Dead Man Walking

IMORTL

NAXJA Member #1156
Location
Corona
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13190993/
Officer says he won’t fight in ‘unlawful’ Iraq war

TACOMA, Wash. - A U.S. Army officer said Wednesday that fighting in the war in Iraq would make him “party to war crimes” and he would not go.

First Lt. Ehren Watada’s supporters — including clergy and a military family group — said he is the first commissioned officer to publicly refuse to serve in Iraq and risked being court-martialed.

The Pentagon said Watada was among a number of officers and enlisted personnel who have applied for conscientious objector status.


“The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people is not only a terrible moral injustice but a contradiction of the Army’s own law of land warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes,” said Watada in a taped statement played at a Tacoma news conference.

His superiors at the nearby Fort Lewis military base would not let Watada leave the base to attend the press conference. Another news conference took place in Watada’s native Hawaii.

Watada, 28, had been scheduled to be deployed to Iraq for his first tour later this month. He joined the Army in 2003, and has served in Korea.

‘Unlawful orders’
Watada said his moral and legal obligations were to the U.S. Constitution, “not those who would issue unlawful orders.”

Nearly 2,500 U.S. soldiers and an estimated 40,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

In recent weeks, Marines have been accused of killing 24 Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha, raising concerns about abuse of force.

Paul Boyce, Army spokesman at the Pentagon, said Watada’s case was being reviewed, adding it “is not the first case, nor is his case particularly unique.”

Joe Colgan, whose son Benjamin was killed in Iraq, said sending sons and daughters to Iraq was “unpatriotic.”

“I ask that we all think about our moral conscience and what we have done in God’s name,” said Colgan.

Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
 
Now Most of you know where I stand on War issuse (if you have read posts). but it think this goes farther than a Pro/Anti war statement.

This coward will altimately receive a Court Marshal and face Life in Prision with Hard labor or be placed in front of a firing squad for his actions if they charge him "in time of war". He join the Military AFTER we invaded Iraq. And before people start saying fredom of speech, let me tell you, they make it perfectly clear that when you join, you give up a lot of freedoms. Freedom of speach is one of them. He has broken several articles in the UCMJ ( which you are made fully aware several times before you take the oath of what that intails). He shoudl not be made an example of. He should get EXACTLY what he has coming to him....

The Military Oath
The following oath is taken by all personnel inducted into the armed forces of the United States, as found in the US Code, Section 502.

I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Congressional Code of Military Criminal Law applicable to all military members worldwide. Use the links below for a quick tour of the UCMJ.

888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

889. ART. 89 DISRESPECT TOWARD SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER

Any person subject to this chapter who behaves with disrespect toward his superior commissioned officer shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

890. ART. 90. ASSAULTING OR WILLFULLY DISOBEYING SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER.

Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) strikes his superior commissioned officer or draws or lifts up any weapon or offers any violence against him while he is in the execution of his officer; or

(2) willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer; shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, and if the offense is committed at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.


892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION

Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or

(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


894. ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.


899. ART. 99. MISBEHAVIOR BEFORE THE ENEMY

Any person subject to this chapter who before or in the presence of the enemy--

(1) runs away;

(2) shamefully abandons, surrenders, or delivers up any command, unit, place, or military property which it is his duty to defend;

(3) through disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct endangers the safety of any such command, unit, place, or military property;

(4) casts away his arms or ammunition;

(5) is guilty of cowardly conduct;

(6) quits his place of duty to plunder or pillage;

(7) causes false alarms in any command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces;

(8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy; or

(9) does not afford all practicable relief and assistance to any troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or their allies when engaged in battle; shall be punished by death or such punishment as a court-martial may direct.

900. ART. 100. SUBORDINATE COMPELLING SURRENDER

Any person subject to this chapter who compels or attempts to compel the commander of any place, vessel, aircraft, or military property, or of any body of members of the armed forces, to give it up to an enemy or to abandon it, or who strikes the colors or flag to any enemy without proper authority, shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.


917. ART. 117. PROVOKING SPEECHES OR GESTURES

Any person subject to this chapter who uses provoking or reproachful words or gestures towards any other person subject to this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


933. ART. 133. CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN

Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

934. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, ll conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
 
Last edited:
If he's so 'concerned' about it he should be over there 'supervising' and making sure 'his' troops toe the line.
 
For those of you who do not know where to find links to the UCMJ, just Google "Title 10, Unites States Code". That's it, in its entirety.

I do agree, however. Since he joined AFTER we'd gone to Iraq (again!) he should have expected that he would be sent. And, this isn't like the Michael New case, where he was supposed to be chopped to UN command, as a UN element to be deployed (to Mogadishu, I think;) rather than being deployed as a USA element in service of the United States. SPC New also took the time to look into the written law as well - and found out that we were already exceeding our manning limit under UN agreements, and found out that the UN commander would NOT be an American officer - and therefore "not appointed above him."

I don't recall how that case came out, but it's been tied up in appeals a couple times as well.

Sorry, but when you sign that paperwork, you go where your commander tells you to - as long as it does not violate your Oath or military law/UCMJ/regulations. Being chopped to an outside commander IS an issue, being sent under a US commander is NOT. Being chopped to NATO would be a grey area, but I'd consider being reassed to the UN a problem. NATO has American interests at heart - however tangentially - but the UN does not.

Will anything happen to him? A dishonourable, maybe - which, I think, won't be enough. It would be worse if he was enlisted. That's backwards to me (officers are supposed to set the example, not follow it,) but I don't run things. If I did, I'm inclined to think they'd make more sense all around...

