Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Conscientious Rejector?

First Lieutenant Ehren Watada still refuses Iraq deployment orders, calling the war illegal. A six-year prison term could result. Preliminary hearings are set for Thursday.

First Lt. Ehren Watada, a 28-year-old Hawaii native, is the first commissioned officer in the U.S. to publicly refuse deployment to Iraq. He announced last June his decision not to deploy on the grounds the war is illegal.

Lt. Watada was based at Fort Lewis, Washington, with the Army's 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. He has remained on base, thus avoiding charges of desertion.

He does, however, face one count of "missing troop movement" and four counts of "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman." If convicted, he faces up to six years in prison.

Watada's court martial is on February 5. A pre-trial hearing is set for January 4, with an added scope of controversy: the Army has ordered two freelance journalists, Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail, to testify against Lt. Watada at the hearing. Both journalists are fighting the subpoenas.

Kevin Sites recently spoke with Lt. Watada about the reasoning behind his decision, the controversy the decision has caused and how he is dealing with the repercussions.

Lt. Watada spoke on the phone from his family's home in Hawaii. Click here to listen to the full audio version of the conversation. A transcript of the interview follows.

The interview is located here:

http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs19056

Tough call if you ask me.  Without knowing too many details or reading the article, I think he is right about the war, but he signed up to do a job and he should honor that committment.  If he can legally prove that the war is illegal then hes got a grounds for not serving.  but this to me like a fireman signing up to fight fires and then when one breaks out he doesn't want to put it out.  of course its more complicated then that since this war is total BS, but you can still see the comparison.

The man is a coward, plain and simple.  As an officer, I would be ashamed to be anywhere near this man.  He is a disgrace to himself, his unit and the Army.  We've been talking about this at work and we all agree, this guy is a piece of shit.  Personally I think the whole thing is a publicity stunt.  Ok, I got it, he doesn't agree with the war.  Join the club buddy.  But you took an oath to lead and train the soldiers that are forced to fight in whatever situation congress and the American voters send them in.

It's not as if him refusing to deploy changed anything, some other officer was appointed to go in his place.  This man is a coward and I hope they give the son of a bitch the maximum sentence.  He can play martyr and hero while rotting in leavenworth for a few years.

Hey Guns, part of me agrees with you and your office, but then another part of me tells me that I wish we had a few more Ehren Watadas in World War 2 Germany.   :-\

I hope he serves his time in a dignified manner.  He does belong in jail.  I feel so sorry for these kids fighting an unjust war.  It's very sad.  :(

while not as passionately, i agree more with guns on this then not.  If you don't believe in the war, you still do what you signed up to do.  Even moreso he has men under him who are relying on him.  If you don't believe in the war, then believe in the guy next to you and do all you can to make sure he comes home in one piece.

Excellent point about WW2 Germany though Axl4Prez.  Although I don't think what america is doing is as bad as Nazi Germany in terms of the holocaust (but don't get me wrong, its pretty bad what we've done to that country and its people already).

this was is a shit storm to say the least.

I'll be very curious to see how history judges this war (and the assholes who started it) 20-30-40 years from now.

Hanna, that's why I said he must do the time.  Of course he has an obligation.  That's what you sign up for when you join the military. 

About the 20-30-40 years thing however...I think it'll take longer than that.  Here's why.  At some point, some wacko extremist will succeed in killing large numbers of people somewhere in the U.S.  It will happen.  How and when, nobody knows.  Once it does though, people who once disagreed with our heavy-handed dealings in the Middle East will quickly switch sides and honor the current president for trying to head it off at the beginning of the 21st century.

Personally, I think the president's actions are harming this nation's future by breeding world-wide contempt for our nation.  Oh well, I don't lose sleep over it.  To function, you just can't.  :no:

perhaps, but i think history will point to the iraq war as the REASON why we were attacked again, or why attacks have escalated since.  its fact that this war has produced MORE terrorists (and more as everyday passes).

^agreed.   :(

i agree with everyone that says he has an obligation. he may not believe in the war but hes  a Lt. and has a duty to be there. i think he deserves prison if he refuses to serve his country. he should go and if he wants to make a fuss fine, let him make his point known, but he should go.

