Ehren Watada is a US army lieutenant who is one of the first officers to refuse to serve in Iraq because the war there is illegal.
After all, he is NOT a conscientious objector and has requested to fight in Afghanistan, but the army doesn't care.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003508558_watada4m.html
2007-01-04 02:29:41 · 19 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The war is illegal because it was not authorized by the UN Security Council. Only it has the power to lift the ceasefire called at the end of the gulf war, and it never did.
2007-01-04 03:15:11 · update #1
The war there is illegal! That's perhaps why the Army doesn't care. I am sure they are wracking their brains on how to get him discharged!
I would not want to serve in an illegal war where the Iraqi Prime Minister doesn't even want to finish his term. How would you like to be the last body bag out and almost all the military being killed are by Iraqi's engaged in a civil war! It is time to stop making millionaires off of the deficit spending we are "spending" on the war! What kind of war is it anyway? It had nothing to do with 9/11!
2007-01-04 02:36:09 · answer #1 · answered by cantcu 7 · 3⤊ 7⤋
First, the war IS NOT illegal. It is the direct result of Saddam Hussein's refusal to abide by the Cease Fire Agreement of the First Gulf War (AKA Dessert Shield/Storm) and the inability or unwillingness of the U.N. (due to its own excessive corruption) to uphold the other end of that same agreement. Conveniently, you choose to ignore and omit these basic facts. This behavior is so typical of the liberal left. Always in denial, always looking for some lost cause/underdog to take a stand and fight for, regardless of how wrong.
The Lt. is supposed to be educated ie: degreed from an acreditted university, and is expected to be a professional. This individual voluntarily signed the bottom line, raise their right hand and swore an oath to defend the United States, uphold its laws and to OBEY the orders of his superiors appointed over him. His betrayal to you and this country is cowardly and treasonous. If he truly felt this strongly about doing the job for which he'd volunteered, accepted his commision and pay, he should have chosen the more prudent course of action and resigned his commision. As an officer, he has that priviledge, something the enlisted are not given. Again, he is a coward and has committed treason and should be dealt with as such.
If the war is illegal now, then by whatever "standard" you are using to make such a determination, it must have been illegal the the first time as well -- Desert Shield/Storm was not sanctioned by the U.N. And I suppose that would mean that Reagan's having reflagged and providing U.S. naval escort to the foreign flagged oil tankers passing through the straights was all illegal as well. I REALLY wish people would pay more attention to factual history and less to whatever is blowing in the wind. It's not up to the Lt. to decide what is and isn't legal. His job is simply to obey orders. If he has a problem with the orders, he is to carry them out and THEN ask questions. This was all made clear to him in fork and spoon school. He must have slept through that lesson.
2007-01-04 02:58:06 · answer #2 · answered by Doc 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It incredibly frustrates me whilst someone enlists, and reaps each and every of the advantages that comprise enlistment (training, homestead loans, etc.) then whilst it comes time to be deployed they are without warning against the conflict. i'm asserting this from the exterior, i'm no longer an energetic accountability member of the militia. i visit enlist regardless of the undeniable fact that, and if it comes time for me to be deployed i will accomplish that with out complaint because of the fact each and every person is acquainted with what they are signing up for. It makes me ill in all honesty.
2016-10-29 23:38:47 · answer #3 · answered by pour 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To bad when we work for others or volunteer in the military we do not get to pick the assignment .
He has the option to request that he serve in Afghanistan but not the luxury of choosing to only serve there .
I can not accept any violence or killing by the military except in strict defense of an invading army on our soil .
We can do anything we want in an effort to prevent terror attacks short of violating the civil rights of legal citizens in our country .
We do have the option to end all foreign entry to our nation and remove all visitors except for foreign diplomats .
We had options after 9-11 that did not include deploying troops over sea's .
I wish all soldiers would refuse to battle in any war except for the Invasion of our nation .
We can choose not to purchase or allow goods from foreign nations who violate the rights of the people they govern .
2007-01-04 02:41:04 · answer #4 · answered by -----JAFO---- 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
lol. I dont know whats worse.. the person that commits the act desertion or the people that think that is patriotic. If the war was illegal the executive oversight would handle it. Checks and balances do not include every man and women in the military. A person in the military has no say in what they should get involved with. They sign their name on the line giving your life to the military. If you dont like it dont join. plain and simple.
2007-01-04 02:38:53 · answer #5 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I really enjoy reading this story, I don't even know what to think, on one hand the war in iraq is the greatest war ever, and it must be done, and keep fighting until iraq is no more, but on the other hand this guy thinks war is iraq is no good, so I think he should be shipped to iraq and hanged next to saddam.
2007-01-04 02:34:22 · answer #6 · answered by MiKe Drazen 4 · 6⤊ 2⤋
no i say put his cowardly @ss in jail for refusing a direct order it is what he volunteer to do protect this country . he have no right to refuse to fight any where he is deployed around this world . i think this is a disgrace to all the men and women who have fought for this country . we as Americans citizens are in a lot of trouble if we have to rely on young cowards such as this idiot to protect this country from our enemies . I'm not for this dam so call war in Iraq . but i do believe you have a call to duty when you join the military .it's time he either man up or go to the stockade.
2007-01-04 02:44:11 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No. Ehren Watada will be court marsh-led, as he should be. He is a traitor. He made a promise to protect America, when he joined the Army, but apparently, he lied. Off to the Brig with him!
2007-01-04 02:35:34 · answer #8 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
If only more german officers had the same attitude as him in the forties, hitler wouldnt have gone very far.
this guy is right to refuse fighting an obviously stupid unjustified war and hope others will follow.
he is a honest man with solid principles.
2007-01-04 02:38:52 · answer #9 · answered by theedge 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
No. I think that Watada will be convicted, given the maximum sentence, and that this will encourage any officers who had such inclinations to live up to their oaths.
Officers aren't drafted. They accept their obligations "freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion."
You don't get to pick your wars.
2007-01-04 02:33:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