Deserters should face the music like men
Days before George W. Bush comes to Canada, three of his countrymen have been dealt a blow in their campaign to receive refugee status and be allowed to live here. Jeremy Hinzman is one of the three claimants — former members of the U.S. military who refuse to fight in Iraq.
The federal refugee board declared that it is irrelevant whether the Iraq war is legal or illegal. It does not, they said, have any bearing on Hinzman’s right to stay in this country or be declared a valid refugee.
The board is quite right, of course. What it should also say is that these three men should stop wasting Canadian time and money and be sent back to the free and democratic United States where their punishment will be moderate and appropriate.
Those who deserted need to be sent back to the United States and should face trial and whatever punishment is deemed appropriate for their actions.
These individuals entered into a contract with a voluntary military. In doing so they had no problem taking advantage of the medical and dental benefits. Nor did they miss a step when it came time to receive their two monthly paychecks. They enjoyed their thirty days leave per year and the numerous other long holiday weekends. And let us not forget the education they received to do their job and to do it well. Then when it came time for them to step up and do what they had been trained to do – - what they had been paid to do – - they ran. They ran hoping someone would pity them enough to let them stay. That isn’t going to happen and now it’s time to come home and have some dignity and deal with the consequences of their actions.
I agree that they should be sent back. Who would join the military not thinking there was a chance you would be deployed into a war zone?
They can count their blessings that this isn’t 1864. Back then this sort of thing got you shot.
If the few defaulters during Gulf War I had received proper punishment, and if troops had to confirm their committment with every paycheck, there mught be fewer of these thankfully rare instances.
The ready-reserve callups, including one Vietnam veteran who is fighting his orders to go to Iraq, have my sympathy more than these guys. A contract is a contract, and the military is the military. There is no way a Canadian court would rule on the legality of the Iraq War, though there is precedent in Canada – including Iraqi soldiers who defected during Saddam’s invasions of Iran and Kuwait. If there were a draft, I would feel differently.
Defaulting on a reserve committment is kinda like an insurance company taking your premiums, then refusing to pay any claims.
#2: If it was 1864, they could have paid $300 for someone else to go in their place.
Why is the military not meeting its recruitment quotas when over 60 million Americans support Bush and believe that the Iraq war is right?
my Grandfather got convicted of making book in the 1930′s and my Grabdmother sat in jail for him so he continue making a living. i’d forgotten about that ’til i read dg’s post.
the government lied to us about going to war and now they’re shocked, shocked[!] i say, that some are lying to them about serving.
everyone eventually gets what they deserve.
even the government.
So why do the canadians think we want them back? hey Robert Redford want to move to canada and all i can say is LET HIM:cool:
Bush dressed up in a flight suit like John Wayne, landed on an aircraft carrier to tell us major combat had ended while a banner over his head claimed “mission accomplished”.
Your definition is not what Bush was trying to convey — and you know it.
6. Defense department recruitment quotas are hardly met in peace time. Stick to something you know more about. Like complaining for instance.
Oh, I’m sorry.
I thought we were at war.
Stupid me.
I must be watching too much FOXNews.
We are at War, and yes stupid you.
RE.#10:
“Defense department recruitment quotas are hardly met in peace time.”
Then what the hell are you talking about?
Actually we are talking about AWOL’s in Canada. Always refer to the top of the page when in doubt.
It doesn’t make any difference.
If this President and this war are supported by the majority of Americans, and it is obvious more troops are needed, why aren’t more people signing up to support the troops already there?
Since 2002, enlistment in the U.S. Army Reserve has seen a 32 percent decrease.
There was even speculation earlier in the year that recruitment offices would not meet their reserve recruitment quota, even though the number had been reduced to 21,200, down from 26,400 the previous year.
Even with lowering the quota numbers and offering bonuses, in addition to extending tours of duty, our troops are being coerced into re-enlisting.
Instead of bithchin’ about a “volunteer” soldier who “deserts” (it wasn’t a big deal when Bush did it), perhaps more Bush supporters should just sign-up?
I don’t see a whole lot of people shouting “support our troops” running down to the recuitment center.
I love it the way dg and it’s ilk has to keep rewatering old weeds. The mission was the tour of the carrier task force. It had been accomplished. Bush earned the right to wear a flight suit a damn sight more than Clintoon earned the right to wear the various warrior jackets he modeled during his reign.
even tho Bush may have been AWOL during his suspicious milirary service?
funnt none of those images from that day on the carrier deck made it into any campaign ads.
why was that?
