Check out some similar questions!

Myth · Jan 3, 2007, 10:45 PM

I saw this story and thought to myself "what would other people think." so I'm posting it here and would like peoples opinions on it.

Conscientious Rejector? - Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone From Yahoo! News

I'll let you all know what I think in a day or two

Allheart · Jan 4, 2007, 02:09 AM

Hi Myth,

Thank you so very much for sharing this. One brave soldier... absolutely. I am so proud of this young man. I am proud of all of our military. Our military is to train young men and women to do many things, one being, to stand up and be a leader, and that is just what this young man is doing. My heart, of course, embraces those young men and women who do deploy as their orders direct, but I stand up and applaud this young Lt. for being brave in another way.
His very own words, answer this, far better than I could:

Sure, I felt, well, in a general sense I felt that when we put our trust in the government, when we put our lives in their hands, that is a huge responsibility. And we also say that "when we put our lives in your hands, we ask that you not abuse that trust; that you not take us to war over flimsy or false reasons; that you take us to war when it is absolutely necessary." Because we have so much to lose, you know — the soldiers, our lives, our limbs, our minds and our families — that the government and the people owe that to us.

"I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop."
— Lt. Ehren Watada

Some may say this young man has an obligation to serve when called. Yes, once we, as a Country, have met our obligations, and that is to ensure, that when it is decided that we are willing to risk our soldiers lives, as well as those lives of the brave men and women from other countries, who stand by our side, we better make darn sure it is for the right reasons, and darn sure to supply the soldiers with everything they need. Otherwise, we are not doing our part.

I again, am very proud of First Lt. Ehren Watada, who indeed is, one brave soldier, standing up and having the courage to speak, for himself and for all of our very brave men and women.

Allheart is one proud American and this is what I meant, in a different thread, when I referred to our military as leaders.

KMSRyana · Jan 4, 2007, 05:54 PM

Ummm, tough one and what I think may not be very popular, but it's my opinion. Just for those who think I'm wrong, consider that I did serve my county as an Army Ranger, and do understand what I'm talking about.

We do not have a draft in place... so he volunteered.

He took an oath to follow orders... he isn't.

I don't disagree with anyone that the war is wrong or right. There are many valid opinions on both sides of the fence. And the reasons we were given for entering into it were obvious lies. I saw that as the words were coming out of Bush's mouth, hope some of you did too.

But flat fact... he volunteered and swore he'd do what he was told and was clearly advised of the ramifications if he did not. He could have backed out before swearing his oath.

If he'd been drafted and forced to do so I'd feel differently. Likely, with all the press coverage he'll only get a slap in the face and tossed out of the service anyway. Mission accomplished.

Fr_Chuck · Jan 4, 2007, 07:25 PM

He is refusing to follow orders and needs to be in the military prision.

In years past he may have even been shot. He is a disgrace to his uniform and I am ashamed to have people like him in our military

** not the politically correct opinion but one of a past soldier and the father of a soldier who has done several tours in the middle east.

He had better hope that he does not have people like me on his court martial board.

Allheart · Jan 5, 2007, 01:40 AM

KMS and Father Chuck,

Hi. I not only respect both of your viewpoints and incredibly grateful to both of you for the time served as well as your son Father Chuck. I am almost ashamed for feeling/felt the way I do about this young solider. And both of your inputs really gave me a lot to think about.

This is a question to both of you... Would it have been better if he would have spoke up but still fulfilled his duty? Would that have been allowed? I ask these questions sincerely, as I do not know the answers. He does also have an obligations to his fellow troop members and yes, should be by their side. I still do respect him though for speaking up.

I do thank the both of you for sharing very good points. Please forgive me, as I meant no disrespect, quite the opposite.

Sincerely,
Allheart

NeedKarma · Jan 5, 2007, 05:43 AM

We need more people willing to stand up for their beliefs regardless of contracts or peer pressure or intimidation.

As opposed to Fr_Chuck I don't believe he ought to be shot (so much for the Ten Commandments eh?).

JoeCanada76 · Jan 5, 2007, 07:29 AM

I agree, Needkarma. We do need more people being able to stand up and question the government, question leaders.

As far as I am concerned. Soldier has every right to refuse a mission. Especially if he does not believe it is the right thing to do.

I am so happy I do not live in the States, but if I did. You know what I would take the firing squad. I will be going to heaven and well just think of what would happen to all those peoples souls that were responsible for my death.

Or if the government wanted to chase me down and hunt me down then I would fight to go to a country that would except me and help keep me safe. Or I would even go to prison. Innocent people go to prison everyday. The only thing that matters to me is what is right in Gods eyes. What is right in my heart and soul. I could not care a less what others thought.

Joe

KMSRyana · Jan 5, 2007, 12:50 PM

Allheart

He could have done several things differently. Probably his best option would have been to refuse to take the oath to begin with. They would have pressured him much like bill collectors pressure debtors or how District Attorneys pressure accused to sign confession or accept plea bargains, but there would have been no real consequences. That would have been his best option to resist peer pressure or intimidation.

He could have asked to be reassigned, and likely long before he was told he would be deployed. After all he was assigned (and likely volunteered for that too) to an INFANTRY unit. Duh, fit hits the shan... combat. He knew what he was doing.

