Are American Soldiers Doing the Right Thing When they Desert?

Question

"The Pentagon says that a total of 40,000 troops have deserted their posts (not simply those serving in Iraq) since the year 2000. This includes many who went Awol for family reasons.
Scores of American troops are deserting — even from the front line in Iraq. Peter Laufer tracked down four of the deserters.
They are the US troops in Iraq to whom the American administration prefers not to draw attention. They are the deserters – those who have gone Awol from their units and not returned, risking imprisonment and opprobrium.
When First Lieutenant Ehren Watada of the US Army, who faced a court martial in August, refused to go to Iraq on moral grounds, the newspapers in his home state of Hawaii were full of letters accusing him of “treason”. He said he had concluded that the war is both morally wrong and a horrible breach of American law. His participation, he stated, would make him party to “war crimes”. " Sunday Times 8/27

Answer 1

Stupidity like this is too inviting to pass up. A point by point rebuttal is in order:

(1) True deserters are classed as those who remain AWOL for 30 days or more and have their status changed to "Deserter" so the unit can get rid of the deadbeat off their books and get someone who'll actually work for a change in the ranks. Most AWOL personnel return to duty; in many instances they decide to take off because they have an immediate family emergency and can't wait for their chain of command to release them for leave.

(2) The number of desertions within the last decade is historically around 2300 men and 200 women. The rates have doubled since war in Afghanistan and Iraq, but even with those totals what was a tenth of a percentage point personnel attrition became a fifth of a percentage point.

The figures for 1998:
http://www.dod.mil/execsec/adr98/g23_g32.html

The figures for 2001:
http://www.dod.mil/execsec/adr2001/F.pdf

Hardly an incredible rise and proof positive the troops are voting with their feet, given the context of the total service strength of 2.3 MILLION. Of course, the way the DoD handles its figures (often, badly) adds ammunition to the wrong arguments constantly:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,SS_070505_Army,00.html

Are you seeing mutiny in the field? Any unit from platoon size or above becoming entirely non-functional due to desertion? And where is the attribution to "scores of American troops are deserting" - from Iraq, did you say? I'm sure the local nationals would be more than happy to take such people in (heavy sarcasm).

(3) 1LT Watada stating he "concluded that the war is both morally wrong and a horrible breach of American law" arising out of some sort of moral principles is bullshit. He was more than happy to collect an Army paycheck and enjoy all the perks of being a commissioned officer. It was only when he discovered he was deploying to Iraq that he started reading on anything and everything to do with international law. He cites the Constitution, the War Powers Act, the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and the Nuremberg Principles, all without rhyme or reason. He states that he is willing to deploy to Afghanistan, not Iraq, yet he embraces a selective view of international statutes that would disqualify him from doing so. He states that he is abiding by the Constitution, yet he embraces international statutes that infringe upon the sovereign rights of the United States. The man is a complete and total hypocrite of the worst order, nothing short of a reptile unable to make up his mind or embrace pacifism with sincerity.

Questioner, you probably fancy yourself some sort of activist. You're really not. If you had any sort of familiarity with the material you're quoting or the rationale behind the cases of that so-called conscientious objector whose name you dropped, you'd be better off than what you aren now.

As it stands, you haven't done anything other than the mild rise in AWOL rates proves that military recruiting is wrong in bringing those unfit to serve into the ranks - and with that, I concur. I also concur that the deployment cycles which contributed to the National Guard and Reserves adding to those AWOL rates significantly has to be remedied.

What I do not concur with in the least is your equation of an act of selfish, moral cowardice being equated with anything to do with the "right thing". Desertion on the grounds of moral weakness is revolting. If you didn't have your mind sorted out before you swore the oath of service, then you should pay back every dime you took from the taxpayers who believed you would protect and serve them.

You may not agree with the war. That's fine. You may not agree with the way things are run in the military. That's fine too. What isn't fine at all is taking a bullshit quote with none of your own research behind it as fact and running with it. Either do your research and give a credible answer or give none at all.

Answer 2

Soldiers who do not fulfill their commitment to their country, whether it be in Iraq or pushing paperwork here in the states, are never doing the right thing. I agree that the war is questionable, but there are some things in this world that we just cannot scrimp on, and one of those things is commitment. If everyone who didn't agree with the war, didn't like their military job, or didn't want to be away from their family abandoned their posts (and believe me, there are A LOT of them out there) our military would be severely depleted. And then what? The reason that all these unhappy people don't leave is because they are instilled with a decent work ethic...and know their options. They can GET OUT of the Army, even if they have a wait a few years for their enlistment to be up. Watada should have resigned his commission and, if he couldn't do that, wait until his term of service is up and then get out. That's the responsible thing to do.

