Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
First Time Ever: Canada Decides to Deport U.S War Deserters
theglobeandmail.com — U.S. army deserter Robin Long is slated to be deported back to his army base in Fort Knox, Ky., Tuesday, which would make him the first resister to the U.S. war effort in Iraq to be sent out of Canada. "Mr. Long's deportation would be a terrible precedent for Canada, especially given our history of providing sanctuary for war resisters."
MakiMaki- 1838 diggs
- digg it
- kidvicious1973, on 07/15/2008, -135/+272What's the problem. Did he not sign up for service? He broke the law. Throw his ass in Jail.
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -10/+74"Mr. Long's deportation would be a terrible precedent for Canada, especially given our history of providing sanctuary for war resisters."
Really? I wonder what the Canadian military does to people who go AWOL...- geardosdotnet, on 07/15/2008, -22/+61if he were a war resister why did he join the army after the Iraq invasion had already began?
War resisters don't join the army. - greevar, on 07/15/2008, -27/+64geardosdotnet: RTFA. He changed his mind when he learned that Bush was a liar. He was duped like so many of us were.
- akilleen, on 07/15/2008, -19/+34That is assuming people can't change their minds. Maybe after he got to Iraq he realized how ***** up it really is.
- WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -32/+14Canadian Mili-what?
- evilJaze, on 07/15/2008, -23/+7HEY! We have a plane, a tank and a gun... uh.. somewhere. Oh wait, we don't need them anyway. The world loves us :D
- Godlike, on 07/15/2008, -17/+34I think that when the government lies to the people and starts an illegal and undeclared war under false pretenses, that the people have not only the right but the duty to stop that war by not fighting it.
- PabloMac, on 07/15/2008, -4/+26When he "changed his mind," he should have claimed Conscientious Objector status.
- beasty_dave_Mk2, on 07/15/2008, -12/+42"Canadian Mili-what?"
The same "mili-what" of whom 86 of our soldiers have died and hundreds injured sent home....and besides, we're the largest contingent besides you ***** yanks over there.
While 98% of the rest of the world spits on you, we help and get spit on by most ***** ignorant ***** yanks.
***** you. - Tiemmothi, on 07/15/2008, -14/+5To Beasty_dave_mk2
Better go update the wiki then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_force_i ...
no reference to Canada's efforts in Iraq at all. - barius, on 07/15/2008, -5/+16@Tiemmothi
Afghanistan, not Iraq. You know, that other place your at war with. The one where Osama Bin Laden was hiding after 9/11...or did you forget that little fact in all the Bush FUD? - PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -9/+4@Godlike
Illegal in the fact that the UN keeps giving us permission to be there by renewing the mandate every year?
@barius
Ah, Afghanistan. You mean the country that has no place in this particular conversation. This nappy-headed ho didn't want to go to Iraq. The story doesn't mention Afghanistan at all. Therefore I'm not sure why you and beasty have brought it up.
Come to think of it, they should honor his request to not go to Iraq, drop any charges, and just ship him to Kabul. - MakinBacon, on 07/16/2008, -2/+8Tiemmothi:
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Securit ...
"Canada – 2500 in Kandahar (as of June 2008). Canadian forces have been actively engaged in fighting the Taliban in the dangerous South and have suffered a high proportion of the allied casualties." - PolishLogic, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3@MakinBacon
Why would you reply to a comment about a country's military presence in Iraq, with a quote about how that country's work in Afghanistan? - barius, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1@PolishLogic
Did you even read the preceding comments? You're comments are the ones that make no sense, hence why you're getting dugg down. Also, your reference to nappy-headed hos probably isn't helping. Actually, I find it rather ironic that someone with Polish in their name has the audacity (or gross stupidity) to behave in such a racist and ignorant manner. - Tiemmothi, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1I quoted Iraq, for the simple fact that's what he is an objector to. Or was I mistaken on that as well?
- geardosdotnet, on 07/15/2008, -22/+61if he were a war resister why did he join the army after the Iraq invasion had already began?
- compu73rg33k, on 07/15/2008, -34/+20Before or after we throw GBW & Cheney's asses in jail? If they didn't lie, the guy may have never signed up to begin with and the whole problem would have been avoided.
- ventralnet, on 07/15/2008, -1/+7*****. I'd hope a what looks to be 30 year old man can make decisions on his own and not have to blame anyone else.
- randomsniper, on 07/15/2008, -5/+0Decisions based upon lies.
Look, Bush lied, the recruiters lie their asses off and then you want to make the lowly foot troop cash the buck?
Get a clue.
I did my 4 years, and about 12 hours after joining I realized the lies that trapped me.
I didn't run, I stuck it out, but I don't blame anyone else for bailing when the thing wasn't what they were sold.
In hindsight I wish I too had run, for it was a complete waste of time and I ended up disabled because of it.
BTW: The only people that stay in the military are people that can't make it outside.
- oneredeye, on 07/15/2008, -31/+84Exactly. He signed a contract and then broke the contract.
- andymadigan, on 07/15/2008, -17/+31You can't be thrown in jail for violating a contract.
In this case, the "contract" he signed is backed by criminal statutes.
If this were a normal contract, which, say, said he owed them $X00,000 (the cost of his training) if he didn't fill his term of service, then the U.S. could sue him civilly, win, and have a civil judgement filed against him.
The court could then issue a warrant requiring him to appear and pay the amount required. If Canadian law covered this type of warrant, he would be deported.
Instead, the government tries to trick kids who don't know better into signing away their life. If later on they figure it out and try to run they can be charged criminally.
The only reason they need this law is because if people knew what they were getting into when they signed up they would get even fewer recruits. Essentially, they need it to further fraud. ("Oh, you'll get a stateside job as a doctor, don't worry you won't be sent to Iraq, we promise.")
In some ways, having a private army might be better, they wouldn't be able to enforce contracts with criminal statutes. - ZenMojo, on 07/15/2008, -16/+15Considering the United States has started violating posse comitatus by sending National Guard soldiers overseas, I'm not particularly moved by this country's plight to keep conscientious dissenters from fleeing the country.
- TheHayze, on 07/15/2008, -3/+11This isn't any ordinary contract. While yes, simplified it is. But you signed up for military service, and the government wants you to fulfill your end of the contract. While it was understandable before when we had the draft, and young American men were forced into service despite opposition to the war, they would flee service. But now, since our armed forces are all contract signing, willing participates, deserters will be punished as traitors. This has been in place not just for the 250+ years we have been a nation, but thousands of years of criminal, and military law to punish deserters. While I may not personally agree with what is happening to this guy, it is not up to us, the people, to decide which laws we follow, and which we do not. Not one person has that power. (Which is for the best, mind you. We need more checks, and balances for power in this country. But that's for another discussion.)
But according to current case, and scripted law says he must be deported, and treated no less then any other deserter. - belumaves, on 07/15/2008, -1/+12@ZenMojo
digging you down because you misunderstand the Posse Comitatus Act. The law restricts the use of teh armed forces for the purpose of domestic law enforcement, the National Guard is not even covered under it, but sending them into combat is unrelated. - nigh7dagger, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5Yeah, I don't know why ZenMojo is being dugg up. He doesn't know the Posse Comitatus Law from his mom's dick.
- barius, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2@TheHayze
The article is about Canada breaking from tradition by sending him back, it has nothing to do with U.S. law. Canada has a fairly long history of accepting U.S. deserters for various reasons. Not all of them are allowed to stay, but if they can prove that they would be unfairly treated back home then they usually get to stay. I'm not sure why this guy is being returned, the article was somewhat lean on details, but it seems to be contrary to the usual leniency Canada shows. I suspect this has more to do with Bush & Co. twisting the political thumbscrews on Harper so they can bring this guy back and make an example of him before too many others follow his lead. The last thing Bush needs is a whole bunch of 'conscientious objectors' in the media telling everybody how bad morale has gotten. The army will do everything it can to label this guy as a deserter and a coward to prevent the public from feeling any empathy for him.
- andymadigan, on 07/15/2008, -17/+31You can't be thrown in jail for violating a contract.
- spyd3rweb, on 07/15/2008, -29/+67Maybe it shouldn't be against the law to change your mind.
- travis1982, on 07/15/2008, -13/+43But it should be against the law to be that stupid as to sign up for the military and not expect America to go to war.
- DaDrake, on 07/15/2008, -23/+46Dealer: "Good day sir, how is your new benz"
Idiot: "Yea... about that; see I thought I would really like it but after a month I no longer care for it"
Dealer: "Sorry to hear that"
Idiot: "Yea.... so I am going to give you the keys and make the first monthly payment, then you can sell it to someone else."
Dealer "What... you can't do that, you sign this contract"
Idiot: "Yea... well I thought I would have loved it, so its only fair"
Dealer "Fair... the second you drove it off the lot its now a used car, I will loose thousands of dollars trying to resell it"
Idiot: "Don't worry ... my bank going loose more when I return my house and default on the loan because of massive amounts of water damage that I don't want to pay for"
Dealer "Don't you live in a flood prone area?"
Idiot: "Yea... but why should I have to pay for insurance? Its not like anyone could have predicted it". - projectstartrek, on 07/15/2008, -10/+18@travis: in the article, it said he believed in the war until he heard there weren't wmds in iraq and he found out about the abuse of iraqi prisoners. stupid
- PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -11/+20Maybe he should have give a bit more thought to his decision. Or maybe he should take responsibility for making a choice he wouldn't be able to live with.
I can see it now applied to other areas: "I changed my mind, looking back I really didn't want to rape that woman". Ah, yes, well your free to go then. - Archer007, on 07/15/2008, -9/+14He didn't "change his mind". He broke the law.
- greevar, on 07/15/2008, -13/+10He learned that he was ushered into the armed forces under false pretenses. If someone offered you a contract for a new car but later on you discovered that it had stolen parts in it, wouldn't you be within your rights to break the contract?
Aside from that, you people that say he should face the music are a bunch of hypocrites. You are against the war, but if someone who wants to avoid being part of it, they deserve no quarter? - blackinthmiddle, on 07/15/2008, -3/+9greevar, it's just a screwed up situation. My wife's a guidance counselor and they used to fight hard to keep the armed forces off of the school grounds. Legally, however, they can't. I believe they just have to notify the school that they're coming and they show up, trying to tell kids just how great it is to go and "be all that you can be".
So they routinely teach kids about the reality of the armed forces. Kids have to realize that when they sign their name on the dotted line, they're agreeing to things that are just insane.
For example, executive order 13139 allows the military to perform experiments on it's people for any reason without their consent or even their knowledge! http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_42_ ...
But education is the key. Because as long as everything is spelled out *somewhere*, if you agree to it, you have to honor it. - shagmin, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Yes, lets let everyone just come and go as they please, whatever is convenient for people. Get some training, brag to the local females you just got out of boot camp, and the second the military takes action in a way you don't agree, leave, right. Everyone play nice.
The military does a lot to make quality of life better every chance it can, as long as the soldier fulfills their term. It'd be ideal and easy to point fingers if wars were fought only when absolutely necessary.. 'Til then what about the other million people that might not believe in what they're fighting for but continue to live up to the oath they were sworn to anyway? Abandoning them the correct thing to do? If you are about to go to the battlefield, and manage a way to go AWOL right beforehand and leave the rest of your platoon a little short because your politics, think you're doing the right thing there too? You just earned more enemies. He should've never joined the military in the first place.
- ad33lshahid, on 07/15/2008, -37/+108people sign up for the military hoping to serve honorably in the name of freedom and justice. The Iraq war does not represent his intentions when he signed up for service, it is an illegal war and an immoral occupation, if he disagrees with it then more power to him for standing up for what he believes in.
- ptsuk, on 07/15/2008, -23/+18except the war started in March and he signed up in July. I'm sorry EVERYONE KNOWS WAR IS HELL and frankly there is nothing good about it. But if you sign up after war breaks out.
the article states that during training his mind changed (couldn't hack it) and because no WMD's were found.
frankly the guy is a coward and and idiot and now he's getting his punishment he rightfully deserves. - manstein01, on 07/15/2008, -16/+13Right, soldiers should be given the right to walk away whenever they feel like it.
- Godlike, on 07/15/2008, -15/+6HEY GUYS WAKE UP
THE "WAR" NEVER STARTED!
Nobody ever declared it. We aren't at war. Nothing that applies to 'war time' applies to now. - ventralnet, on 07/15/2008, -1/+12@Godlike
where have you been for the past 5 years? - Rikkochet, on 07/15/2008, -2/+8Actually, manstein, they should. That's how you build a proper army. You fill it with people who want to be there.
Where do you see more motivated people? At a Fortune 500 company or in high school? Where is the per capita performance substantially higher?
Sadly, that doesn't work as well for the military because it's presently an illegal disaster and in the long term military service can't compete with what someone can get out of the private sector.
Still, there's a reason conscripts make for a ***** military. - koumed, on 07/15/2008, -5/+0Totally agree, nothing to add, you are absolutely right! :)
- PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -8/+6@Rikkochet
Illegal? LOL.
Unneeded, money thrown down the drain, poorly planned are words that describe Afghanistan and Iraq, but not illegal. - kingjam, on 07/15/2008, -4/+5@PolishLogic
Your dumb. - PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2@kingjam
Care to expand?