He could have gone to therapists and voiced his objections, even the military ones would work to get him out of the service or reassigned to a non combat assignment. Yes, there really are some people that will help you like that in the military.

I think it's great he voiced his opinion. It's part of our constitutional rights. But he is dead wrong for refusing to follow orders. Plenty of reporters over there would have made the story have a greater impact than it will have here. And yes, they'd have sent him to man a radar station in Alaska if he had done it that way, but he'd be out of the war and not in military prison. I still doubt they'll imprison him anyway.

phillysteakandcheese · Jan 5, 2007, 02:16 PM

Professional soldiers are thinking men and women. They have the obligation to refuse to commit acts that may constitue war crimes.

I can see this point of view and I applaud this soldier for stating his opinion, but this soldier also broke his word. He gave an oath for his military service. In my view, that's an oath to members of his unit, and an oath to those that depend on his unit, in addition to an oath to protect his nation.

Fr_Chuck · Jan 5, 2007, 11:32 PM

To defend myself a little, I did not mean I wanted him shot, but during past war times like WWI he well would have just been shot. That is how the military believed they could force 1000's of young men to jump up in front of machine guns and rush the enemy.

But we have to remember that he as a soldier while he can think, he has taken an oath to follow the orders of his commander in chief.

And while many talk about an "illegal" war, it is legal since Congress voted on it and passed it, and continues still to fund it. So by the US military standards he is obligated to fight in it.

And it is not like the war just happened, the war was going on when he signed the inlistment papers, or re-inlistment, so he knew exactly where he was going soon when he signed.

I still have nightmares at times form things I have seen while in the employment of our government, and my son tells horor stories of what the enemy does in Iraq that never makes the news.
So I can't blame someone for not wanting to, I would worry more about someone that wanted to be there. But their duty is to go if they agreed to do it. Military service is not like working at McDonlds, there is a committ that far too many Americans have forgotten.

JoeCanada76 · Jan 5, 2007, 11:37 PM

I thank God I am Canadian, Amen.

Allheart · Jan 6, 2007, 02:12 AM

Originally Posted by KMSRyana

Allheart

He could have done several things differently. Probably his best option would have been to refuse to take the oath to begin with. They would have pressured him much like bill collectors pressure debtors or how District Attorneys pressure accused to sign confession or accept plea bargains, but there would have been no real consequences. That would have been his best option to resist peer pressure or intimidation.

He could have asked to be reassigned, and likely long before he was told he would be deployed. After all he was assigned (and likely volunteered for that too) to an INFANTRY unit. Duh, fit hits the shan... combat. He knew what he was doing.

He could have gone to therapists and voiced his objections, even the military ones would work to get him out of the service or reassigned to a non combat assignment. Yes, there really are some people that will help you like that in the military.

I think it's great he voiced his opinion. It's part of our constitutional rights. But he is dead wrong for refusing to follow orders. Plenty of reporters over there would have made the story have a greater impact than it will have here. And yes, they'd have sent him to man a radar station in Alaska if he had done it that way, but he'd be out of the war and not in military prison. I still doubt they'll imprison him anyway.

KMS, thank you so much for your insight and explanation. Does help a great deal. Very glad there are people on hand to assist a soldier when he or she needs to express concerns. I more than respect your words and I again, thank you for sharing them.

Allheart

Allheart · Jan 6, 2007, 02:21 AM

Originally Posted by phillysteakandcheese

I can see this point of view and I applaud this soldier for stating his opinion, but this soldier also broke his word. He gave an oath for his military service. In my view, that's an oath to members of his unit, and an oath to those that depend on his unit, in addition to an oath to protect his nation.

This portion from Phillysteak, I think really gives great light to the entire situation. The young soldier should be commended for the courage in speaking up and standing up and then you have the oath on the otherside.

Perhaps, as KMS pointed out, yes, he has a right to speak up and stand up and I still am so very proud of him for doing so, but there appear to be procedures already in place that would have allowed this young man to exercise his right to speak.

Still a tough one though.

excon · Jan 6, 2007, 05:58 AM

Hello:

This isn't about Iraq. It's about a contract.

He made a commitment. I believe in commitments. If he didn't want to commit himself, he didn't have to. He took what they offered in exchange for his commitment, then he didn't want to fulfill his end. Yes, things change. So what? Things are going to change. Don't commit, if you can't handle the changes. Sorry, a commitment doesn't have an escape clause - it just doesn't. It's like saying, I promise, until I change my mind.

excon

magprob · Jan 6, 2007, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

This isn't about Iraq. It's about a contract.

He made a commitment. I believe in commitments. If he didn't want to commit himself, he didn't have to. He took what they offered in exchange for his commitment, then he didn’t want to fulfill his end. Yes, things change. So what? Things are going to change. Don't commit, if you can't handle the changes. Sorry, a commitment doesn't have an escape clause - it just doesn't. It's like saying, I promise, until I change my mind.

excon

You nailed it. He got in the game knowing full well the rules and now he wants to change them. Oh well, I've seen the inside of Levenworth and I'm sure, so will he!