But HOW can they contend that it's illegal if it's not?
This is why we have courts, is it not? There is a lot of compelling evidence to support that the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq is illegal. First, it was sold on a false bill of goods... that's just the tip of the iceberg.
This is why we have courts, is it not? There is a lot of compelling evidence to support that the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq is illegal. First, it was sold on a false bill of goods... that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Then shouldnt they go to court? Or are they going to court?
You dont have to accept the reasoning, but it is what it is, and you know that going in. Obviously we all want the government to be responsible with our troops, especially since they volunteered to do what many of us wouldnt. But at some point in this, there is some personal responsibility on the troops for fulfilling their committments. You know there is a possibility of going to war when signing up, and in this day you know its almost a certainty.
it's not about soldiers not wanting to go to war ... it's about soldiers not wanting to go to THIS war ...
again - many aspects of contracts are negotiated in good faith ... this war in iraq was not an act of good faith towards the soldiers nor the public ... if anyone has a right to break that contract - i say the soldiers do ...
i think they do......whether that is *right* or not, i am not even attempting to discuss. i am focusing on the issue of their contracts, and the initial premise of the thread, the verbal discussion before signing, etc. and i would fully agree, i cannot imagine any other contract that would state such....but i do believe the military contract does in fact state such...so yea....i DO believe, one knows of this beforehand, at the very least should know what they are signing....and yes, it is NOT something i would ever volunteer to do. so legally, they are made aware of this beforehand, sign a contract saying they agree to such...so that's that. now you want to argue if it's RIGHT for such a clause to BE in that contract, another conversation entirely....
i don't really care what is written in the contract ... but if my choices are to shoot innocent people or goto jail - something is wrong ...
But who has declared it illegal? I respect their opinion, and really dont disagree, but individual soldiers dont get to decide what military operations are and arent illegal.
Who gets to decide?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
But who has declared it illegal? I respect their opinion, and really dont disagree, but individual soldiers dont get to decide what military operations are and arent illegal.
Well, section 9.1 of the contract seems to say different:
(1) Required to obey all lawful orders and perform all assigned duties.
it's not about soldiers not wanting to go to war ... it's about soldiers not wanting to go to THIS war ...
again - many aspects of contracts are negotiated in good faith ... this war in iraq was not an act of good faith towards the soldiers nor the public ... if anyone has a right to break that contract - i say the soldiers do ...
Then they need to take this to court. Again, speaking in generalities, because I agree that the Iraq war is bullshit and needs to end. But speaking in general, it would be impossible for our military to ever be able to go to war not knowing how many troops would committ to the war. And if we left it up to the troops on an individual basis, then there is no way you could determine just how many troops you have for use.
Well, section 9.1 of the contract seems to say different:
(1) Required to obey all lawful orders and perform all assigned duties.
"Lawful" is the key word there.
I understand that. But who has declared Iraq illegal? Just because they "think" it is illegal doesnt make it so (though I agree with them). They need to go to court and prove that.
i don't really care what is written in the contract ... but if my choices are to shoot innocent people or goto jail - something is wrong ...
your choice is to not volunarily sign up in the first place.
and i am not going to assume what soldiers are *made* to do......but first and foremost, for this discussion anyway...to me it's what you are given, your CHOICE to vountarily sign up or not......and agreed to said terms.....that's the legality of the contract, anything else imo is another discussion.
Then they need to take this to court. Again, speaking in generalities, because I agree that the Iraq war is bullshit and needs to end. But speaking in general, it would be impossible for our military to ever be able to go to war not knowing how many troops would committ to the war. And if we left it up to the troops on an individual basis, then there is no way you could determine just how many troops you have for use.
Then they need to take this to court. Again, speaking in generalities, because I agree that the Iraq war is bullshit and needs to end. But speaking in general, it would be impossible for our military to ever be able to go to war not knowing how many troops would committ to the war. And if we left it up to the troops on an individual basis, then there is no way you could determine just how many troops you have for use.
It isn't left up to them on an indiviual basis. It comes down the chain of command - the President at the top of the heap - and it will always be that way.
Besides, I think you can see that the guys who really want to fight, do fight, regardless. And those that go AWOL, go AWOL. It is the rare one, like Lt. Watada who takes the fight to where it belongs when the chain of command has failed.
It isn't left up to them on an indiviual basis. It comes down the chain of command - the President at the top of the heap - and it will always be that way.
