English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

They refuse to go to war in Iraq? Do you know anyone who has?

2007-01-03 16:58:50 · 9 answers · asked by Gui 2 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

Conscientious Rejector?
First Lieutenant Ehren Watada still refuses Iraq deployment orders, calling the war illegal. A six-year prison term could result. Preliminary hearings are set for Thursday.
By the Hot Zone Team, Tue Jan 2, 6:38 PM ETEmail Story IM Story
First Lt. Ehren Watada, a 28-year-old Hawaii native, is the first commissioned officer in the U.S. to publicly refuse deployment to Iraq. He announced last June his decision not to deploy on the grounds the war is illegal.


Lt. Watada was based at Fort Lewis, Washington, with the Army's 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. He has remained on base, thus avoiding charges of desertion.


He does, however, face one count of "missing troop movement" and four counts of "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman." If convicted, he faces up to six years in prison.

2007-01-03 17:03:42 · update #1

That's from the MAIN YAHOO! PAGE.

2007-01-03 17:04:08 · update #2

i meant prison..

2007-01-03 17:04:39 · update #3

9 answers

At the very least he may get booted from the service. I know one thing for sure: if you are looking to join the service, don't tell the recruiter that you are trying to avoid deployment. You will be considered a conscientious objector. That is the same thing "draft dodgers" were considered during Viet Nam.

2007-01-03 17:07:59 · answer #1 · answered by Crysteenah 2 · 0 0

If published as a legitimate news report, I kinda assume he could get 6 years. I do not know of anyone who has personally done this.

He can not win by claiming Conscientious Objector status because his enlistment would go against those beliefs, which is that all war is against his religious convictions. By saying the war is illegal, he is basically saying that to fight in that war would be treason, or a violation of the Oath he took at enlistment to defend the Constitution of the US.

I am sure many will call him a coward for refusing to go, but think about it. He faces certain conviction, dishonorable discharge, probable prison time, & loss of his pension if he cannot show he has a legitimate claim of the illegality of the war, which is a very, very long shot. He will be tried in military courts. He did not desert or go AWOL. He has put his freedon, career, & future on the line for his beliefs. Win or lose, his career & reputation are trashed. That is a hell of a lot more than either George W or Cheney did when it was their time to serve. He shows more guts than either of them did or I would.

2007-01-04 01:26:38 · answer #2 · answered by bob h 5 · 2 0

Yes he can and should be sent to prison..Fort Levanworth is the military detention barracks. he was fine taking the Benefits but not ok with fufilling his oath. It is no secret what the Army does. It is no different now than it was 200 or 2000 years ago. the military fights wars plain and simple.

2007-01-04 02:07:26 · answer #3 · answered by horgurce 3 · 2 0

yes, i cannot speak for the USA but in South Africa during the days of compulsory military conscription (mandatory 2 years service- followed by camps) if an individual refused conscription on conscientious grounds the maximum sentence imposed was 6 years. there was a case involving a medical doctor (Ivan Toms- i think) who completed two years military service but who still needed to complete his camps, he volunteered to work in the townships working on TB (tuberculosis patients) instead of doing a military camp, he was imprisoned for 18 months for refusing. things are different now but to answer your question- i hope this illustrates the point, in most countries refusing the military will land you jail time.

2007-01-04 05:01:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Refusing to fight used to get you stood against a wall and shot. The reason for this is that you can either take your chances of getting killed by facing enemy bullets or you can DEFINITELY die facing ours. This should be brought back.

2007-01-04 01:08:40 · answer #5 · answered by ? 5 · 1 2

it's worth it
better to do 6 years rather than die or kill people you don't know just because someone tells you to.

2007-01-04 01:51:52 · answer #6 · answered by brainiac 4 · 1 1

No, that is not true...... Certain conditions apply.... My cousin is a 2nd Lieutenant.......

2007-01-04 01:01:48 · answer #7 · answered by Missy 4 · 0 1

no, it'd be prison

2007-01-04 01:01:03 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 0 1

i dont think they do..

2007-01-04 01:00:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers