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

Unless someone is severly retarded,all people who VOLUNTARILY enlist in our Armed Forces?Isn't it one of their duties to protect our country from enemies,both domestic and foreign?What a disgrace he is.He is a coward in my eyes.

2007-02-07 04:27:24 · 14 answers · asked by jnwmom 4 in Politics & Government Military

14 answers

no...the politicians who are undermining them in the name of "debate" are....the real fact is that we have a bunch of politicians who dont believe in america anymore,, they want to become "global"...and they will sell out our military for a chance to realize their goals....socialism and huge govt in america,, and the united nations being able to tell america what it should and shouldnt do....the idealistic libs have this "pie in the sky" attitude about living in this kind of world...what will they do when their standard of living shrinks by 50 - 60 %...??? talk about wealth redistribution...and then there will come the economic, social and political attacks on us because we are down and the other countries of the world percieve they need to exact some sort of retribution for america having a couple hundred years of freedom and prosperity...while they couldnt make it happen in their own countries.....by the way...anyone not doing what their ordered to do in time of war is called desertion..they are letting him off easy by just charging him with failure to obey a lawful order...i dont think 4 years in prison is enough...he should get life...just as some of his fellow soldiers are going to get for him not doing his job....he deserves no mercy...and this is not vietnam...the hindus and buddhists werent out to conquer the world and destroy all "infidels"....

2007-02-07 04:32:56 · answer #1 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 2 2

Then open your eyes. The man said he would serve in Afghanistan that says he is no coward. He simply doesn't want to throw away his life in a war he sees as illegal and wrong. So he is upholding his oath by defying the domestic enemy that is George W. Bush and company. The difference in the two wars is thus Afghanistan was where the 9/11 attackers came from and operated out of under the protection of the Taliban an enemy we fight to this day. Iraq is a voluntary war that was sold to the country under very false pretenses. This war has now become a civil war and cannot be undone. So if we can't fix it why stay there time to leave and let the locales settle it one way or another.

2007-02-07 04:47:58 · answer #2 · answered by brian L 6 · 2 1

At Walter Reed scientific center that's barely a million small development this is falling aside. That certainty would desire to be found out, even nonetheless the media is making it sound worse than that's. Given, there isn't any excuse for that a million small development getting used whilst it might have been condemned. in simple terms be conscious of that Walter Reed, as an entire, is a appropriate, ideal-knotch facility. The undesirable egg on the ability would be fixed, and those in charge for that undesirable eggs use would be fired. and you'd be able to't charge Rumsfeld without additionally charging Obama, Clinton, Kennedy, and Kerry.

2016-12-17 04:35:29 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

The first respondent is correct that the HIGHEST disgrace are those who've committed rape and murder while deployed overseas... whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, or the Philippines.

Lieutenant E. Watada, USA has made his decision... and thankfully here in the US, he has the right to make that decision. However, he was and IS well aware of the UCMJ regarding his actions. I think he should and shall be convicted of his "missed movement" and his "conduct unbecoming" charges.

Note that prior to submitted a resignation of his commission he asked to be assigned to combat-duties in Afghanistan.

I think he has acted within his own moral code, and he will pay the price. But I don't find him to be a coward. He's disgraced his oath, and may be considered a disgrace by his fellow officers and the soldiers he should be leading.

But REMEMBER that we (international opinion) decided following World War II that an officer is also required to REFUSE what he or she considers an illegal order.

I refused an order as an AW2 (E-5) from a LT (O-3) and LCDR (O-4)... and it was determined that THEY had issued me an illegal order. They had wanted me to serve as a crewman (my duty) for a 250 mile flight of our helicopter from the ship to Japan... for MAIL and Movies and then return... the Manual which governs flight rules and regulations OPNAV 3710 states that we could only fly 200 miles TO shore or 150 miles TO ship.

My Commanding officer hammered those two and cleared my name

2007-02-07 04:53:48 · answer #4 · answered by mariner31 7 · 1 1

From a (drafted) Vietnam Vet:
Multiple thousands of men and women have gone before in all of our conflicts. They have distinguished themselves, and I can tell you, that often they did NOT personally agree with all of their orders or with the governmental policies of their day. However, the majority hold that their mission and purpose is to defend their homeland, in good times and bad. Most selflessly put the mission first, seeing the "big picture" and realizing that there is much more to life than just what affects them personally.
Only Watada knows the true reasons why he has chosen his current path. However, I will say that, especially when military service is VOLUNTARY, that eliminates the "I didn't realize" or "I didn't agree" excuses out of hand. A soldier does not ( and should not) have the luxury of "picking his battles". When he signed his name and raised his right hand, it was for better or worse. The military has many good benefits such as subsidized education. But, a soldier must realize that there is NO free lunch. You have to be as willing to gut out the "bad" as you are to suck up the "bennies". Thank God, most believe this way.
Freedom is NOT free; sometimes you pay with your blood...or your life. If that doesn't appeal to you, stay out of the military! They can certainly do without you, if that is your mindset. At least, nowadays one cannot blame the "draft".

2007-02-07 05:07:01 · answer #5 · answered by Dr. J 3 · 2 1

While I agree that Watada has a right to his personal views. As a sworn military officer he is a disgrace!

but the highest?

nope.
That dubious honor goes to John Anthony Walker, Jr.
(born July 28, 1937) was a Chief Warrant Officer and communications specialist for the U.S. Navy, who sold his services as a spy to the Soviet Union from 1968 to 1985, the height of the Cold War era. In this time he helped the Soviets decipher over one million classified encrypted naval messages, and most observers agree that he was one of the most effective and destructive Soviet spies in US history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Anthony_Walker

2007-02-07 04:42:29 · answer #6 · answered by CG-23 Sailor 6 · 4 0

Watada's stance is that the orders he has received are illegal. However, even if you believe that the war itself is illegal, the order to move from one base to another is NOT illegal. He's protesting too soon. And simply because he 'changed his mind' after VOLUNTARILY enlisting, that doesn't grant him the right to violate his orders.
I respect his opinion, but he's violating his contract and his agreement, and knew full well his obligations before accepting his commision. He needs to spend a little time in a military prison.
His only redeeming quality is that he's throwing away his career here, instead of on the battlefield where his troops would need him.
And for the record, no, I don't personally agree with the validity of the reasons we invaded Iraq, but soldiers don't dictate policy.

You can't be a conscientious objector when you volunteered for duty.

2007-02-07 04:47:55 · answer #7 · answered by Devil Dog '73 4 · 1 2

Watada deseves a medal of great honor.

This Iraq debacle is such a pack of lies and deceptions. It'sapparently a shooting gallery to distract from the gigantic oil theft that went sour. It takes a proud American with an actual consious to stand up to Bush's attacks. To go half way around the world and pick a fight, blowing up people and citiies shock and awe style, while wasting lives and gargantuan sums of money is so unbelieveably wrong. For someone to stand up against that kind of killing and destruction is to be commended.

2007-02-07 04:57:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I have met cowards like that my entire life in the military. I know guys who joined the reserves and said "I didn't join the reserves to go to war"... YES, they are ALL cowards and Watada had NO RIGHT to don that uniform. He is a disgrace and so is his Father!

2007-02-07 04:58:14 · answer #9 · answered by MadMaxx 5 · 2 1

No, he's doing his duty to not obey an order from a superior officer to do something immoral. I believe Iraq hadn't started when he was going in; so he wasn't expecting an illegal war. He would go to Afghanistan. Would you? Yeah, that's what I thought.

2007-02-07 04:48:12 · answer #10 · answered by guy o 5 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers