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.
Have a look here first:
http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs19056
2007-01-03 17:43:42 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Hopefully Congress will follow his lead and do the right thing. He doesn't have to serve one more day to be considered my Hero!!
Future posters, please follow the questioners advice and read the link---You don't wanna look as foolish as the poster above me!!
2007-01-03 17:59:03 · answer #1 · answered by scottyurb 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
He should be court martialed, serve out the rest of his contract in the brig, and then be DH Discharged. It makes me wonder why people even join the military. If this "war" were illegal, it would not continue any longer.
Basically, the man is a coward. He wanted all the benefits of the military without the responsibility. They do it in this manner in the hopes that by annoucing it publicly, he will gain public support, and the military will go easy on him.
My father served in Panama, Desert Storm for a year, and again this time for another year. He missed my high school graduation, the first year of his first grandaughter's life, and both of his kids college graduations defending this country, never once complaining about it. It was his job, and he did it.
I was lucky enough to serve during 94-98 when things were relatively peaceful. We sat off the coast of China near Taiwan when the Chinese were testing those rockets of their's. We were ready to go, but luckily did not have to.
You make a commitment to this country, you honor it. Those who don't are nothing more than cowards.
2007-01-04 02:25:08 · answer #2 · answered by digsrocknroll 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It should never be for a soldier to say a policy is wrong and thus not go to war. This man willingly accepted this role when he enlisted, just many millions before him. Iraq sucks, sure. But that doesn't change the fact that he volunteered. The idea that a bad President could send us to a war and not win had already happened in Vietnam, Thus this man KNEW it could happen again.
2007-01-04 02:08:52 · answer #3 · answered by Lester W 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's his right to refuse. It is also the government's right to take away his freedom and most of his other rights for 6 years. His arguement won't hold water in court, the initiation of the war went through the proper channels, no matter what he thinks about the root causes or reasons for the conflict. I don't think he is a coward, as it takes a certain amount of guts to do what he is doing. I just think he's a fool. If you join the military, and then get orders to a conflict you don't like, you can't ask for a mulligan.
Edit: ...and yeah, I read the article. My statement stands.
2007-01-04 02:02:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well some of his reasons I agree with... It was hard to find information about the right after the war started, but pretty soon info started leaking out...
If only he waited...
Maybe by doing this he is defending America's Constitution and interests... Oh well, he should go, but I admire his bravery and his opinions.. Finally a soldier who thinks before he obeys, maybe this might break the stereotype of soldiers being robots :)
2007-01-04 03:13:20 · answer #5 · answered by Shadowfox 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He just now decided that the war was illegal? Why is that? Because he was next to get deployed? He should have claimed the war was illegal way back when the war first started.
Did he just join the military? If so, why? Did he join "pre-war"? If so, he should have claimed the war illegal when the war started.
Well, if he ends up behind bars, it'll beat the tar out of having an unstable person like himself in Iraq. He'd probably end up getting himself and a few other innocents killed. I HOPE, for the sake of the soldiers in Iraq, that this fellow DOES NOT go.
**EDIT** I'm here to answer questions, not read links. I never "read the links," because it means the poster is too lazy to include the details in his/her question.
2007-01-04 01:54:25 · answer #6 · answered by scruffycat 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Just another Drama of the Day.
2007-01-04 01:53:11 · answer #7 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He just screwed his reputation on earth. At least the terrorists may spare his life.
2007-01-04 03:04:42 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