The war was is illegal under international law and he has the right to refuse to fight. The man signed up to defend this nation, not use false evidence to invade a country and nation build.

SLC, I agree with your point on the war, but when you sign up for the military you take orders.  He belongs in jail.  :(

So our soldiers should have the ability to choose when they want to fight? ?What if he was in Iraq already when he had his moment of "clarity", should anyone be able to say "No, I'm gonna sit this one out." ?He's a volunteer like all members of America's military. ?He got a college degree paid for by teh US govt and agreed to serve as an Officer for x number of years.

Thank god your view is held by a very small minority or we'd have no military at all.

As a veteran myself, I'd like to add my 2 cents to this conversation.  I joined the Army in 1998...got out in late 2002 right when all this stuff was starting off.  I joined knowing that if I had to be in battle during my tenure, I'd have to do it...it's there in the contract.  When 9/11 happened, I along with everyone else around me in my unit was very very patriotic...we all wanted to fight.  After that, things took a wrong turn....maybe because I paid very close attention to it I could see that it was a crock of shit immediately.  I mean we're after Al-Qaeda when all of a sudden there's a sharp halt and boom we're on a different path for a different agenda.  I had a $25k re-enlistment bonus and a promotion to SGT thrown at me.  I said no way...my service was up and I have no desire to fight this war.  My time was up anyway so it didn't matter....call me unpatriotic whatever...I don't give a shit...no blood on my hands.
This 1LT signed up AFTER the war....he knew damn well what he was getting into.  Right there in his contract it is required of him to serve his branch of service under time of need.  Regardless if he feels it's wrong or not, he is obligated to do his part.  My view on it is this....he should be stripped of his college degree that the Army paid for.  He should be given a dishonorable discharge and loss of all benefits.  As far as jail goes...I don't think it's needed.  He's going to be judged for his choices all his life.  I can understand if it was cowardice..however, he took the oath as a COMMISSIONED OFFICER to lead hundreds of other troops.  He should be working in a supply unit right now sharpening pencils. 
The war is fucked up..we all know that, but our soldiers are doing a duty that their government (not their country) is paying them to do.  They all chose to do what they're doing....there wasn't a draft.  If it was a draft situation then he would have every right to protest. 

You should take orders, but what if the orders are illegal? Then what?

SLC I see your point and Axl4prez alluded to the same thing - but while the war is illegal, i don't think you can compare this to the atrocities the nazi soldiers committed in ww2.   If war movies (and the books they are based on) have taught me anything, whether its ww2 with saving private ryan, vietnam with we were soldiers or somalia with black hawk down - whether or not the troops agreed with the mission at hand or not, they all followed their orders and were there for EACH OTHER.  Sometimes its the guy next to you you fight for, not the orders themselves.

I agree with most everyone here...its one thing if this was a grunt (it'd still be wrong not to fight), but this guy is a commissioned officer.  Even worse that he is refusing to do his duty.

That is the definition of a Patriot.  A Patriot is someone who actively supports their government.  A Nationalist is someone who supports their country.  You can't call yourself a Patriot if you don't support your government.  I guess you could wiggle around and say, well I support The Constitution, so I'm a Patriot.  But such a claim requires no effort and isn't active support.  It's been my experience that people who use this justification don't support the Constitution, but pick and choose certain parts they like, interpret other sections differently than the intent of the authors and just make up their own qualifiers of rights.

The word 'Patriot' is a very powerful word, and people want to be able to use it.  So they just try to redefine the word to suite their needs.  I remember being in school listening to people claiming they were patriots by getting an education  :hihi:.

I had a recent discussion with someone who is anti-war and said you can't support the troops and be against the war.  I fully agreed with him.  His analogy was this:  If there was a mob boss (Bush) who ordered his hired hit-men (the all volunteer US Armed Forces) to kill someone and they did, would you just blame the Boss and write the hitmen off as doing their job?  I couldn't argue with that. 

If you don't support the US Govt, you're not a Patriot.  You can be a Nationalist if you support America the nation, but you're not a Patriot.

Can you point me to a dictionary which defines it that way.

When I say I am against this war, I believe I am supporting the troops.  If enough Americans voiced their opposition to this war (recently as high as 70% of Americans said it was a mistake to invade Iraq) I believe the powers that be would radically re-think our involvement in Iraq.

