Officer plans to refuse to go to Iraq

[CyberEd]

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648381"]Meanwhile, I find it funny that you point that out, yet forget that there never was a "war" to begin with.[/quote]huh ?!

[Deacon]

It's all a fabrication of the liberal media to put Bush himself in a bad light.

PS what a poorly written article.

[StruckingFuggle]

[quote="CyberEd";p="648420"][quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648381"]Meanwhile, I find it funny that you point that out, yet forget that there never was a "war" to begin with.[/quote]huh ?!
[/quote]

The United States never declared war on Iraq, so there never really was a "war" to begin with.

[Deacon]

Ed, irrelevant semantics are fantastic if that's all Fuggle's got to argue with, or they're terrible and petty if you point them out. Just something to be aware of in any discussion with Fuggle.

[StruckingFuggle]

So. I've been kickign around a question, and since someone else necro'd the thread, guess I'll actually bring it up.

Phong, specifically, but anyone else who's taking issue with a man following conscience instead of orders ... if that's such a huge crime, then I have to ask, do you think George Washington should have been ground to dust? How about Robert E. Lee? They were both comissioned officers in the government of a nation they fought against, because they believed it to be the conscienable thing to do. Oh no.

[Deacon]

"The best way I can support my fellow soldiers and those under me is by helping to oppose an illegal war and helping to end it," says Watada in a streaming video clip.

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648381"]Meanwhile, I find it funny that you point that out, yet forget that there never was a "war" to begin with.[/quote]
[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648474"]The United States never declared war on Iraq, so there never really was a "war" to begin with.[/quote]

Oh snap! Fuggle pwned that disgraced, dishonorable, little chickenshit!

High five, Fuggle!

[SunTzu]

There never was a war, therefore the prisoners in guantanamo doesnt have to be treated according to the geneva conventions, since they arent prisoners of war.

[Arminius]

Aaaaanyway. It's over for Guantanamo. Guantanamo has been declared illegal by the highest American tribunal. Twas about time.

[CyberEd]

StruckingFuggle, all that "who declared what" legal crap has no grasp on the reality of shrieking bullets.
when someone shoots at you - it's war.
when you conquer - it's war.
and when you occupy and are under guerilla attack - it's also war.

the soldiers over there are currently AT WAR. they risk their life every day.it's bad enough to be at war and read in the papers how useless and unneeded your death will be, it's even worse when a fellow soldier, no, an officer REFUSES to join you claiming the war is immoral.

you ask who wrote the laws allowing the army to do this or that. I ask who wrote the laws claiming this is moral and that is not ?

I see no moral problem in te way the US is fighting in Iraq (Haditha-like incidents excluded as I am sure they are not widespread)
I see NO moral problem in detaining suspects for questioning, (and in questioning I include torture) - if that's what's needed to get information that'd keep your soldiers alive.
it's ugly, it's hideous, it's hell
it's war

are the soldiers in Iraq less moral than the soldiers in any other war the US fought ? do you think american soldiers are commiting war crimes ? should american generals be prosecuted in international courts ?

[Deacon]

CyberEd, not just immoral, but also illegal.

[StruckingFuggle]

StruckingFuggle, all that "who declared what" legal crap has no grasp on the reality of shrieking bullets.
when someone shoots at you - it's war.
when you conquer - it's war.
and when you occupy and are under guerilla attack - it's also war.

Precisely.

[CyberEd]

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648381"]Meanwhile, I find it funny that you point that out, yet forget that there never was a "war" to begin with.[/quote][quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648606"]

StruckingFuggle, all that "who declared what" legal crap has no grasp on the reality of shrieking bullets.
when someone shoots at you - it's war.
when you conquer - it's war.
and when you occupy and are under guerilla attack - it's also war.

Precisely.[/quote]


deacon, the question whether a war itself is internationally legal or not cannot and should not be asked by a serving soldier.

[StruckingFuggle]

Okay. I'll see if I can explain it, Ed.

Aerdan finds it funny that he objects to the war, when there is no war to begin with. I find that funny, because there was never a War in any sort of legal term (oh no, responsibility!) to begin with ... but there's always been a 'war' in the sense of a battle, which is, as you said, still going on... so there was both no war before, as there is no war now, and there as since always been battle, so really ... Aerdan's really saying nothing.

Looking back, I do see from the beginning that I could have explained that a lot better. Alas.

[Phong]

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="648486"]So. I've been kickign around a question, and since someone else necro'd the thread, guess I'll actually bring it up.

Phong, specifically, but anyone else who's taking issue with a man following conscience instead of orders ... if that's such a huge crime, then I have to ask, do you think George Washington should have been ground to dust? How about Robert E. Lee? They were both comissioned officers in the government of a nation they fought against, because they believed it to be the conscienable thing to do. Oh no.[/quote]

George Washington was not a commissioned officer in the English Army, he was a Colonel of the Virginia Militia, and he would even so have been hanged by the British as a traitor if he was captured.

Robert E. Lee I can at least have respect for, his home state seceded from the Union and was about to be invaded by Union forces (he was offered the command of that force) at that time he resigned his commission, his resignation was ACCEPTED under the circumstance as was the resignitions of all Union officers wishing to return and defend their homes, and southern Cadets at West Point were released as well. It was a different war at a different time, and Robert E. Lee gave up his career and reputation in order to defend his home.

Mr. Watada's home was not invaded, his rights were not deprived of him. Really Fuggle, don't make such obtuse comparisons you embarass yourself when you grasp at straws like that.

[Calus]

Pardon of Robert E. Lee

"It seems clear that General Lee was in fact pardoned by President Johnson, if not by the proclamation of July 4, 1868, then certainly by that of December 25, 1868, and that any politcal limitations to which he was subject by the Fourteenth Amendment were removed by the act of June 6, 1898."