Military Service... (uh oh, this might get hot!)

[jdb67]

It is quite ironic that he should be caught while being convicted of fraud under his Alias... That would indicate to me that he is an undesirable and therefore should be treated with contempt despite his age and the time elapsed since his desertion

It is obvious that he has not used the time to better himself.

 

[McRocket]

According to the report - he simply walked away from Camp Pendleton. He hardly put anyone's life in jeopardy by doing so.
I would give him a dishounarable discharge and nothing else.
Now if he ran away from his unit while in combat - that is another matter. But he walked out of a Stateside camp over a generation ago? No one possibly could have been more in danger because of that.
Dishonourable discharge.

I know you have to keep discipline and order and stuff. I was in the military - for an incredibly short period of time. But if the guy doesn't want to be in the military; he is probably doing his fellow soldiers a favour by leaving when he did.

Interesting thread Nightfly.

 

[Mighty Budda]

From what I understand you have to volunteer to get into the Marines, if he was drafted I could understand Dishonorable Discharge, but to volunteer and then desert deserves a little bigger slap on the wrist... 2 cents from ex CDN Army volunteer

 

[McRocket]

My understanding was that many Marines were drafted during the Vietnam War.

 

[Bushido]

As I was last year in L.A., I met a "Marine" Family. All members of the family were soldiers at the US Marines. They lived quiete well, but there were also very often in Iraq, planning new attacks. I hope that they are doing fine!

 

[member2686]

And your point about the topic being discussed is.... :dunno:

As I was last year in L.A., I met a "Marine" Family. All members of the family were soldiers at the US Marines. They lived quiete well, but there were also very often in Iraq, planning new attacks. I hope that they are doing fine!

 

[calpoon]

I really have a problem with submitting to authority "just because". that's too much like nazism. pretty much every single henious act commited against humanity were by people that were "just following orders." I also really hate the idea that our soldiers have no right to disobey or not comply with actions they don't feel comfortable doing. by taking away all individual perspective it seems to me that we want to reduce them simply to expendable weapons. the men and women that serve this country deserve more than to be thrown away without any regard. That being said, if this guy simply walked away, and in doing so caused no expense or harm to his fellow soliders or the military, then to imprison him for it is a slap in the face of all the ideals of a free nation that these guys are supposed to be fighting for.

 

[Ax3C]

My understanding was that many Marines were drafted during the Vietnam War.

All branches of the United States Military enacted the draft through the Selective Serviced System. A lottery system - held on 01 Dec 1969 (the first of its kind since 1942) - was enacted and determined the order of call for induction during calendar year 1970, that is, for registrants born between January 1, 1944, and December 31, 1950. Reinstitution of the lottery was a change from the "draft the oldest man first" method, which had been the determining method for deciding order of call.

Wow ... even found some information I wasn't previously aware of:

United States Selective Service - The Vietnam Lotteries

United States Selective Service - Induction Statistics

United States Selective Service System

United States Selective Service Act

HOW THE DRAFT HAS CHANGED SINCE VIETNAM

If a draft were held today, it would be dramatically different from the one held during the Vietnam War. A series of reforms during the latter part of the Vietnam conflict changed the way the draft operated to make it more fair and equitable. If a draft were held today, there would be fewer reasons to excuse a man from service.

Before Congress made improvements to the draft in 1971, a man could qualify for a student deferment if he could show he was a full-time student making satisfactory progress toward a degree.

Under the current draft law, a college student can have his induction postponed only until the end of the current semester. A senior can be postponed until the end of the academic year.

If a draft were held today, local boards would better represent the communities they serve. The changes in the new draft law made in 1971 included the provision that membership on the boards was required to be as representative as possible of the racial and national origin of registrants in the area served by the board.

A draft held today would use a lottery to determine the order of call. Before the lottery was implemented in the latter part of the Vietnam conflict, Local Boards called men classified 1-A, 18 1/2 through 25 years old, oldest first. This resulted in uncertainty for the potential draftees during the entire time they were within the draft-eligible age group. A draft held today would use a lottery system under which a man would spend only one year in first priority for the draft - either the calendar year he turned 20 or the year his deferment ended. Each year after that, he would be placed in a succeedingly lower priority group and his liability for the draft would lessen accordingly. In this way, he would be spared the uncertainty of waiting until his 26th birthday to be certain he would not be drafted.

 

[Ax3C]

I really have a problem with submitting to authority "just because". that's too much like nazism. pretty much every single henious act commited against humanity were by people that were "just following orders." I also really hate the idea that our soldiers have no right to disobey or not comply with actions they don't feel comfortable doing. by taking away all individual perspective it seems to me that we want to reduce them simply to expendable weapons. the men and women that serve this country deserve more than to be thrown away without any regard. That being said, if this guy simply walked away, and in doing so caused no expense or harm to his fellow soliders or the military, then to imprison him for it is a slap in the face of all the ideals of a free nation that these guys are supposed to be fighting for.

Joining the United States Military, whether it be the United States Marine Corps, the United States Army, the United States Navy, the United States Air Force, or the United States Coast Guard, is a choice; it is a purely voluntary act and such, the enlistee is bound by law - the Uniform Code Of Military Justice.

When an individual joins any one of the United States Military Branches, he or she takes an Oath Of Enlistment:

I, ___________________________________, do solemly 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 overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

^ the above is for all branches of U.S. Military organizations with the exception of the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard. Their Oath Of Enlistment is as follows:

I, _________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of ___________________________________ 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 Governor of ________________________ and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.

NOTE: The last words, "So help me God," are optional, depending on the individual's personal religious preferences.

When one swears in under either one of those Enlistments Oaths, that individual is acknowledging and accepting the duties and requirements of whatever branch of United States Military Service he or she is enlisting in. It's the equivalent of a verbal signing of a contract for employment, of which, I might add, there is a mound of paperwork a foot or more high which is required to be filled out by enlistees.

If an enlistee is given an unlawful order, there are ways and manners of challenging said unlawful order ... it is called the "Chain Of Command".

A civilian - one who is not a member of the Armed Services - is required to go through an induction period - training, in other words - to become a member of whatever branch of the military he or she decides to enlist in. Otherwise, normal, everyday people would have no idea what to do in the heat of a pitched battle.

I could go on and on and on about this subject. I really don't have the time nor the inclination to sit here and discuss the errors in your quote, calpoon.

 

[Daemoncraft]

yeah this was hot =O

 

[calpoon]

while I appreciate your attention to details, x3, I disagree with your asessment that my post was in error. please see specifically the sentance featuring the phrase, "taking away all individual perspective." since my main point is that this shouldn't be done, I really don't care about any stupid peice of paper that justifies doing it. anyway, I think there are many circumstances that make this oath invalid. for instance the very first part of it says that you swear to uphold the constitution. later it says that you swear to obey orders... well when your orders are to break constitutional law, then it seems to me that it's contradicting. Also, this oath doesn't make you exempt from crimes against humanity/ breaking international law. that's why people can be tried as war criminals. Another important detail is that lastly you swear to God. This supercedes all other oaths, as far as I am concerned. God gave people thoughts and feelings, and it's your responsibly to humanity to act upon them justly. No country or president or anyone else on the planet has authority over that.

PS. also the point of the constitution is to preserve the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It seems to me that this man felt continuing military service went against this for him. Obviosuly he did not go about this in the best way, but acting out of irrationality shouldn't be grounds for punisment, or else every person would be in jail for making a mistake. And I'll say once again, imprisoning someone for commiting an act that does no harm to anyone is clearly in violation of this aim.

 

[member2686]

calpoon, you raise some interesting points and present them quite well here!!! Wow. I can't wait to read asianxxx's response!!! I lvoe good dialogue like this!!! :thumbsup:

 

[Death_blooms08]

while I appreciate your attention to details, x3, I disagree with your asessment that my post was in error. please see specifically the sentance featuring the phrase, "taking away all individual perspective." since my main point is that this shouldn't be done, I really don't care about any stupid peice of paper that justifies doing it. anyway, I think there are many circumstances that make this oath invalid. for instance the very first part of it says that you swear to uphold the constitution. later it says that you swear to obey orders... well when your orders are to break constitutional law, then it seems to me that it's contradicting. Also, this oath doesn't make you exempt from crimes against humanity/ breaking international law. that's why people can be tried as war criminals. Another important detail is that lastly you swear to God. This supercedes all other oaths, as far as I am concerned. God gave people thoughts and feelings, and it's your responsibly to humanity to act upon them justly. No country or president or anyone else on the planet has authority over that.

PS. also the point of the constitution is to preserve the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It seems to me that this man felt continuing military service went against this for him. Obviosuly he did not go about this in the best way, but acting out of irrationality shouldn't be grounds for punisment, or else every person would be in jail for making a mistake. And I'll say once again, imprisoning someone for commiting an act that does no harm to anyone is clearly in violation of this aim.

See I don't think he should be given life in prison or anything extremly harsh, yet if they don't do something, then they are letting someone commit a crime and get away with it, so whats to keep some new Joe from seeing this case, seeing him get off and then figuring "Hey he got off, so why can't I?" and several hundred new servicemen leave cause they just feel like it.

If you read what Asian wrote after the oath

NOTE: The last words, "So help me God," are optional, depending on the individual's personal religious preferences.

And as for an order that would get you in trouble, that would be an unlawful order, if you were ordered to go gun down a village for the hell of it even if it was GW that ordered it, that would be unlawful to follow said order. Thats why their is a chain of command if my Sgt. is trying to get me to do something I shouldn't, I can go to my Squad leader, then my Platoon sgt. then my Platoon leader, then if I have to my Company 1SG/XO/CO and if they all fail, I could try my BN CSM/XO/CO, if they fail I could try my BDE CSM/XO/CO and if they continued to fail then their is the Inspector General I can always report to. I long as I respect my chain of command as well you can get in trouble for going higher in case of something like an unlawful order or something like that.

 

[member2686]

Devil's advocate here, death blooms: How do you follow that chain of command/heirarchy of authority when you're in the middle of hostile terrain, on foreign soil, guns blazing and mortars falling all around you? You don't or can't, at least not in a timely manner. This reminds me of...I can't remember the name of the movie, but it had Sean Pean and Michael J. Fox in it, and there were atrocities committed, and he tried to protest and was lucky to get out alive.

The guy in question in this thread/news story simply bailed out after enlisting. Remember the times...back then, if you didn't join up you were either too young or old, a draft dodger, a "pussy" (I HATE using that word as a pejorative term, because I love women and it's a misogynistic term used as such...just breaking it down into colloquialisms here), or you were a parent or consciencious objector (which didn't mean shit). This guy joined up and then bailed out before deployment. It seems pretty simple. Yeah, he fucked up later in life, but what does that have to do with his AWOL status?

I don't blame him one single bit. It was a bogus war, the USA got its ass kicked in many ways, and it was a total waste of humanity and resources/national resources ($$$).

My :2 cents:

 

[Ax3C]

This reminds me of...I can't remember the name of the movie, but it had Sean Pean and Michael J. Fox in it, and there were atrocities committed, and he tried to protest and was lucky to get out alive.

You're thinking of 'Casualties Of War'; made in 1989. It was "loosely" based on article written by Daniel Lang of The New Yorker which, in turn, was also "loosely" based on a real incident from the Vietnam War.

As for unlawful orders V. the chain of command, same illustration could be drawn from A Few Good Men; another movie / play "loosely" based on real life events.

Naturally, I can't find the one link I came across the other day, but using this Google SEARCH link, you'll find quite a few interesting articles regarding the subject at hand:

www.Google.com - WEB SEARCH - Unlawful Orders, UCMJ

:hatsoff:

 

[Ax3C]

calpoon, you raise some interesting points and present them quite well here!!! Wow. I can't wait to read asianxxx's response!!! I lvoe good dialogue like this!!! :thumbsup:

Actually, I was going to counter part of what I had written and raise a couple of the same points that calpoon did, but the 'edit' time ran out on me before I could erase the bottom portion of my existing post. I had forgotten about this thread until I came back across it this morning.

 

[SeraphiM]

This topic can be debated in many ways and in response to some of the above posts I'll say this.
Since Vietnam the draft has not been reinstated. We have went to an all volunteer army. That's why our numbers are so low.
Military life is not for everyone. I hate it when I hear someone "bash" the military, when they themselves have not served a day in it. Most soldiers do not fight for god or country. They fight for the "brother" that stands besides them.
It is not up to the soldier to decide what is bogus and what is worth fighting for. You gave up that right when you enlist or submit yourself to the draft. Soldiers do not and will not blindly follow orders. It's a myth that they do so. They swear to uphold the constitution and yes follow orders as well, but should the order violate the Constitution then it need not and will not be followed.
As for atrocities committed in times of war I'll say this. History is written by the winner. Had Hitler and Hirohito won WWII would our generals and chiefs of staff been tried and convicted as war criminals? Yes, you better believe it. The object of war is to win and most wars are won by attrition.
In the "heat of battle" you revert to your training. It's like your on auto pilot, you react instinctively. Therefore orders on the battle field are rarely given. instead you rely on "knowing your job". Even after almost 10 years I can still remember how to clear a fortified position, how to move within tactical formations, hand and arm signals, ordinance deployment, etc. Train, train and train again.
The life expectancy of an infantryman on the battle field is less than 2 minutes. 2 minutes doesn't seem like a long time does it, trust me it's an eternity when your being shot at.
What this guy did was dishonorable and cowardly. He walked away from his duty. Today one's duty and honor are things that are not seen very much any more. He should be prosecuted and punished within the law. He took a cowards way out. He should have faced his eagerness to take flight back then. He would have gotten his dishonorable discharge, done his time and been done with it.

Just an 'ole war dogs :2 cents:

 

[McRocket]

What this guy did was dishonorable and cowardly. He walked away from his duty. Today one's duty and honor are things that are not seen very much any more. He should be prosecuted and punished within the law. He took a cowards way out. He should have faced his eagerness to take flight back then. He would have gotten his dishonorable discharge, done his time and been done with it.

Most soldiers enlist at an extremely young age; well before our personalities are fully formed. There are inevitably going to be some that decide after enlistment that it is not what they want to do. They may also feel terrified of the retribution they must face if they do quit. So it is conceivable for an 18 year old to run away. It is not a smart thing to do no matter what.
But as far as I am concerned, if they quit because they do not believe in the cause they signed up for - like Vietnam - I think they are doing both his/her fellow soldiers and their country a favour by stating it before they are thrown into battle and depended on.
Sometimes it takes more courage to say 'no' to an immensely popular thing and admit you made a mistake and take the consequences then to just go along with it and hope your guidance becomes clearer.
To lay one's life down for someone else is a noble thing to do. But to force someone to go to war when they do not wish to is to me - assinine. Especially when the war in question - like Vietnam - has nothing directly to do with the safety of the nation.

 

[Death_blooms08]

Devil's advocate here, death blooms: How do you follow that chain of command/heirarchy of authority when you're in the middle of hostile terrain, on foreign soil, guns blazing and mortars falling all around you? You don't or can't, at least not in a timely manner. This reminds me of...I can't remember the name of the movie, but it had Sean Pean and Michael J. Fox in it, and there were atrocities committed, and he tried to protest and was lucky to get out alive.

Sorry to respond so late. Actually even in the heat of battle, unless you are a complete brain washed idiot, you still have time to think about unlawful orders such as killing someone you know is innocent or doing something else wrong or stupid. If you pay attention to training and your fellow soldiers do, then you can survive with any officer........example:

The Infantry battalion I was attached to set up a base camp at the bottom of a village for the night, while out on a 3 day patrol. The platoon that was out started getting rocketed while they were sleeping, in the choas they started firing their rounds off wasting them, and by the time they found out where the attackers where, all they had left was rifle rounds and some AT-4's. The Battalion CO in the TOC told them to put together a request for air support to bomb the area that they were getting attacked from, but their were several houses in that area and they met some of the villagers earlier...so the Platoon Sgt ignored the BN CO's orders and they retrograded back until ground support showed up to take the village. The Colonel tried to hem up the SFC and threatened every UCMJ action possible for not following orders, but I just found out from a friend that the Colonel is now under UCMJ action himself for giving that order......so imagine if that Platoon Sgt has listened to him.

Another example, their was time my squad was getting some pop shots taken at us, well our 2LT wanted the guys wasted right away, but S.O.P. for pop shots/sniper shots is don't fire unless you can see the shooter if it is a crowded area/city which it was. So when we didn't start shooting back he got pissed and then when he ordered us to drive through a know mine field to get to the suspected area of attack, and when we refused he got pissed again and was threatening all of us until the squad leader threatened to leave him there if he didn't shut up and let us handle the threat.

 

[McRocket]

Actually, I signed up for the military when I was 18. I had just finished some VERY long physicals when a soldier came to me and asked me if I had a criminal record. I said yes, and he told me that they cannot take me and that I had to go.
I had no idea that the military (Canadian military) cannot take those with criminal records. It was for a minor, non-violent offence.
But almost right after he told me I felt relieved. I realized quite early on that this was NOT for me. But I had no way out. Until then.

Now I highly doubt I would have desserted or anything. But I knew the military was not for me. But 12 hours earlier, I thought it might just be. I needed a way out. And I thought the military could be that way.

I just describe this to show that not everybody joins the military for the right reasons. And some armed forces recruiters can REALLY push/semi-trick you into it.
So maybe before we judge people who dessert under non-combat conditions, maybe we should know ALL the details before we condemn them.