Besides, I think you can see that the guys who really want to fight, do fight, regardless. And those that go AWOL, go AWOL. It is the rare one, like Lt. Watada who takes the fight to where it belongs when the chain of command has failed.
But if you are leaving it up to individual soldiers to decide if the war is legal or not, then it really is left up to them on an individual basis.
How do you know this? We have never fought a war where troops were more or less left with an option to go fight or not.
how many people signed up for the army right after 9-11?? ... i'm guessing the numbers were above what they were prior to that day and i would say they haven't dropped below that day since ... despite the number who want out ...
I understand that. But who has declared Iraq illegal? Just because they "think" it is illegal doesnt make it so (though I agree with them). They need to go to court and prove that.
I think one Federal judge ruling could turn this whole thing topsy-turvy.
how many people signed up for the army right after 9-11?? ... i'm guessing the numbers were above what they were prior to that day and i would say they haven't dropped below that day since ... despite the number who want out ...
But it is still just a guess. Im not saying you wouldnt be right. But what happens when a true war of necessity comes along and we have several thousand soldiers decide it is illegal and not fight?
ANd thats fine, I certainly respect him acting on his beliefs. But, that still doesnt prove the war is illegal, which is basically the cruxt to all of this.
And maybe I shouldnt have used the phrase "have to" look at it as being legal, but instead the word "should".
But it is still just a guess. Im not saying you wouldnt be right. But what happens when a true war of necessity comes along and we have several thousand soldiers decide it is illegal and not fight?
what does your knowledge of americans tell you? ... in a time of a righteous war - will they choose to fight or run?
what does your knowledge of americans tell you? ... in a time of a righteous war - will they choose to fight or run?
Most likely fight, but you are basing that off of generations past. Even today, most of the war supporters have not sacrificed a bit for this war. Honestly, there is no point getting into this, because neither of us can prove a hypothetical for one, and for 2, I actually dont disagree with you, I just dont think you can really take that chance when planning a war.
ANd thats fine, I certainly respect him acting on his beliefs. But, that still doesnt prove the war is illegal, which is basically the cruxt to all of this.
And maybe I shouldnt have used the phrase "have to" look at it as being legal, but instead the word "should".
How do you think we or anyone can prove this war is illegal in the courts, realistically?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
How do you think we or anyone can prove this war is illegal in the courts, realistically?
There in lies the problem, I dont discount that it might be next to impossible. But still, you are more or lessing leaving it up to the invidual troops to decide if you think they should get out of their committment because they think it is illegal. And generally speaking, I dont see how a military can effectively operate that way.
Most likely fight, but you are basing that off of generations past. Even today, most of the war supporters have not sacrificed a bit for this war. Honestly, there is no point getting into this, because neither of us can prove a hypothetical for one, and for 2, I actually dont disagree with you, I just dont think you can really take that chance when planning a war.
the only thing you need to consider is how many will quit during the time of a just war if given that option (not imprisonment as punishment) ...
we can speculate that enrollment will go up but even if it didn't - the way to judge your numbers is simply by determining how many will quit ...
the only thing you need to consider is how many will quit during the time of a just war if given that option (not imprisonment as punishment) ...
we can speculate that enrollment will go up but even if it didn't - the way to judge your numbers is simply by determining how many will quit ...
But you cant determine that until that policy is put in place. Meaning, you are going to be planning at least one war before you know the answer to your question.
There in lies the problem, I dont discount that it might be next to impossible. But still, you are more or lessing leaving it up to the invidual troops to decide if you think they should get out of their committment because they think it is illegal. And generally speaking, I dont see how a military can effectively operate that way.
But they are doing all they can realistically do. What do you do when there's no way out and you strongly object to what you're being asked to do?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
How do you think we or anyone can prove this war is illegal in the courts, realistically?
Maybe not illegal, but unconstitutional? The power to "declare war" rests with congress alone and too my knowledge, they have never issued a formal declaration of war.
How is military action permitted without this declaration?
Maybe not illegal, but unconstitutional? The power to "declare war" rests with congress alone and too my knowledge, they have never issued a formal declaration of war.
How is military action permitted without this declaration?
I've wondered that as well. It doesn't get brought up enough.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
But they are doing all they can realistically do. What do you do when there's no way out and you strongly object to what you're being asked to do?
I guess you do what they are doing. That is a personal decision for them and if they think the penalty is worth their convictions then more power to them, I certainly cant disrespect that.
