So you would rather everyone become drones that do whatever the president wants than think for themselves and have a concionce? (sp?)

If you are unwilling to participate in combat, what exactly are you doing in the military? Though the first article didn't specify, there was a lot of allusion to the fact that he was not drafted. The military is not a democracy and anyone who signs on the dotted line and raises their right hand had better be prepared to go to war at the direction of the president.

Hypothetical situation:

You join the military because you think your country's intentions are honorable on the whole, and want to help bring world freedom, or whatever, all that captain america schtick. Then you find out the country is getting involved in a war that you can't make yourself support ideologically, and you believe that every time an enemy soldier is being killed over there, it's morally/ethically wrong /dishonorable/whatever.

What should you do? Go over there, obey orders, and gun down folks who you don't believe deserve it? What's the best way to satisfy your conscience?

Of course, the first link you posted conveniently fails to mention his reasons for deserting, so for all we know, yeah, he was just a coward. But the second guy?

Draft dodging is totally different (atleast in my feable brain) then desertion.

Yeah Sutherlands, I think that everyone that joins the SERVICE should be prepared to do what they are told to do. I am so tired of these people (the Reserves people are the worst) that seem to think that the U. S. goverment was writing them checks just for the hell of it. "Well I didn't know I would have to go fight!!!"

What does your conscience say about the obligation that you made to follow the orders of those appointed over you? To follow the direction of the president of the United States? Or are those things something to be thrown away at your convience? If you are unwilling to live up to the commitment, you never should have made it in the first place. If you become disillusioned with things after the fact, get out when your commitment is up. Until that time, a member of the military has obligations that they need to hold on to.

Then voice your opinions, but if you agree to receive the benefits the government bestows upon those serving the country, than you better damn well serve the country.

And who actually thinks that crazy people who blow up schoolbuses full of children and blow up policemen don't deserve it? If your mind has been so warped by listening to the rants of the inbred political left that you think killing the people who are actively trying to blow up children of their own religion and ethnic group in order to prove their disgust with America and the freedom of women to not be treated like cattle is wrong, then I think you deserve to be court-martialed.

It's one thing to be one of the "elite" inbred radical political left, but it's a whole 'nother level of stupidity to actually believe that shit.

It's an interesting dilemma... I think if people refused to fight what they thought was an unjust war, the President would be less likely to run into war. However, people would just do as you said, get the money and then leave, saying they didn't believe the war was just.

There's a book called "People of the Lie" that is really quite excellent... it talks about "A Psychology of Evil". Mostly it's individual evil, but in one of the chapters it talks about group evil. A few things are covered, including what I will say is "shifting responsibility." If the people who make weapons for war just believe they are following orders, and the people who use them feel the same, and the peopel giving the directions feel that's what the people want... no one stands up for what is right.

Just to be clear about what we are talking about

885. ART. 85. DESERTION
(a) Any member of the armed forces who--
(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently;
(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or
(3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another on of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States; is guilty of desertion.
(b) Any commissioned officer of the armed forces who, after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, quits his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently is guilty of desertion.
(c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

Exactly. Other soldiers could die unnecessarily because of a refusal to follow orders / desertion.


Though they may seem crazy to you, most of these suicide bombers understand what they're getting themselves into and give their lives for a cause in a calculated and controlled manner. You pretty much have to have the element of surprise and be willing to give your life to have any hope of effectively combat a superior military force like that of our own... you know, US armed forces and Iraqi security forces.

Although a school bus full of children is certainly colorful imagery, most civilian-on-civilian terrorist attacks are between greedy factions warring over power in any new government that may emerge out of this mess... specifically, fighting between the Shia and the Sunnis/Kurds.


Oh I see. They have a culture different from yours, and since yours is correct they should be forced to adopt it. Furthermore, anyone who disagrees with you should be punished.

Sorry bloke, but people like you make others hate America world-wide.

Oh, right, because the radical right is so much more intellectual and rational.

I don't recall George Washington using suicide bombers. Are you saying this is a legitimate tactic?







I don't think we need to appreciate a culture which esteems the ideas of blowing up innocent people, even for such worthy causes as greedy factions warring over power in a new government.
This isn't about culture. It's about murder. I happen to enjoy many aspects of muslim culture - and there's plenty of rich muslim culture without the blowing up of innocents.

To say that we should accept the parts of their culture that includes blowing up innocent people (even when you don't count school buses) - sorry, it's folks like you who make honest americans want to have a culture war. Otherwise, they might be able to accept the majority of muslim culture and be enriched for it.







I didn't say that. I have just as much problem with the radical right as I do with the left. They're both on the same side where it matters, and that is authoritarian. Doesn't matter to me whether you're forcing people to the right or the left, you're still forcing people.

Of course it's a legitimate tactic! It's being used to fight a war of attrition in Iraq right now. Are you implying there are rules in war? Creating abstract laws for something as inherently lawless as war is absurd.


I'm curious, do you condone America's fireboming of Hamburg and Dresden in Germany and Tokoyo and Kobe in Japan? Or the use of nuclear weapons on Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Were those tactics, with civilians in the sights, "valid"?

Interestly enough, George Washington (our freedom fighter, Great Britain's terrorist) regularly had his troops hide behind rocks and fire from the windows of houses instead of form on-line in front of a organized mass of British troops to be slaughtered. The British painted our tactics were cowardly/dirty. Nevertheless, they worked.


So you're saying our forces are innocent? Or that one faction's forces are innocent? The point you missed is that although innocents are falling into the path of destruction (as happens in most wars), many of the people being killed are actively supporting a side in this conflict.


No; I did not say we should accept someone else's culture. I said we shouldn't try to change the culture of others forcibly, and most importantly, use differences in culture to justify crimes against them.