Without the 3000 American soldiers dead, and at a fraction of the cost we could have infiltrated and destroyed Al-Qaeda's network.  With the support of peace-loving nations throughout the world, our intelligence services and joint clandestine operations with those nations would have prevented another terrorist attack.  Saddam was no imminent threat to anybody but his own people.  There are thugs like this throughout the world, and I don't see us throwing a hundred thousand troops into their backyards allowing tens of thousands to die as "collateral damage."  Every person killed over there has a very angry relative.  Many are young and impressionable and ready to seek vengeance on the U.S. whether it's warranted or not. 

That said, the guy still belongs in jail.  SLC, you have to understand, it's the military.  If guys were allowed to freely question every order...the hatches would have opened on the beaches of Normandy with guys saying, "It's illegal for you to force me into a rain of machine gun fire."  You'd have one pathetic military if your soldiers couldn't follow orders. 

I'd love to see the movie:  "Patton Meets SLC Punk!"   :rofl:

pa?tri?ot     /ˈpeɪtriət, -ˌɒt or, especially Brit., ˈp?triət/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pey-tree-uht, -ot or, especially Brit., pa-tree-uht] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?noun 1. a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion. 
2. a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, esp. of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government. 
3. (initial capital letter) Military. a U.S. Army antiaircraft missile with a range of 37 mi. (60 km) and a 200-lb. (90 kg) warhead, launched from a tracked vehicle with radar and computer guidance and fire control. 

Guns 'N rock music, you need to do some researching...........a patriot defends their COUNTRY...not the government.? Read up on some Thomas Paine while you're at it for a little more in depth meaning of what a real patriot is.

I understand what you are saying, but to me (and the soldier) it is not just any other order, it is an order to perform an illegal act, one which will expedite the death of thousands more people.

"Watada said his refusal to serve in Iraq was based, in part, on his review of the Army Field Manual, which states in a section entitled "Commencement of Hostilities" that "The Charter of the United Nations makes illegal the threat or use of force contrary to the purpose of the United Nations."

Watada said he believes the United States did not get the necessary U.N. approvals to launch the invasion that began in March 2003.

"

Standing up to a government that is lying to you, is patriotic in my opinion, even if you are in the military.

United States Officers and Soldiers don't take an oath of allegiance to the UN.  The opinions of the UN and their policies have no bearing on the military.  The moment I become subordinate to the UN I will resign my commission and join any faction that aims to keep American soverignty in tact.

My patriot definition was more detailed than the standard dictionary one. ?While I could make a case for my definition being the standard, I don't think I need to. ?Your definitions say someone who DEFENDS their country. ?Country in this aspect is defined as a soverign state. ?A soverign state is in essence a government - ours being determined through democracy.

The key word being there is "DEFEND". ?A Patriot makes sacrifices and endures times of difficulty to defend. ?While some may argue that to defend is a variety of terms, common sense and honesty will admit that true defense is to put one's well being in danger. ?Blogging and commentaries don't count. ?

Nobody claimed they did, strawman.

Defending a nation from a legitimate attack and invading a country on trumped up charges and LIES, are quite different.

I wish there were more brave men like him in the army. Men who arent afraid to stand up for what they believe is right.

No offence, but that's one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever read here. Just because the Bushies have redefined "good" sounding words like patriot, freedom and victory to make it sound like you're a terrorist if you don't support the war, that doesn't mean they supersede the dictionary definitions.

Well according to him, he doesn't need a dictionary, just "common sense and honesty". That way he can define it anyway he wants, as long as he believes he is being honest with himself and pretends to have common sense.

the thingi s there are..... and they are in iraq..... not saying everyone in iraq is pro war, but there are brave men that belive in this war and will fight to achive its goals. IMO th braver men of the war are not that ones who stand against the war or stand for it but are the ones that will go in beleiving either but will fight for their friends on the line with them. Time and time again in canada and the US the public refuses to see that soilders fight cause they are told to they do so not blindly as many say but they do so to protect the lives of their friends and to bring what they feel is the goal of their mission go in get out alive and safe.

its like building a house though, you want things to be leel, but in some cases level doest work so you make it true :p

exactly my next points. Im all over the protest right for the people but you sign up knowing that you could be asked to wage war and die for your country.... dont go oh its illegal or not after teh fact your walk away means that others will be sent in your place

Really?  I've heard Guns N Music (Flagg) say A LOT more retarded things....but yeah, this does rank up there with them.  Just put these two statements side by side, both from Guns N Music

The word 'Patriot' is a very powerful word, and people want to be able to use it.  So they just try to redefine the word to suite their needs.

then he says

My patriot definition was more detailed than the standard dictionary one.? While I could make a case for my definition being the standard, I don't think I need to.