5-90
 
He is scum and should be shot, plain and simple. Barring that, kick his ass to the curb with absolutely no benefits. Period. A disgrace to every serviceman and woman before him.
 
Im my Opionion Either Life with Hard labor ( and i have hearrd the stories and it aint pretty) or an old fashion Firing squad... But it would be cool to assign him to Afganistan... Bet he would not last too long in his squad after this stunt... friendly fire happens... He surely is a disgrace to his family... And i disagree... I think he will get it worse than an enlisted... He is suppposed to the a leader... A leader telling troops not to obey orders... I think death is waranted... Pay per view would be nice...

Edit: BTW - I Don't see him as a disgrace to servicemen/women, cuz I dont consider him a service man anymore... He is a coward... Imaging if the troops on D-day decided they didn't want to go... Spreken de German?


Ken

USN 1987 - 1991
U.S.S. Enterprise CVN-65
 
Being an active duty Navy man E-6, I would not want to serve under that "Officer" nor would I want him to influence my sailors. I say good riddens and hopefully he sees the worse that the UCMJ can offer.
 
Put him in a holding cell with "BUBBA" while he is waiting to go for trial. He may find going over to IRAQ to his liking then.....


USN 1964-67 VV

USS OPPORTUNE ARS-41
 
IMORTL said:
Edit: BTW - I Don't see him as a disgrace to servicemen/women, cuz I dont consider him a service man anymore... He is a coward... Imaging if the troops on D-day decided they didn't want to go... Spreken de German?


Ken

USN 1987 - 1991
U.S.S. Enterprise CVN-65

Ken, he currently wears the uniform, he is a disgrace to the uniform that I wore. But I agree on your other points.

It likely would have been Russian, not German.. the Germans were giving the death rattle there towards the end.
 
I think he's the exact opposite of a coward actually. It takes some big balls to do what he's doing. No question its an unethical and illegal war and no question he's defying his orders. No question that if everyone did that the entire military complex necessary or not, would crumble, but I commend him for taking a stand for what he believes in. Since when is being an American equated with having to do what is expected of you? It seems to me the entire country is founded on not being pushed around due to the beliefs you hold dear.

Where's a mormon air marshal when you need him...
 
Glenn said:
Ken, he currently wears the uniform, he is a disgrace to the uniform that I wore.

I agree... I retract My Statement... HE is a disgrace to the uniform...
 
Beej said:
I think he's the exact opposite of a coward actually. It takes some big balls to do what he's doing. No question its an unethical and illegal war and no question he's defying his orders. No question that if everyone did that the entire military complex necessary or not, would crumble, but I commend him for taking a stand for what he believes in. Since when is being an American equated with having to do what is expected of you? It seems to me the entire country is founded on not being pushed around due to the beliefs you hold dear.

Where's a mormon air marshal when you need him...

Your sarcasm is good. Otherwise there would sure be a lot of questions about your "no question..." jokes. Good one, I bet ya got a few sucked in there Beej. :)
 
Beej said:
I think he's the exact opposite of a coward actually. It takes some big balls to do what he's doing. No question its an unethical and illegal war and no question he's defying his orders. No question that if everyone did that the entire military complex necessary or not, would crumble, but I commend him for taking a stand for what he believes in. Since when is being an American equated with having to do what is expected of you? It seems to me the entire country is founded on not being pushed around due to the beliefs you hold dear.

Where's a mormon air marshal when you need him...

In My Opionion you are completely wrong. If that is what he believes in, he should not have joined the military and took that oath... The Military is founded on tradition and Disipline. You DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to do what he did. If he wanted to serve his term and then speak out against the war, More power to him... But in the military, you dont disobey orders, and you keep your mouth shut. You are not a civillian and you dont ahve the rights as one... you are a member of the miliary... read the UCMJ selections I posted above... they do not take those lightly

And in your opionion it is an unethical and illegal war. and as a civilian you and the right to express that OPINION... ( BTW - your elected officals voted to authorize the war so how is it an unethical and illegal war)....
 
Don't get too worked up. He is a Canadian eh! :) We love Canada. Tim Hortons coffee, some troopers in Afghanistan, and help keeping Americas attic clean for when we want it. :D They can start working on their terrorism issues now that they are starting to see that it is for real these days....

IMORTL said:
In My Opionion you are completely wrong. If that is what he believes in, he should not have joined the military and took that oath... The Military is founded on tradition and Disipline. You DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to do what he did. If he wanted to serve his term and then speak out against the war, More power to him... But in the military, you dont disobey orders, and you keep your mouth shut. You are not a civillian and you dont ahve the rights as one... you are a member of the miliary... read the UCMJ selections I posted above... they do not take those lightly

And in your opionion it is an unethical and illegal war. and as a civilian you and the right to express that OPINION... ( BTW - your elected officals voted to authorize the war so how is it an unethical and illegal war)....
 
IMORTL said:
If that is what he believes in, he should not have joined the military and took that oath... The Military is founded on tradition and Disipline. You DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to do what he did. If he wanted to serve his term and then speak out against the war, More power to him... But in the military, you dont disobey orders, and you keep your mouth shut. You are not a civillian and you dont ahve the rights as one... you are a member of the miliary...

X2

Like everyone else said...
He is a COWARD!!!!!!
He KNEW what he was signing up for.
Find a tree and get a rope.


U.S. ARMY MILITARY POLICE 80-83
......
TowerRat.jpg

......
th_mp1.jpg
 
Back
Top