Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebell
That is only speculation.
There are also soldiers that signed up for the money and education benefits and then refused to go. I would guess that neither of us would trust their judgment.
On the flip-side, I agree that there are spectacular snafus that do indeed result in the deaths of troops. The introduction of the M16 rifle and the resultant deaths spring immediately to mind. (People should have been sent to jail over that one, IMO.)
But again, out and out mutany cannot be the answer.
A miltary can only function effectively if soldiers obey the orders of their superiors (blantently illegal orders aside). If it comes down to a "judgement call", then a soldier MUST rely on his superior's judgement, at least until he can go up the chain of command with any serious reservations.
To just say "no, I won't do it" leads a unit down the path to where soldiers don't do what they need to do in order to win the battle and ultimately, the war.
|
I respect what Martin and you are saying and I never said anything "partisan". But I will stick to my opinion that until Bush gives the true reason why we are there and how this war is truly defending our freedoms. I cannot condemn a soldier for not going or not obeying an order that is blatantly irresponsible. (I would have respected Bush far more had he and his administration picked a purpose for the war and stuck to it no matter how hot the fire got. Instead he's given so many different reasons and then denies the previous reasons.... and you say Kerry flip-flops? How can you instill dignity and honesty into troops when the administration isn't showing it?
Until our troops are as safely protected as possible, I can see why they would "mutiny".
Haliburton is ripping off the government (overcharging on fuel, selling us things then never giving the product bought out), yet obviously we aren't spending the money we need to on making sure our troops are safe.
Call it what you will, but this war is already a mess and will fast become the next Vietnam.