| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/16/2004 01:29:32 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by jab119:
FACT: this guys is a deserter, plain and simple.
Action: he needs to be dealt with according to the UCMJ, plain and simple.
He needs to face that fact and take it like a man.
I feel the most sorry for the people taking his side in this issue. you are a bunch of softies and lemmings, just following the crowd, but you will be the very first people to run crying to the US Government when the shit hits the fan and we are under attack and want to know why they did nothing to stop it.
James |
******
Have you served your country in any wars? |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 01:30:20 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
I respect that way of looking at it. Normally I would probably agree with you but..
this is not a situation in which the war was not necessary (at least in Iraq). |
I'm pretty sure there are no clauses in the contract or oath that include "only if I agree that the war is necessary". (I'll overlook, for the moment, the falacy that "the war was not necessary...)
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
One of the stipulations of the US gov is that they will only send troops to die if its the last option and absolutely necessary. |
I'm pretty sure there is no stipulation like this of any kind, in the constitution or elsewhere. That's too vague and open to interpretation. The only real stipulation is that the President (i.e. the Commander in Chief) deems it necessary (which he did), and that the congress, within some boundaries, agree (which it did - including the democratic running mates).
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
I think we all know now this is not the case. |
No, we don't. :)
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Also, he had already spent over 8 months in Afghanistan. But again, Afghanistan was the real war, Iraq shouldnt be happening. |
So, you sign a contract for X years (don't know what this guy's particular term was), and serve 8 months and decide you don't want to play any more, so you can just walk away? I don't think so.... |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 01:32:40 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Now, after having accepted and received all of these benefits, they have decided that they do not want to keep up their end of the bargain. I'm sorry but this is unacceptable. If a private company contracts for you to do a job, and they pay to train you, house you and provide a salary, and you accept all those benefits, do you then get to just decide to change your mind when you suddenly "don't agree" with the underlying princples? |
Perhaps you should ask this of a college football or basketball coach ... they seem to find it perfectly fine to "move on" whenever a better offer surfaces, regardless of the commitments they made to their school or recruits. |
How is that, in any way, relevant, let alone equivilent? "Other people do wrong, so its OK for me to do wrong." What a wonderful, relativistic generation we've raised.... |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 01:34:08 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Yeah, I guess it's rhetoric just like VP dick Cheney officially maintaining to this day that Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda. |
Rhetoric is rhetoric, no matter which party it comes from. But why do you insist on turning the tables away and avoiding the original issue by bashing the administration? The issue raised in this thread involved a deserting soldier. There can be no argument based on the facts and the law that he deserted. His reasons for doing so can be argued back and forth, but in the end, he avoided his commitment and obligation without authorization.
For the record, I am neither a Bush lover nor a Bush hater. I agree with some of his policies and decisions and disagree with others. The problem is that there is too many unsupported and unsubstantiated claims being made by both parties simply for political advantage. My point above was simple... if you are going to make an affirmative factual statement, it needs to be backed up by facts. This holds true for anyone, including myself, you, Bush, chaney, Kerry, Edwards, etc. Personally, I am sick of it... I prefer facts to innuendo. The fact here is that this soldier deserted and should now be forced to face the consequences of the circumstances in which he alone placed himself.
Message edited by author 2004-07-16 13:38:23.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 01:42:38 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Have you served your country in any wars? |
Yes I have. United States Navy 1988 to 1991, I served in Operation Desert Storm. I was an Aviation Electrician's Mate. I worked on the A6-E Aircraft. Granted I was not on land fighting the real fight ( if u can call a 2 week war a real war) but I was there doing the duty I signed up for.
here are a few pics from my Navy Days
Navy
Desert Strom
James
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 01:54:53 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by jab119:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Have you served your country in any wars? |
Yes I have. United States Navy 1988 to 1991, I served in Operation Desert Storm. I was an Aviation Electrician's Mate. I worked on the A6-E Aircraft. Granted I was not on land fighting the real fight ( if u can call a 2 week war a real war) but I was there doing the duty I signed up for.
here are a few pics from my Navy Days
Navy
Desert Strom
James |
******
I thank you for signing up and doing your duty with the military, but I have to ask you why, with the military now being so depleted that the govt has initiated stop-loss orders preventing thousands of military men and women who have served their time from retiring, why you haven't reinlisted if you believe as you've stated above, that the nation's security is at risk, why you haven't reinlisted for a station in Iraq? This is not only happening with military personnel currently serving in Iraq, but also former enlisted men/women are being called back to serve in the military.