Care to discuss why the UN renews the mandate allowing our troops to be in Iraq, year after year, if being their is viewed as "illegal" in the eyes of the UN? - carlosos, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2He wasn't standing up to his believes. He was a chicken and ran away.
Standing up to his believes would be refusing to go into war and fighting in court as long as he has good reasons. This happened a few years ago in Germany with one soldier and he even won in court based on his "basic rights" as citizen that the army can't take away. (was some kind of programmer for the army that refused to work on some Iraq or Afghanistan project).
- ptsuk, on 07/15/2008, -23/+18except the war started in March and he signed up in July. I'm sorry EVERYONE KNOWS WAR IS HELL and frankly there is nothing good about it. But if you sign up after war breaks out.
- rudeboyskunk, on 07/15/2008, -31/+15Ever run a red light? Ever downloaded a music file illegally? Sped? Looked at porn when you were under 18?
If you have ever broken ANY law, go to the police station now and tell them what laws you broke and that you want the standard punishment for each.- ventralnet, on 07/15/2008, -5/+5not a valid argument... you are a moron
- tcpip4lyfe, on 07/15/2008, -7/+2Not the same as wasted 100s of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on training and schooling only to deciding that maybe getting shot at is not for you. I say hang him for treason.
- nigh7dagger, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1No, this is like going to Canada for getting a speeding ticket and being told to go back because I would get a fair trial for it.
- urgeigh, on 07/15/2008, -11/+16Obviously yes, he broke the law, he's going to pay for it. But the "problem" as I see it, is that if you sign up for something or sign a contract under a pretense that you believe what you're doing is justified and then that changes, you're going to feel a lot worse about killing someone if you don't really believe in the cause for which you are killing. I would not enjoy killing anyone, but if I had to I'd at least make sure it was for the right reasons. And if your view changes you really only have 2 options, flee or fight and end up killing people for a cause which you believe is not moral... it's a major conflict of human interest.
- VirtualSobriety, on 07/15/2008, -5/+4It's fine that he changed his mind, but he has to accept the consequences.
There is no such thing as a free lunch! - urgeigh, on 07/15/2008, -2/+7I didn't say he shouldn't, but I feel where he's coming from. But this raises a really good question. You're obligated to fulfill your duty regardless of anything. And if you willfully neglect your duty, you have to face consequences. At what point in the chain of command as you work your way up does accountability disappear and facing consequences no longer becomes a fact of life? Because it seems to me that if this guy has to face the music for what HE did, HEADS SHOULD BE ROLLING in Washington D.C. right now. You can't have it both ways, either everyone should be accountable for what they do or no one is. It just seems to me quite hypocritical to throw this guy under the bus when Washington D.C. is essentially a stationary circus.
- blackinthmiddle, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3urgeigh, that goes without saying. The law is only for us little people. Defining who's little and who's not is up for debate and is not worth discussing for what we're talking about here. Clearly, people like Rove don't even have to listen to Congressional subpoenas. The rules suck and we know it. All the more reason to not sign a contract with the devil!
- VirtualSobriety, on 07/15/2008, -5/+4It's fine that he changed his mind, but he has to accept the consequences.
- spongya77, on 07/15/2008, -21/+41I guess launching illegal wars is illegal, too. Murdering civilians is illegal, too, the last time I checked. In the first case there was not even a tribunal. In the second the perpetrators were acquitted. Torture, illegal wiretaps are illegal, too. So SFU and go die somewhere, you hypocrite. This guy at least had the balls to change his mind, and take his chances.
- Cjsparky, on 07/15/2008, -24/+2*****...
- Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -4/+7"launching illegal wars is illegal"
"Iraq Resolution" and "Iraq War Resolution" are popular names for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] a joint resolution (i.e. a law) passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War. - pweegar, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4Ah, you refer to the 3,000 INNOCENT AMERICANS a stinking bunch of terrorists killed after hijacking a number of airplanes.
Your referring to the beheading, by stinking terrorists, of innocent civillians.
I say we carpet bomb iraq, iran, sysria, etc, back to the stone age. Islam is nothing but astinking cancer on the world. allah ain't nothing but the ***** devil in disguise.
If this pussy signed a contract to join the military, to train for war, he is expected to fight. I say hang the bastard. Desertion in the time of war is still punishable by death. That or send his useless ass off to iran or iraw. He deserves what he gets. - marx2k, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4pweegar, don't forget all the WMDs in Iraq.
You do realize that due to this "war", more US soldiers have died "over there" than citizens have died "over here" from the event on 9/11.
And how many INNOCENT IRAQIS have died due to this "war"? - kingcam, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2@pweegar
If we become barbarians to fight barbarians we will do just that... become barbarians. - funkymoose, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2@marx2kmarx2k
How many innocent Iraqis will be not taken in the future because we removed Saddam? How many people won't have to fear him? How many people will be able to have freedoms they would have never been able to enjoy if we left things they way they were? - marx2k, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2funkymoose: I'm sure that the 85,966 to 93,778 [1] dead Iraqi civilians much appreciate the effort. I'm also sure that the 4,121+ [2] American dead soldiers and civilians appreciate it as well.
1- http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
2- http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf
- mike17032, on 07/15/2008, -9/+3Canada has troops over there too, it wouldnt make sense for them to not deport deserters.
- Godlike, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6You very obviously do not understand the issue.
- shawn1122, on 07/15/2008, -2/+6No we don't, we only have troops in Afghanistan. I'm glad Harper was smart enough to stay out of something so stupid..
- piradians, on 07/15/2008, -1/+6"I'm glad Harper was smart enough to stay out of something so stupid"
Originally Harper pushed for Canada's participation. He wasn't smart enough, just not PM yet. - kingcam, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Glad to see that the conservatives are still claiming credit for decisions that they did not make. Keep up the good work Shawn one day you'll be subtle enough to phone radio talk shows.
- gn0stik, on 07/15/2008, -6/+21Exactly, if it was a draft, I'd understand, but not for someone who signed up willingly, thinking he'd only join for a college education or some *****. Next stop.. breaking rocks in Leavenworth.
- cawpin, on 07/15/2008, -4/+14Exactly, there should be no conscientious objector status any longer. It is a completely voluntary military now.
- blackinthmiddle, on 07/15/2008, -5/+5cawpin, easy for you and I to say. I remember when i was six years old, my mother sat me down one day (at six years old, I have no idea why) to tell me just how bad the military was and how I was NEVER to sign up. I still remember crying that night because I couldn't believe people had to suffer so much.
What happens to the kid who doesn't even know who his father is and his mother's on crack? There are a lot of kids who never got the, "let me tell you about the realities of the armed forces" story.
Yes, they signed and it's their problem. However, the military preys on the ignorant and sells them *****. "Sure kid, you can be an engineer in the army, just like the commercial says (whisper) if you're smart enough, which I know damn well you're not". 80% of these kids would not join if they actually knew what all the fine print meant. - spongya77, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6Yeah, I guess, if you signed up, you should carry out every unlawful order you get, right? Never mind that people were hanged for carrying out such orders; there should be no conscience in an all-voluntary army. (Oh, well, we know that no one in the US was ever punished for serious war crimes, and not because no one committed any,so I guess it makes it OK.)
Because, you know, some dumb, idealistic idiot might really think he signs up for protecting his homeland, and not for invading countries for some right (or left) wing business interest, or ideology. - barius, on 07/16/2008, -2/+1If a soldier was ordered to fire on U.S. citizens in a peaceful protest you'd want him to object wouldn't you?
There are absolutely cases in which you want soldiers to have the right to refuse an order, however the fact is, the army will never let anyone out whether they signed a contract or not, that's just the way armies work. However, the issue here isn't whether or not he deserted, the issue is that Canada doesn't usually force these guys to go home. Also, the U.S. army doesn't usually make much effort to force the issue since any trial of a deserter is bound to get national coverage which would make the army look bad. Something has changed though, and it stinks of politics. IMHO this guy isn't being forced to go home because he did something bad, he's being forced to go home because the army needs to make a public example of someone. - gn0stik, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2He can protest his orders all he wants. He just better be willing to be a man and take his medicine afterwards. Not run off to Canada like some coward. Disobeying an order is one thing, refusing deployment is something else entirely.
- barius, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Protesting an order is not the same as refusing it. It is trivial to protest an order, but refusing one can get you killed.
Eitherway, you're still completely missing the point, or perhaps your trying to miss the point...? None of this has to do with the U.S., it has to do with the erosion of Canadian principles. Bush & Co. are not just wiping their crusty asses with the U.S. constitution anymore. The croneyism between Bush and Harper is becoming a problem for Canadian rights and liberties too.
- wissler, on 07/15/2008, -9/+3A valid contract means both parties hold up their end. Mr. Long's position is that the US government lied about the reasons for the war, and has violated the constitution while pursuing it.