Comments
This is why we have courts, is it not? There is a lot of compelling evidence to support that the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq is illegal. First, it was sold on a false bill of goods... that's just the tip of the iceberg.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Then shouldnt they go to court? Or are they going to court?
it's not about soldiers not wanting to go to war ... it's about soldiers not wanting to go to THIS war ...
again - many aspects of contracts are negotiated in good faith ... this war in iraq was not an act of good faith towards the soldiers nor the public ... if anyone has a right to break that contract - i say the soldiers do ...
i don't really care what is written in the contract ... but if my choices are to shoot innocent people or goto jail - something is wrong ...
Who gets to decide?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Well, section 9.1 of the contract seems to say different:
(1) Required to obey all lawful orders and perform all assigned duties.
"Lawful" is the key word there.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Then they need to take this to court. Again, speaking in generalities, because I agree that the Iraq war is bullshit and needs to end. But speaking in general, it would be impossible for our military to ever be able to go to war not knowing how many troops would committ to the war. And if we left it up to the troops on an individual basis, then there is no way you could determine just how many troops you have for use.
I understand that. But who has declared Iraq illegal? Just because they "think" it is illegal doesnt make it so (though I agree with them). They need to go to court and prove that.
Courts. If the war is illegal they should sue so they can legally avoid going.
your choice is to not volunarily sign up in the first place.
and i am not going to assume what soldiers are *made* to do......but first and foremost, for this discussion anyway...to me it's what you are given, your CHOICE to vountarily sign up or not......and agreed to said terms.....that's the legality of the contract, anything else imo is another discussion.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
if the war is just - you won't have a problem ...
It isn't left up to them on an indiviual basis. It comes down the chain of command - the President at the top of the heap - and it will always be that way.
Besides, I think you can see that the guys who really want to fight, do fight, regardless. And those that go AWOL, go AWOL. It is the rare one, like Lt. Watada who takes the fight to where it belongs when the chain of command has failed.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
How do you know this? We have never fought a war where troops were more or less left with an option to go fight or not.
But if you are leaving it up to individual soldiers to decide if the war is legal or not, then it really is left up to them on an individual basis.
how many people signed up for the army right after 9-11?? ... i'm guessing the numbers were above what they were prior to that day and i would say they haven't dropped below that day since ... despite the number who want out ...
I think one Federal judge ruling could turn this whole thing topsy-turvy.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I dont disagree, but until that ruling comes, then the soldiers, from a professional standpoint at least, have to look at the war as being legal.
But it is still just a guess. Im not saying you wouldnt be right. But what happens when a true war of necessity comes along and we have several thousand soldiers decide it is illegal and not fight?
Of course.
Then again, there is the case of Lt. Watada, and others.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=060623015345.itst2a0w&show_article=1
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
ANd thats fine, I certainly respect him acting on his beliefs. But, that still doesnt prove the war is illegal, which is basically the cruxt to all of this.
And maybe I shouldnt have used the phrase "have to" look at it as being legal, but instead the word "should".
what does your knowledge of americans tell you? ... in a time of a righteous war - will they choose to fight or run?
Most likely fight, but you are basing that off of generations past. Even today, most of the war supporters have not sacrificed a bit for this war. Honestly, there is no point getting into this, because neither of us can prove a hypothetical for one, and for 2, I actually dont disagree with you, I just dont think you can really take that chance when planning a war.
How do you think we or anyone can prove this war is illegal in the courts, realistically?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
There in lies the problem, I dont discount that it might be next to impossible. But still, you are more or lessing leaving it up to the invidual troops to decide if you think they should get out of their committment because they think it is illegal. And generally speaking, I dont see how a military can effectively operate that way.
the only thing you need to consider is how many will quit during the time of a just war if given that option (not imprisonment as punishment) ...
we can speculate that enrollment will go up but even if it didn't - the way to judge your numbers is simply by determining how many will quit ...
But you cant determine that until that policy is put in place. Meaning, you are going to be planning at least one war before you know the answer to your question.
But they are doing all they can realistically do. What do you do when there's no way out and you strongly object to what you're being asked to do?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
How is military action permitted without this declaration?
I've wondered that as well. It doesn't get brought up enough.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I guess you do what they are doing. That is a personal decision for them and if they think the penalty is worth their convictions then more power to them, I certainly cant disrespect that.