It seems to me that the military is allowed to violate the agreement of service with personel, but not the other way around.
Message edited by author 2004-07-16 13:58:25. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:00:21 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Hey, how old are the Bush daughters? Shouldn't they enlist and be eligible to be sent off to war? |
It's a free country, if they chose to, they can. How is that relevant to the topic? |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:04:57 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Yeah, let's court martial (sarcasm here) a young father who is a CO because he doesn't want to kill innocents and because he realizes that this war in Iraq is unethical and wasn't needed to begin with. Accountibility has to start with the higher ups as well and that doesn't seem to be happening. Leadership starts with the proper role modeling. |
If a soldier is commanded to kill "innocents" they are oblicated to refuse the command and turn in the officer that gave the order.
P.S. Innocents don't shoot at you, don't have RPG's, aren't suicide bombers, don't plant explosives on the side of the road, don't shoot at planes enforcing a UN no fly zone, don't ban UN inspectors... |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:06:49 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Hey, how old are the Bush daughters? Shouldn't they enlist and be eligible to be sent off to war? |
It's a free country, if they chose to, they can. How is that relevant to the topic? |
******
I think it's relevant because if the security of this country is in such dire straits from the threat of terrorism then Bush should lead by example, as all of the congress people who voted for the war, and send their children to serve in the military. As far as I know, there is only one family member of a congress person who is serving in the military. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:10:06 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Yeah, let's court martial (sarcasm here) a young father who is a CO because he doesn't want to kill innocents and because he realizes that this war in Iraq is unethical and wasn't needed to begin with. Accountibility has to start with the higher ups as well and that doesn't seem to be happening. Leadership starts with the proper role modeling. |
If a soldier is commanded to kill "innocents" they are oblicated to refuse the command and turn in the officer that gave the order.
P.S. Innocents don't shoot at you, don't have RPG's, aren't suicide bombers, don't plant explosives on the side of the road, don't shoot at planes enforcing a UN no fly zone, don't ban UN inspectors... |
******
Have you served in war? |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:47:37 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I think us "softies" are already questioning why our government didn't do anything to stop the WTC attacks when they had foreknowledge of the attacks. |
Is it that time of the month again? You really need to try renewing your prescriptions BEFORE they run out. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 02:55:09 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by thelsel:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I think us "softies" are already questioning why our government didn't do anything to stop the WTC attacks when they had foreknowledge of the attacks. |
Is it that time of the month again? You really need to try renewing your prescriptions BEFORE they run out. |
****
olyuzi |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:01:21 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by thelsel:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I think us "softies" are already questioning why our government didn't do anything to stop the WTC attacks when they had foreknowledge of the attacks. |
Is it that time of the month again? You really need to try renewing your prescriptions BEFORE they run out. |
*******
You have nothing better to add to this discussion so you slur womankind and mentally ill people? |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:03:03 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by thelsel:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I think us "softies" are already questioning why our government didn't do anything to stop the WTC attacks when they had foreknowledge of the attacks. |
Is it that time of the month again? You really need to try renewing your prescriptions BEFORE they run out. |
****
Have you served in war, Tom?
Message edited by author 2004-07-16 15:04:00. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:11:43 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Hey, how old are the Bush daughters? Shouldn't they enlist and be eligible to be sent off to war? |
It's a free country, if they chose to, they can. How is that relevant to the topic? |
******
I think it's relevant because if the security of this country is in such dire straits from the threat of terrorism then Bush should lead by example, as all of the congress people who voted for the war, and send their children to serve in the military. As far as I know, there is only one family member of a congress person who is serving in the military. |
It would be very nice if they did, just as it's nice if anyone does. But no one should be expected to do it. It's a free country. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:14:58 PM · #41 |
What's the deal with asking everyone if they have served in a war?
Are you trying to suggest that an individual may not hold nor express an opinion on the situation unless he has done so?
Or are you just trying to make it personal/ find some method, any method, of dismissing those opinions you don't like.
Don't assume, from my post, that I have yet decided where I personally stand on this issue, I haven't. I just find your repeated reference to whether individual posters here have served in a war or not irrelevant to the discussion and downright rude.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:17:24 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Hey, how old are the Bush daughters? Shouldn't they enlist and be eligible to be sent off to war? |
It's a free country, if they chose to, they can. How is that relevant to the topic? |
******
I think it's relevant because if the security of this country is in such dire straits from the threat of terrorism then Bush should lead by example, as all of the congress people who voted for the war, and send their children to serve in the military. As far as I know, there is only one family member of a congress person who is serving in the military. |
It would be very nice if they did, just as it's nice if anyone does. But no one should be expected to do it. It's a free country. |
******
Just curious if you've served in war and if you are currently serving in the military, or have an offspring doing so? |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:17:54 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Have you served in war? |
No. So I guess I have no idea what I'm talking about.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:22:25 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I thank you for signing up and doing your duty with the military, but I have to ask you why, with the military now being so depleted that the govt has initiated stop-loss orders preventing thousands of military men and women who have served their time from retiring, why you haven't reinlisted if you believe as you've stated above, that the nation's security is at risk, why you haven't reinlisted for a station in Iraq? This is not only happening with military personnel currently serving in Iraq, but also former enlisted men/women are being called back to serve in the military.
It seems to me that the military is allowed to violate the agreement of service with personel, but not the other way around. |
Im too old to re-inlist now, plus my IRR status has passed and I have fulfilled my obligation of a total of 8 years (4 active duty, 4 inactive). When you join up for the US military you are signing an 8 year contract so to say. How you do your 8 years is up to you. I did the standard 4 years active service 4 years inactive (IRR) , knowing all to well that they can re-call me at ANY time during my 4 years of in-active reserve. Thats what happening today, people are being recalled and not being let out because you HAVE 8 YEARS OF SERVICE to complete before yo uare totally free and clear from your obligation.
The government/military is not violating any agreement and or contract.
Many people DO NOT realize this.
I dont know about people who have stayed in longer than 8 years of active duty and are trying to get out, but im sure somewhere it is stated you will still do 4 years of IRR before you are fully releived of any obligations, even if you served 20 + years
Would I go back if I could? NO I would not. Why? I dont like the Military rules and regulations I had enough of that when I was in.
James |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:26:14 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
What's the deal with asking everyone if they have served in a war?
Are you trying to suggest that an individual may not hold nor express an opinion on the situation unless he has done so?
Or are you just trying to make it personal/ find some method, any method, of dismissing those opinions you don't like.
Don't assume, from my post, that I have yet decided where I personally stand on this issue, I haven't. I just find your repeated reference to whether individual posters here have served in a war or not irrelevant to the discussion and downright rude. |
******
I"m sorry you find it rude, and I don't mean to be, but I do find it relevant to the discussion since it's very easy to say someone should be off fighting in a war situation that could result in loss of life or limb, from behind a computer when you, or your offspring, is not. Just like no one in the Bush family has sent their children to fight overseas, or any congressperson, I find it rude that this war, which imo is not ethical or needed, should be hoisted on the American public to fight and fund, when our leaders in government are not willing to. To me, that's equally rude. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:30:18 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by Kavey:
What's the deal with asking everyone if they have served in a war?
Are you trying to suggest that an individual may not hold nor express an opinion on the situation unless he has done so?
Or are you just trying to make it personal/ find some method, any method, of dismissing those opinions you don't like.