13. I’m talking about R-E-C-R-U-I-T-M-E-N-T. You said we’re not meeting recruitment quotas because of the war. I said that those quotas are barely met during times of peace. Your statement has no validity. Actually wars tend to boost recruitment. Something about patriotism and crap like that. You probably wouldn’t understand. I had a great friend who was a recruiter ten years ago (in peace time) when I got in. It was hard for him to make quota then. Oh yeah, I’m about to re-enlist for another 4 years too. I’ve probably been manipulated or coerced.
Rat – you seems like a reasonable fellow. i thought the force levels were pretty much where Rumsfeld wanted them to be in his new ‘slimmed down, more mobile miliraty’.
the fact of the back door drafts (stop-loss) and the increasing relative enlistment numbers, one must ask, why?
You’re being disingenuous, Wally and you know it.
The impression Bush was trying to give by saying “major combat operations have ended” was that no one else was going to get killed.
It was hyperbole — deliberate deception and you know it. That’s why you guys still have to quantify it.
BTW — That’s not water I’m pouring on those old weeds. Unfortunately, those old weeds are persistent regardless of what I pour on them.
P.S. My comment was meant for another post: “Iraq Wants To Postpone.”
— sorry.
19 -= Rat – i meant before we went to war with Iraq re: troop levels.
19. You give me far too much credit Shi.I’m really not reasonable at all. I just refuse to scream at the top of my keyboards lungs the way some people do here. I must work with a group of patriots because most want to stay in and it’s not because were living like Kings. My cup runneth over because my wife runneth off to work.
Alas, I must admit to a few temper tantrums on this site.
23 –everyone’s hackles just wait under the veneer of civility, ready to come out like a raging bunch of Huns.
(thanks capital one)
Rat, at least you believe what you say and you demonstrate it by re-enlisting.
However, your argument does not explain why recuitment quotas have to be lowered by congress in an attempt to help the military meet them.
If more troops are needed, then more Republicans should be eager to serve next to you and your band of brothers, as their votes suggest.
If you do go to Iraq, may God be with you. (Our God, not “their” God.)
I think Simon brings out the Hun in me. I get suckered into responding to that one man parade every time. His views are so damn inflammatory. Yet he never stays to debate where I can really tear into him.
Simon is definitely an agitator. he has said things that make sense but then goes off on one of those wild tangents that, i can only assume, he does intentionally to get the arguement on to the table in the starkest terms possible. then sits back and watches the discussion, which is almost always personmal and not on point. (of course, not all the points he brings up are valid – not even worthy of discussion)
&, of course, you’re there to ensure he has the right to do exactly what he does.
25. Thanks. I hope he stays with all of us. Not that I’m terribly religious. Sorry if I get a little sharp at times. Possibly the season has toned down this site a little. I like it.
Respect your fellow human being, treat them fairly, disagree with them honestly, enjoy their friendship, explore your thoughts about one another candidly, work together for a common goal and help one another achieve it. No destructive lies. No ridiculous fears. No debilitating anger.
Bill Bradley
27. I know and it rips me apart inside. He quipps about washing his face in American blood. I think about my friends I’ve lost. I think about the guy in the “A Fathers Farewell” thread. What galls me the most is he’s just doing it, like you said, to get attention
29. Lets not get too touchy feely or we’ll all have to do a testicle check when we get up.
Just another quick word on 25. most of my bro’s are Republicans. However, I did get a twinge of regret from one who felt pressured into voting for Bush. He felt like Bush wasnt the answer, but the best option presented. Perhaps there were better options for Pres. They didnt put their hat in the ring however. I dont think Bush is the Caligula you guys make him out to be. He’s not the worst Pres ever.
no Rat – he might not be the worst
I have made several statements to the effect that Kerry was not the best choice of the Democrats, either. Too many Democrats act like Republicans.
However, when it came to Iraq, I felt if there were any chance at all of getting other nations to help there — taking some of the burden of our troops — someone other than Bush would have a better shot.
Instead, it appears Bush has secured a profit-pool for his friends at Halliburton — at the expense of American blood.
The war on Terror may protect our freedom, but Iraq has nothing to do with that war. That is the lie.
actually Rat – i’ve reconsidered. given what Bush has done to this country, there’s every reason to believe he might be the worst, after all.
He is our Pres. and my boss. I must say I’m happier now than when I got in under Clinton. I guess in your eyes he’ll just keep on fiddling while Washington burns. I’ll keep going over if he asks. I still like the man.
