Army Officer Who Refused Iraq Duty Is Allowed to Resign

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by civ_king, Sep 27, 2009.

?

Was it fair to Watada to be given a dishonorable discharge for this? (read below)

  1. Yes he deserved it

    46.9%
  2. No he didn't deserve it

    12.5%
  3. This sets a dangerous precedent

    28.1%
  4. Other (explain

    12.5%
  1. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    Actually, he may still qualify for VA benefits. The VA treats each case seperately, and simply because someone got a OTH discharge doesnt mean the VA may still give them benefits, if the VA deems their 'misconduct' understanable under the circumstances. For example, a kid that may go AWOL to see his dying relative or something like that if his unit is unable to grant him leave for mission reasons.

    Watada might lose his VA benefits....or he might not. May depend on which caseworker he gets. :lol:
     
  2. Flying Pig

    Flying Pig Utrinque Paratus Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    As I have always, always said - since when is it a squaddie's job to think politics? Your job is to shoot the men that want to torture your babies, remember?
     
  3. civ_king

    civ_king Deus Caritas Est

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,368
    @MobBoss+Patrolkos
    If your CO asked your to commit genocide would you do it?

    Watada refused to do actions that may have resulted in being prosecuted for warcrimes
     
  4. Holycannoli

    Holycannoli Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,406
    That's a flimsy excuse. He wasn't asked to commit genocide or illegally cross a border or something like that.

    I don't know much about these types of military cases, but is it normal for officers to cliam that entire wars are criminal and they don't want to participate because of it?
     
  5. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    I humbly say that I am good, but not that good. Genocide is a bit outside of my own capability. :rolleyes:

    That being said, I would refuse an order to commit a warcrime. That satisfy you?

    No...thats false logic. We have had virtually millions of soldiers serve in Iraq since the course of the war, and very, very, few of them have actually comitted warcrimes. Its like saying there is also a chance Watada could kill 20 people on the highway driving home tonight, so he shouldnt drive. Its stupid logic.
     
  6. Imperialmajesty

    Imperialmajesty Emperor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,232
    Location:
    Your Computer Screen
    To add to that, Watada was offered a desk job in Iraq.
     
  7. civ_king

    civ_king Deus Caritas Est

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,368
    he tried to resign before they tried to court-marshal him, does that make is less bad Mobboss?
     
  8. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    Well, you have to realize that simple resignation carries a different code on it than one done in lieu of a courts martial or admin action.

    In other words, the military wants to make sure that his resignation carries a characterization of service that ensures he will never, ever return to the military.

    Which I happen to think is appropriate.
     
  9. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    Of course not.

    No he didn't.
     
  10. amadeus

    amadeus Hey now!

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    36,172
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    Indeed. He should have been given a dishonorable discharge (if he hasn't already) and stripped of any privileges that would have been earned with military service. The only way to choose which wars you fight is by whether or not you join the service -- joining just to get some college benefits or score resume points has its costs, and some young men and women that think they can breeze through it are seeing the harsh reality that if they sign up, they are indeed obliged to go, or else.
     
  11. storical

    storical Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    535
    I agree 100%
     
  12. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    Or he joined to get college money with the hope that he would never actually have to be sent anywhere. Or he really is a coward. Or a deployment doesn't fit into his personal life at the moment so he needs an excuse.

    I gave you the two legitimate reasons to disobey orders, and he has not met either of him. The Army educated, fed, trained, and paid him for over four years because he made an oath and a contract to be available for legally sanctioned service and instead of fullfilling his obligations he wussed out. That is not courage.
     
  13. Maxxie

    Maxxie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    74
    Wow, surprised this is still going. I saw your response before but it wasn't worth replying to. I prefer data to endless talk and your assumptions were in much worse shape than mine after even a little research. Now since I'm not the only one to recognize things this way and you have an issue with the ideas invovled I'll explain more. You were in the navy I think, so of course you see all of this in those terms but it is more complicated.

    A quick search found this which has some very useful information.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003044627_nogo7m.html

    So, to set out a few points: Lt. Watada did not join for a free education and "wuss out," from his contractual obligations. Of course not, he wasn't just some poor schmuck who enlisted. He already had a finance degree and joined with intent to become an officer. His honest intent is and was to defend the United States and to fight those actually threats. He was convinced and ready to serve in Iraq up to the point where his research and the reports from those returning from Iraq revealed how poor the case for the preemptive war was.
     
  14. civ_king

    civ_king Deus Caritas Est

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,368
    seems to validate mt PoV, correct?
     
  15. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    Your entire poot is moot since enlisted and officers dont get to choose in that particular case.

    Point being, Watada was part of a unit - a team. His soldiers depended on him and his training to be a part of that team. They essentially put their lives in each others hands as a unit.

    And he bailed on them at the last minute.

    Lets be clear. This guy isnt some hero. There are plenty of people who still deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan that may not agree with everything we do there - but they recognize its their DUTY to do so. That they swore an OATH to fullfill. Those are the real heros serving their country. Not Watada.

    Watada crapped on that. If you ask me, the guy should have been serving time in Leavenworth military prison for doing what he did, but the prosecutors screwed it up.
     
  16. Maxxie

    Maxxie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    74
    The point you bring up does not bring any kind final verdict condemning Lt. Watada, rather that point is the crux of the entire issue. As an officer it was exactly Lt. Watada's duty to examine the orders he was give for their legality.

    Its long been established that officers are liable for the orders they give as much as the orders they have to follow. The one is done through military policy and the other is done through the actions of the courts since at least the end of the second world war, and for even longer by other means.

    Take your time replying I won't see it for a while.
     
  17. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    Nothing you said invalidates or even contradicts what I said.

    I repeat, AGAIN, the only two acceptable reasons to violate orders is if the are illegal (not the case) or are for competant objection (not the case). If he wasn't comfortable perhaps following orders he doesn't personally agree with but are from a legitimate command authority then he fraudulantly enlisted. If he really wants to make some grand protest then he should be happy to accept his dishonorable discharge and/or jail time in that effort.

    Do you think I really relish the fact that that boob Obama without an ouce of military experiance is now my Commander and Chief? Do you think it will make a difference in whether or not I follow his orders while I maintain the public confidence via my commission?

    He wants to have his cake and eat it too, tough.

    Yes, but his opinion as to whether they should be illegal are irrelevant, whether the ARE illegal is. And when you refuse an order for being illegal you still go to courts marshal because that is where the veracity of your claim will be determined. However, this is moot because there is nothing pointing to the illegality of his orders in any way shape or form. Please provide the evidence Watada provided to back up his claim.

    And it isn't as nebulous as that anyway. You don't get to violate broad things like deployment orders into a country for being illegal, thats like saying I refuse to even come into work today lest my labor contriubute to rapes in Okinawa however tangentaly :rolleyes:
     
  18. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    While correct, it has already been stated that his order to deploy to Iraq was indeed a legal and binding order.
     
  19. civ_king

    civ_king Deus Caritas Est

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,368
    what about that boob named Bush whose experience consisted of deserting?
     
  20. Flying Pig

    Flying Pig Utrinque Paratus Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    Even if he was ordered to commit a war crime, such as crossing a border (genocide's a bit different) I would still say he has a moral obligation to do so. His superiors will help him out if he gets caught, and remember that sometimes playing by the rules doesn't work when nobody else does. There's an element of putting your country first - if you'd take a bullet for it, why won't you take a court case?
     

Share This Page