Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
Will, I am one. That gives me a pretty good idea. What are your credentials again?
|
You're a veteran, yes. So in line with my beliefs, you should not be mistreated by the government, and they should not go back on their word to you. You sacrificed for the government, so if the government turns it's back on you you'll have 100% of my support. It's about fairness. Walter Reed was a travesty and was clearly unjust, I found that it was a cause worth championing. Likewise, I champion that the military should not make it so difficult to get all of the perks they promise, such as scholarships. This ties directly into this thread, though, because many military recruiters are knowingly promising things that the military will not or cannot provide.
This whole thing is about fairness, at it's core. At least for me.
So yes, I can dump on people for fighting a political war that has nothing to do with honor or justice, but at the same time I can champion fair treatment of said people.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
Soon to be ex-1LT Watada disobeyed a direct lawful order and tried to dictate policy, neither of which are permitted whilst in the military. He claimed that he would be party to war crimes if deployed, but countries do not commit war crimes, individuals do. He said he is willing to serve jail time for his beliefs, indulge him.
|
His orders were in direct violation of Article 51 of the UN Charter. As he was actively disobeying what he understood to be illegal orders, what should have happened was an investigation to determine whether said orders were illegal or not. They skipped that. They assumed the orders were legal and even at the trial the judge ordered that the case not include arguments for his actions.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
No, will. We follow orders, period. Those orders come from the CiC, who is elected by the people of the United States. I have said this again and again, you do not want the military making its own descisions what to do. Really, you don't. We don't go by opinion polls, we don't listen to who yells the loudest. If you don't like what the military is doing, look in the mirror and blame yourself: you didn't work hard enough in 2004.
|
You don't want the president to make his own decisions on what to do either, apparently, but that's moot. You follow the president and the president doesn't follow the people, therefore you're not serving the people. Being elected by the people is not the same as serving the people.
BTW, he lost in 2004.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
I suggest you spend your time petitioning the Supreme Court then. It is my duty to refuse a clearly illegal order, not try to interpret the UN charter. I am not qualified to do that, and if memory of your previous attempts to do so serves, neither are you.
|
The Supreme Court is stacked. I stand a better chance of opening up the mind of a military officer than an old idiot hand picked by a member of the Bush family.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
Obama couldn't bust a grape in a food fight, and wiping the floor with a warmed over corpse isn't that impressive. But I digress. Watada did not have the UCMJ on his side, that's why he is history.
|
He's not history, though. In fact, the military judge is in deep shit for ignoring double jeopardy and breaking several other laws. Google U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle for more details.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
The letter of the law is policy. We don't just strap on our sandals, smoke some pot, and make this up as we go. The policy is codified in the UCMJ, it's just that simple. It is DoD policy to prosecute recruiter who are found to have lied to recruits, why can't you understand that?
That's not policy, will. Thats culture. If thats what you meant I wish you had said so up front, it would have saved a lot of time.
|
As Tully said, policy is only valid if enforced. It's useless if you can just break the UCMJ and get away with it. Kinda like the UN Charter.