HAHAHAHAH pot, kettle, black  :rofl:

To say you can't support the troops by not supporting the war is such 2004 Bush propaganda...NOBODY IS BUYING IT ANYMORE!!! WAKE UP!  God, are people STILL this idiotic? Its like these morons who STILL think saddam had ties to 9-11 !!!  I just dont' get it.

My definiiton is the standard definition in all Political Theory courses.? I explained how the dicitonary definition was no different, just vague and ambiguous.? Let's use a little common sense here.? Not everyone can be a "patriot".? yet, many of you want to look at yourself that way.? Running your fucking mouth does not make you a patriot.? Very few of you do anything that would constititute "defense" in the caliber this definition requires.? If you think typing on the internet and going to a rally with a bunch of socialists who hate capitalism and are just using the war to push their agenda is on par with someone who risks their life for America, then you're a fucking fool.? Call me retarded and dumb if you like, but you're civilians, not patriots.

People who badmouth their country, make no sacrifices for it, wish to change it from top to bottom aren't patriots - at best they're revolutionaries.? But it's cool, continue to call yourselves Patriots.? When your kids ask you what you did during the Iraq war and you tell them you were a patriot by voting and bitcing on a message forum, then they give you that queer look, you'll have to admit that you're full of shit.

I dodge bullets and SLC sells real estate.  But we're both Patriots.  ::)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I friggin love it man!

People are firing guns by your computer?

What part doesn't your small mind grasp?  I explained how what I said was the definition.  You're trying to claim you're a patriot, but do NOTHING warrant DEFENSE of your country.  You seem to not understand what defend means.  So you're trying to redefine "defense" to suit your agenda.  People who support an international control aren't defending America.  You're not a patriot, you're a blow hard.  Get it through your head.  Find me a list of patriots who claim you in their numbers?

Your unyielding stubbornness is the stuff of legends, and may very well take you to an early death.

I must only guess that you are posting from Baghdad right now?

Your ignorance is astounding.  As I told you once, I will be in Iraq soon enough.  But just because someone isn't in Iraq or doesn't go because their job prohibits it (Read: Brody who is a submariner) doesn't mean that their capacity in the military is any less important.  Someone in the National Guard in Iowa helping in a disatser, like Katrina is just as important.  Do you have to be in the military to be a Patriot, no but everyone who serves in the military is.  And don't kid yourself, if this were months from now and I was posting here from Baghdad, it wouldn't make a difference to you. 

You have seen no action yet, so I don't see how you can be chest pumping away here on how you are "dodging bullets".

Your argument is absurd anyway,  claiming that unless you are serving or have served, then you are not a "patriot", or that your opinion on Iraq or national security is not credible. Well my wife served, and thinks you are a shame to the military-using the uniform as a means to try and win arguments.  I guess she must be right, since she "served".

Just be glad I'm typing this instead of her, she'd probably tell you to take your version of "patriotism" and shove it.

Wow your wife was an ambassador and now she was a soldier too.  All of this before her early 30s.  Nothing short of amazing.

My mother worked in the foreign service, serving this country overseas for years, not my wife. She spent a great deal of time in Pakistan, India and other middle east countries and understands the make-up of those regions quite well unlike our LIAR president. My wife served in the Army, and I also have a brother who has served this country for years. My parents are both military and I was born in a military base in Virginia. My insurance is USAA for my homes and cars.

But don't let any of your confusion take away from the fact that there are those who have "served" that think people like you are a shame to the uniform.