- kmolleja, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9For that argument to work he had to have informed the government of his reasons for entering the army and then the army would have to agree to those conditions.
- dumbasshit, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4Wissler,
Unfortunately, the contract is Unilateral. The military isn't obligated to uphold its side of the contract.
Here's the clause in the contract
Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may affect my status, pay, allowances, benefits, and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment or reenlistment document.
I don't know why anyone would sign that.
- Ne007, on 07/15/2008, -7/+9What about the government's duty to uphold the constitution? Do you think servicemen should follow unconstitutional orders?
Personally, I think servicemen should take out people in charge who blatantly violate constitutional law they are sworn to uphold. Who else is going to hold people accountable?
Anyways, I wouldn't follow the orders either. - chaos7, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1you have a lot to learn
- Infowarmachine, on 07/15/2008, -5/+6i guess he didnt sign up to participate in an illegal war to kill millions of people who pose zero threat to our country or our way of life
infact our preemptive unprovoked attack has done more to change our way of life and threaten our freedoms and our pocket book than iraq or saddam ever did- Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -3/+3not so much illegal as....legal?
"Iraq Resolution" and "Iraq War Resolution" are popular names for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] a joint resolution (i.e. a law) passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War. - StratoStreak, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4So as long as the American Government says it's ok, it's ok!!!!!
- kingcam, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2International law =/= American law. It is the contention of most who say that the war is illegal that it violates international law as asserted by the United Nations. So go as far as to contend that the war violates several of the Nuremberg principles.
- Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -3/+3not so much illegal as....legal?
- Jareth86, on 07/15/2008, -8/+8First of all, This sets a dangerous precedent. Say the government brings the draft back. There's nowhere to go now, unless you have the money to get off the continent. Do you believe your government has the right to throw your life into the meat grinder?
And Secondly, when did the hell did Digg begin sliding so far to the right? More and more in the past few months, I've seen People cheerleading The occupation in Iraq, Praising the lift on the offshore drilling ban, and now this.
I hope you psychos all get drafted.- nigh7dagger, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Because if they don't subscribe to your viewpoints, they are psychos and should be put somewhere where they could die.
- secrity, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3I am too old to get drafted and I have already served in the military.
- kingcam, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1They would probably have to fight about deportation again if the draft came back, the Canadian Supreme Court would probably want to hear it as a distinct case.
- j0keR, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5The thread starters disgust me. More proof that North America no longer contains a free country. If you don't like it, get out! Unless they decide to send you back to be imprisoned! But you still have the freedom to leave!
- mal1964, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Its free enough so you can say. "More proof that North America no longer contains a free country"
- dreamlayers, on 07/15/2008, -4/+4kidvicious1973, that's ridiculous! You're saying the government gets to run a war of questionable legality and do various illegal things in the war while a soldier should be condemned for breaking the law to get out of that illegal enterprise. Oh, and why did that get modded up so much?
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -10/+74"Mr. Long's deportation would be a terrible precedent for Canada, especially given our history of providing sanctuary for war resisters."
- Rapter09, on 07/15/2008, -22/+144"Mr. Long, who fled to Ontario in 2005, had signed up to join the U.S. Army in July, 2003. He believed at that time that his country was justified in going to war in Iraq, his lawyer Shepherd Moss said at the court hearing to halt the deportation. Mr. Long intended to train as a tank commander. “He wanted to go to defend his country,” Mr. Moss said."
So he signs up thinking the war is just, and then changes his mind midway through.
It's not that easy for a grunt. Unlike people fleeing from Vietnam for a draft, you signed up for the Army, buddy.
As much as I love my country, and I want us to be known as a safe haven for the persecuted, I can't abide us breaking law for somebody that signed up for it. Yes, he's allowed to change his position when facts change - I believe that very strongly - but is there no method for US soldiers to 'drop out' or something akin?- ordig, on 07/15/2008, -19/+13I somewhat agree. I mean this dude joined after the Iraq war started. If he couldn't tell it was going to be a cluster *****. That's his bad.
I would support asylum though for military personnel that joined prior to 2003, as they all got hoodwinked into an illegal occupation.- PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -13/+6Illegal?
That's funny. - thesonofdarwin, on 07/15/2008, -6/+8Yes, it's called illegal when you go against the international law you agreed to act under.
That is funny, isn't it? - phoenixshard, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6No they didn't. When you join the service, you should expect combat, period. You can use it for a way to get money for college, but you're joining the military, the people that go out to fight.
- PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5@thesonofdarwin
If this war is illegal, then why has the UN renewed the mandate allowing us to be there, year after year. Seems to me the UN is basically encouraging or at least ok'ing our "illegal" actions by doing so. - Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4this isnt the united states of earth. congress authorized the war, thats pretty much all thats neccesary
- PolishLogic, on 07/15/2008, -13/+6Illegal?
- xrisnothing, on 07/15/2008, -14/+78"Sir, I don't want to be in the Army anymore."
"Why not?"
"I don't think this war is just."
"Righteo, let me get out some discharge papers."
ummm...no- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -1/+44Even if your a conscientious objector you can't just leave the Milliary... They'll give you some ***** job (quite literally) away from combat.
Moral of the story? When you sign on the dotted line, your a$$ belongs to uncle sam. - CRCulver, on 07/15/2008, -1/+11I asked for and received honourable discharge from the U.S. Navy as a conscientious objector. Of course, this was back in the pre-9/11 era. Back then CO advisory organizations found a success rate of about 80%. I would imagine it's much more difficult now.
If you were one of the few who asked for CO status but not for discharge, you wouldn't necessarily be put far away from combat. You simply wouldn't be asked to carry a weapon. You might still find yourself assigned to some sort of medic duty. - Klisk, on 07/15/2008, -14/+6Wow.... Americans are ***** up. What backwards hick logic. A contract should be considered null if the original ideas are revealed as lies.
- WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -9/+10Moral of this story? NEVER JOIN THE MILITARY.
- MavRevMatt, on 07/15/2008, -2/+7@WNW3, no that's not the moral. The moral is that if you join the military, and to those in it I respect your service, that you understand what you're getting into and that you can't just back out when you feel like it.
- mercano, on 07/15/2008, -1/+14"Sir, I don't want to be in the Army anymore."
"Why not?"
"I'm gay."
"Righteo, let me get out some discharge papers."
I think that may work. - WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4@MavRevMatt. Right, but if he never joined in the first place he never would have had to try to sneak out. And really, if no one joined the military we couldn't have any wars due to lack of participants...until the robotic army became viable...then the uprising. Then I for one will welcome our new robotic overlords.
Really, there should be one question that recruiters should ask. "Do you want to be shot at for money?" if the answer is no then you can't be in the military...well maybe the Navy. OHHHHHH!!!!
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -1/+44Even if your a conscientious objector you can't just leave the Milliary... They'll give you some ***** job (quite literally) away from combat.
- neoform, on 07/15/2008, -22/+41To be fair, he was lied to when he signed up.
Problem is, that wont be accepted in his trial, even though it damn well should be.- CoMpUtErITGuY, on 07/15/2008, -32/+15Your family lied when they said they loved you.
- phoenixshard, on 07/15/2008, -3/+13He wasn't lied to when he signed up. Nobody came recruiting him, he went to the recruiter willingly and wanting to join.
- oneredeye, on 07/15/2008, -5/+7The only way out is to become unable to perform your duties. You would have to lose an arm or a leg or die.
- devolved, on 07/15/2008, -2/+14Or "do tell"
- oddtom, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Or be shown to be mentally unfit for combat, to name just one other possibility of many for a legimate discharge?
- Veretax, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4"Or you could go out the honorable way, with a section eight!"
- X86BSD, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2Don't worry. He will have ample opportunity to do all three soon enough.
- staticneuron, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4Here is the real stickler. Just like we hunt down and persecute the Nazi's for what they have done the question really is.... who is at fault? When the army of a country marches into a fight they don't believe in and they have no option to back out how does this play out if they lose?
Granted for any of this to matter we would have to lose the war (which isn't really likely) but it raises important philosophical questions. If we win a war does it mean our POV was justified?- gurudrew, on 07/15/2008, -1/+11History is written by the victor.
- X86BSD, on 07/15/2008, -3/+10What war? You are fighting an insurgency of pissed off Iraqi's. This is so similar to N. Ireland now its amazing. You wont win this. You can be there for 100 years and still be getting your ass blown to bits by snipers, road side bombs, and bombings of selected infrastructure targets. The standing army is defeated. That war is over. Now you are just an occupying power the people wont stop blowing up until you leave. The sooner you realize that the better you will be. Seriously. Go home.
- Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -3/+5we dont shoot first. all they have to do is act like people and stop blowing ***** up and wed leave.
- brstilson, on 07/15/2008, -0/+15"but is there no method for US soldiers to 'drop out' or something akin? "
No. Not even dressing like a woman works, as Corporal Klinger will tell you first hand.- sb66, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1Sure just say you're gay.