Major combat operations HAD ended – then the left wing rats gave hope to the enemy that, just as in Vietnam, they could win in the streets of the United States what they could not win on the battle field, thanks to all their fellow travelers, pinks and just plain idiots.
You’re saying, Walter, that the battle they fought last week was not major?
The ‘left wing rats’ were right about the illegal war in Vietnam. Or will you support any old war the president wants to wage?
People told LBJ & Nixon that Vietnam couldn’t be won. Under Johnson, those people were marginalized or replaced or discharged. The same thing is happening in this administration and the folks who said well be greeted as liberators and that the post-war environment was gonna be safe, are not only still employed, they been pronoted loyalty is more important than competence?
Wonder how many soldiers died for the sake of ‘saving face’?
Fallujah was indeed major, but it would never have taken place had the Islamics not believed we would chicken out at the doors of victory as we did in Vietnam. The first war was to defeat Saddam’s army, and we did that in excellent order. This war is to fumigate the rats.
It is a comfort to some to think themselves above the fray.
I don’t know what Vietnam you are talking about, but it bears no resemblance to the Vietnam on this planet. The Vietnam on Earth was sold to North Vietnam by the democrats.
What “victory” was to be had in Vietnam? Honor?
The military was claiming to have killed or wounded 120% of the enemy.
Then — like now — the military brass and warmonger politicians lie about war.
i see now – the liberals are responsible for the Iraq insurgency and the democrats are reponsible for the loss in Vietnam even though it was Nixon who pulled out.
your credibilty is now on the level of George Bush which you’ll proabably take as a compliment but which i & most of the world see as an insult.
well if these 3 people must face the music for protesting an unjustified war in which the president lied about the reasons for going to war, then shouldnt bush, himself, be accountable for the horrific war crimes he has committed in the deaths of over 100,00 Iraqi citizens and over a thousand of his own troops. i cant wait until Bush must face and recognized the horrific attrocities he has committed that the rest of the world already knows about
start holding your breath Wes. we’ll tell you when to exhale.
The victory in Vietnam would have been the continued independence of South Vietnam from communism they had won, and could have retained if the democrats had upheld our side of the bargain and continued military aid. China and the Soviet Union rebuilt North Vietnam and continued heavy rearmament until the outcome became certain. Shinola, what have I written here that is not verifiable fact?
41. I love the way you try to paint our President as another Pol Pot. You grasp at straws as you drown in a sea of truth. Wake up son.
37. The reason the “left wing rats” were right about the war was because of the foreign policy of the US and its intelectual state at the time.
The vietnam war was a “no win war” in which american soldiers were not permitted to act but only to contain the enemy, and not beat them. This is based on the idea that america is big and powerful and those who are big are morally obliged to help the weak regardless of moral judgement. Does this not sound like the democrats philosophy?
The question then becomes, who will win the intellectual war at home.
This was a war started by modern liberals conducted in a modern liberal fashion. The far left and the enemy in Vietnam were kept going by appeasement. The lesson for bush – the nicer you are the more you will be hated.
When a country is at war, it has to use all of its power to win as quickly as possible. It cannot fight half-way out of fear of being called warmongerers. Did anyone say this? No. Did Nixon? Of course not. In order to challenge the foreign policy of the left, he would have had to challenge the above moral question. Given that republicans also accept self-sacrifice as moral(religious and other(ie)bush’s mandatory public service etc) this is not going to happen. Can you imagine Nixon writing a moral declaration of independence for individualism. He was to busy going to china to shake hands with communists to wage war with other communists
Given this, of course the war couldn’t be won. Its like saying to someone “lets fight blindfolded” and then blaming him when he loses as you do in 40 when you say “he’s the one who pulled out”.
It was the state of the world at the time. The question is has bush learned from history? Or will he continue to justify the war on the grounds of freeing the iraqi’s.
And no this should not be taken to imply that one should support “any old war the prez wants”
Jay, you are wasting your breath…. liberals will only use force when one of the following is occurring…people (Christians) are around… a baby is in danger of not being dismembered…. an 8 year old cuban boy has a chance at a free life… you have any of those, and libs will swoop in with reckless abandon.
Hard to argue with Jay – or with MK.
I don’t understand this post at all. These US militaries in Canada have done nothing worse than W Bush. Their only problem is that none of them is the son of a former US president. Otherwise they would be surely allowed to come back to the US, and they could maybe even run in 2008 !
Nickele- speak not what you know nothing about. The proof to back up part of your statement was forged, and his discharge papers refute the other part. These guys signed a contract. During war I might add.