He wants to abandon his brothers in arms.
Low. :no:

They'd be in the minority. ?I deal with AD soldiers every day. ?I know what their feelings our on the situtation. ?Amercians don't tolerate cowards or losers. ?You want to cut and run, call names, and wait a few years so America is being bombed left and right. ?Then you can still point fingers, and try to push your agenda onto everyone else.

I have never supported the invasion of Iraq and will never agree with it. ?But we're there now and need to do what's necessary to keep America safe. ?Rather than focus on viable solutions, you live 4 years in the past yelling LIES LIES LIES. ?That's real constructive and helps better the situation. ?But ok SLC, here's a question you should ask your family. ?Ask your career father if he was still active would he go over to Iraq if his unit was deployed. ?

You don't give a rats ass about the Iraqis, or you'd advocate keeping America in to keep an all out genocide from happening. ?You don't give a rats ass about our miliatary or you'd advocate finishing the job so we don't have to go back in 10 years when it's 100x worse over there. ?You live in a dream world where lions lay down with the sheep.

Rather than exxagerate and spin what I said. ?Let's look at the truth. ?Have I ever said that someone who's not serving or hasn't served opinion is invalid or worth less? ?No, I have not. ?Have I said that you can be a patriot and not have served in the military, yes I have. ?What I have repeatedly said, is that I value the educated and empirical observation of people who have been over there rather than "independent" activist groups trying to find what they're looking for. ?I place a value on the opinions of our service men and woman because they're the ones who have to fight this war, not the American voters or the international community. ?I give a fuck what someone in France, INdia, Russia, China, etc. ?thinks about the US military and our foreign policy. ?In the end their opinions serve their best interests, not mine or Americas. ?People actually making sacrifices are the ones who will get fucked over in 10 years when some Democrat with a mandate from the UN sends my ass into Iraq on some humanitarian aide bullshit. ?Of course you'd support that, but again, you wouldn't be dodging bullets.

Do I discount the opinions of civilians, absolutely not. ?But if this war has taught us anything, it's that civilians are stubborn, finicky and unstable. ? When you unleash teh hounds of hell, you let them do their job. ?You don't get queazy after a short time and call the dogs back. ?You're god damn right if you think I give more creedence to the opinion of someone who's actually going over to do the fighting than someone who gets to stay at home and watch American Idol. ?People not serving at best have no investment in this war. ?You'd rather let Iraq become the ultimate factory for terrorism, rather than finish the job now, hoping one of your boys can take credit. ?I get it and agree - going in was stupid and wrong. ?But we're there now and we need to live in the present, not the past. ?You don't see me spamming the board about how Democrats fucked with Vietnam and Korea - I live in the present.

There you go again with your Bill O'reilly clone talk.

Many republicans are ready to "cut n run" now in case you have not noticed.

Another thing you didn't notice was the latest NIE report which concluded that Iraq has made us less safe and has become a virtual recruiting ground for terrorists. Just like I said it would when this mess started.

My agenda huh? My "agenda" which you never seem to say what it is, is truth. Seems like most of America likes my "agenda" these days too.




Staying in Iraq is making us less safe, intelligence reports have already told you this.


That is one of your many lies. I have given solutions non stop to this and my final solution is telling you that we need to get the hell out of Iraq.
 


Iraqis are getting slaughtered by the thousands due to our occupation. I have always said this, since day one and Genocide is happening right now anyway-a total meat grinder, some of the worst yet.



In fact my entire argument since day one is that Bush has used our military, which is a tragedy, sending them off to early deaths for a pack of lies. If anybody cares about our military, it's me, I want them out of harms way. Always have.




Look who is spinning now?

Your theme is.... "I serve my country, so shut the fuck up". You use this as a way to show how "patriotic" you are, and compare personal lives, using that as a scale, when your arguments and Ann Coulter articles fall flat. Kujo called both you guys out on this before, having served himself. 





Take a look in the mirror.


Another thing you do (and the other kool aide drinkers) is put words in my mouth. You guys always do this. For your information, Iraq has ALREADY become the factory for terrorism. Again, maybe take a look at the NIE report which says just that.




Finish what? Bush ignored good military advice before going into Iraq, opting to listen to Rummy's powerpoint presentations instead. We have failed, created a terror state, and essentially left Iraq open to Iran, all while making our country less safe. Now the oil companies are lining up to get their share, just like I said they would.