Don't assume, from my post, that I have yet decided where I personally stand on this issue, I haven't. I just find your repeated reference to whether individual posters here have served in a war or not irrelevant to the discussion and downright rude. |
******
I"m sorry you find it rude, and I don't mean to be, but I do find it relevant to the discussion since it's very easy to say someone should be off fighting in a war situation that could result in loss of life or limb, from behind a computer when you, or your offspring, is not. Just like no one in the Bush family has sent their children to fight overseas, or any congressperson, I find it rude that this war, which imo is not ethical or needed, should be hoisted on the American public to fight and fund, when our leaders in government are not willing to. To me, that's equally rude. |
I agree with your point. However rather than making your point by bring peoples' personal histories into this why not just say as you have above - that unless one has served in the military during a war that it is hard to understand what it is like and that it's much easier to say someone should be fighting in war than to do it oneself.
That way, you are refuting their point rather than criticising their personal choices.
Just my opinion anyway.
Message edited by author 2004-07-16 15:30:31.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:31:27 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Have you served in war? |
No. So I guess I have no idea what I'm talking about. |
*****
It's very easy to say that this man with a young family should fulfill his obligations because he signed a contract, but until you've been in his shoes, it's alot easier to do that behind a computer screen. Not that you don't know what you're talking about, but what's going on there is a horror and I can understand where he's coming from. This is not just about a business/military contract, but ethical and humane issues. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:35:04 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by Kavey:
What's the deal with asking everyone if they have served in a war?
Are you trying to suggest that an individual may not hold nor express an opinion on the situation unless he has done so?
Or are you just trying to make it personal/ find some method, any method, of dismissing those opinions you don't like.
Don't assume, from my post, that I have yet decided where I personally stand on this issue, I haven't. I just find your repeated reference to whether individual posters here have served in a war or not irrelevant to the discussion and downright rude. |
******
I"m sorry you find it rude, and I don't mean to be, but I do find it relevant to the discussion since it's very easy to say someone should be off fighting in a war situation that could result in loss of life or limb, from behind a computer when you, or your offspring, is not. Just like no one in the Bush family has sent their children to fight overseas, or any congressperson, I find it rude that this war, which imo is not ethical or needed, should be hoisted on the American public to fight and fund, when our leaders in government are not willing to. To me, that's equally rude. |
I agree with your point. However rather than making your point by bring peoples' personal histories into this why not just say as you have above - that unless one has served in the military during a war that it is hard to understand what it is like and that it's much easier to say someone should be fighting in war than to do it oneself.
That way, you are refuting their point rather than criticising their personal choices.
Just my opinion anyway. |
****
Thank you for pointing this out to me.
BTW...there is another post above that directed towards me is equally rude. I hope you will comment on that.
Message edited by author 2004-07-16 15:38:29. |
|
|
|
07/16/2004 03:47:58 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I"m sorry you find it rude, and I don't mean to be, but I do find it relevant to the discussion since it's very easy to say someone should be off fighting in a war situation that could result in loss of life or limb, from behind a computer when you, or your offspring, is not. Just like no one in the Bush family has sent their children to fight overseas, or any congressperson, I find it rude that this war, which imo is not ethical or needed, should be hoisted on the American public to fight and fund, when our leaders in government are not willing to. To me, that's equally rude. |
You miss the point entirely. No one is telling anyone what they have to do. Parents do not send their children to enlist. Each person has a choice, and I respect that choice, whether it is to serve or not to serve. Your point makes no sense. The only point being made is that if you have signed up for 8 years of military service, you should complete it and not cut and run simply because it has suddenly become distasteful to you. No, I have not served in the military or in a war, nor do I ask or require anyone else to enlist. However, if you choose to enlist, then you should honor your obligations. I know enough about myself and my character that, had I enlisted, and had I been called to duty in Iraq, I would have honored my obligation, despite the threat to life and limb and despite any reservations about whether it is a "legal" war.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2004 04:04:01 PM · #50 |
Olyuzi,
Sorry! I didn't mean to come across as a forum moderator or anything.
:0)
I think it was just that the question about whether people had served themselves was repeated a few times to the point where I really noticed it.
Usually when people are being very rude I just ignore them since I feel that it's often a sign of intellectual weakness - can't argue a point eloquently, just insult the opposition instead. In your case I didn't feel that you were posting aggressively or ignorantly, I just wanted to point out that the question you asked came across as rude/ irrelevant to me. I don't want to make this into some weird righteous hunt for the rude so forgive me if I don't follow up on the post you're referring to.
|
|