Furthermore, what makes people Watada think that their brand of suffering is any more important than any one else's? Does he honestly think that he is the only person in the Army that disagrees with the war, that doesn't want to deploy to a crappy place for a year? Is his moral compass better than all the others who stick with their commitment? There's no way that that's the case. So, why does he think that he's special? He needs to suck it up, serve his term, and then get as far away from the Army as he can.

Answer 3

Being AWOL is not necessarily deserting. You could be AWOL with a hangover while laying in some brothel until the MPs find you drunk.

To not return because of family matters on a temporary basis would probably result in court marshal, loss of rank including possible imprisonment.

Taking it upon yourself to decide that a law was broken when none was is self serving should result in court marshal and imprisonment. If he were on active duty in a war zone, than the punishment can be death.

You see what you libs do not understand, is that because someone joins the military, it does not automatically qualify that individual to be Mother Teresa or John Wayne. Soldiers are even at times the sons and daughters of Libs, the majority are dedicated to serving this country, a few are not.

This would be like saying every conservative is a republican, or even like saying every lib is a moron, okay that last one was a bad example.

Answer 4

I've been in Iraq and now in Afghanistan. Statements like LT Watadas are nothing but a cowards easy way out. I'm sorry but if you want to quit the Army go kiss your same sex commander. It would be more honorable than AWOL or desertion. Deserters and cowards should be be sent to the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, KS under hard labor for at least the length of the contract. If you want a job you can quit when it gets hard don't join the military.

Answer 5

We have a similar problem in the UK. Whenever a soldier gets killed or injured, their family back home is all up in arms about why they are there. What's the point. It's not our war etc

When Germany invaded Poland in 1939, we could all have sat back and watched on from afar, but we decided that it was a better thing to do, to try and stop tyranny. To preserve our freedom.

When a young man or woman makes the decision to join the Army, they do so knowing that they might have to go to war. By going to war they will see and do some very bad things. They will shoot people and be shot at. They may die.

If they are not prepared to fulfil those obligations then they should never have signed up in the first place.

Deserting is wrong. It leaves your colleagues short handed and may ultimately end in the deaths of many fellow soldiers.
It is wrong and should be punished severely.

Answer 6

Those figures include soldiers who get drunk on Liberty and show up late the next day, stay on leave an extra day, Miss a flight back to base after leave. Using these figures I was a Deserter 4 or 5 times in my military career. Most soldiers and sailors are at one time or another. It's called unauthorized absence. The news reporter made a mountain out of a molehill. I NEVER deserted a post. That is like saying that every time a worker employed in the US is late or takes a day off that they quit their job.

Answer 7

It's hard to give one answer to an action by so many soldiers. Some do it for moral reasons, some do it because of fear. They join the military and swear an allegiance to the US, and therefore it is like breaking a contract. But if they really feel they have been tricked into thinking the war in Iraq was a just cause, you can sympathize and respect their decision.


Perhaps young troops should be counseled more before joining.

Answer 8

Why join the armed forces at all to run away?

Deserters have no moral ground to stand on if they have enlisted. They are quitters and losers who have betrayed their comrades in arms; their country which have given them a home and family; and lastly themselves as people with a spine, honor and integrity.

Their reasons to justify AWOL are excuses - just another word for cowardism. I salute the rest of the US Armed Forces - the men and women in uniform who uphold the finest tradition of military courage, commitment and duty to the country - not the 40,000 who think they are right.

Answer 9

The American military is a VOLUNTEER force. Those folks volunteered to get the benefits, and were more than happy to get benefits. But when the time came to fight (that's what armies traditionally do, ya know?), they suddenly came up with a case of conscience and couldn't fight 'on moral grounds'. What a CROCK! None of those other folks over there particularly wanted to be away from their families getting shot at!
Deserters ought to be shot, just like in the old days.
And the fools who think that this war is wrong apparently haven't read any history books. When Hitler was in power, the Europeans continually tried to appease him. Time after time he signed truces and agreements, then broke them. He built a gigantic military machine because no one would stand up to him early on. Same with Japan. They commited numerous attrocities, but the world turned their collective backs. Ask the Russians, they bore the brunt of it. Only when they bombed us, did we finally realize that if we didn't start defending ourselves, we would be overrun.
I hope Watada spends the rest of his life in Levenworth!

Answer 10

NO!! People say they shoudn't be over there or don't believe in it--well then why the heck did they sign up!?! I thought about joining the army but decided not to because i didn't want to leave for overseas-and this was 6 years ago, before anything happened. You have to know there is always a chance of being deployed when joining any military branch and doing it for the $ or schooling is the WRONG reason if you can't handle your duty.