- shallabal316, on 07/15/2008, -7/+1Mexico or bust.
- kmolleja, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6don't let the door hit you ....
- Monk22, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5they have extradition treaties so you might want to find somewhere else to go.
- shallabal316, on 07/16/2008, -1/+0LOL the hatred
- sb66, on 07/15/2008, -3/+11Yeah when you join the army, you accept that you will go where you are told. You can (and should) refuse to follow blatantly illegal orders like killing women and children; but you don't have the luxury of second guessing national policy.
- shagmin, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Exactly, a soldier who doesn't believe in what the military is doing, is still sworn to an oath, it's not their job to perform or not perform their duties based on politics. Soldiers can vote to affect politics. And there's so much time in the military spent on learning law of armed conflict and things like that to know when it's lawful to disobey superiors.
- Chode2235, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2He should have filed as a conscious objector. That seems to me the linchpin of the legal argument to deport him.
- shaXian, on 07/15/2008, -0/+13Filing as a conscientious objector does not get you out of the service.
It ensures that you spend the rest of your commitment doing the worst jobs possible in the military.- loganrapp, on 07/16/2008, -2/+4Well, when you sign up for the Army, you shouldn't expect "nice" jobs, anyway.
- ordig, on 07/15/2008, -19/+13I somewhat agree. I mean this dude joined after the Iraq war started. If he couldn't tell it was going to be a cluster *****. That's his bad.
- the13thzen, on 07/15/2008, -68/+148Persuaded into the military under false pretenses.
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -25/+36"Persuaded into the military under false pretenses."
Ooooh booo hooo... He can't take responsibility for his actions? Anyone with half a brain knows what joining the military is about.
You're probably the type of twit who whines when they buy a car under false pretenses. What you believed the salesmen when he told you it would get you hot chicks?- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -20/+8joining the military is about killing brown people in a war based on lies so that the military industrial complex and no bid contractors can profit? funny, that part isn't in the commercials.
- asw0210, on 07/15/2008, -5/+9Joining the military is about protecting your country and securing freedom. Have you ever been a member of the armed forces?
- jabberwolf, on 07/15/2008, -5/+6pintomp3
There was 1 mislead in entering IRAQ. And the whistle blower himself believed the uranium report was valid until after we invaded. It was a bogus report and many were stupid for listening to it. But it was only 1 reason.
The sanctions and no fly zone were not working. Countries breaking them, Saddam benefiting, 100,000's people dying because of sanctions approved by U.N.
We should never have left in the first place until we got the job done. Leaving and doing nothing doesn't help. But that lesson is beyond you as you want the USA to do the same thing again. - mal1964, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2@asw
That's the bottom line, But there are countless opportunities that out weight the negatives of the war side of it. - marx2k, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2asw: What are our soldiers protecting out country from in Iraq? Securing our freedom from who?
- mal1964, on 07/15/2008, -5/+7Just like anything you need to do your homework first. But you don't have to join, its voluntary.
- jabberwolf, on 07/15/2008, -9/+10"Persuaded into the military under false pretenses. "
Most people who are stupid usually claim its someone else's fault as well. - SurfingMonkey, on 07/16/2008, -1/+3I agree with "Persuaded into the military under false pretenses." Propaganda in the making...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.u ...
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -25/+36"Persuaded into the military under false pretenses."
- RadioVibes, on 07/15/2008, -50/+86Hmm.. so we let drug smugglers, and terrorists stay in our country but deport a non-criminal.. F*ck you Canadian Government!
- Mikhail101, on 07/15/2008, -20/+12I want links about drug smugglers and terrorists in our country right now that have been found and are not deported or your claim is 100% *****
- jabberwolf, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663276/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Canada
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/ar ...
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/05/29/csis-ter ...
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/ ...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/446509
Hey you asked! - Mikhail101, on 07/15/2008, -3/+3thank you very much
- metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2Jabberwolf: Thank you for providing useless links that did nothing to address the situation at hand.
the question at hand is: "I want links about drug smugglers and terrorists in our country right now that have been found and are not deported"
None of those links had anything to do with people being caught and not deported. They were just random crap about lists of terrorist organizations that have been banned, or other equally useless information. Anyone that actually dugg you up is a moron and obviously didn't open a single link you posted.
Hell, that second-last link you posted was from early July, 2002! can't you find something even REMOTELY recent?
Radiovibes:
Again, refer above, I want some PROOF. I agree that your claim is *****, so back it up.
Also, why is this guy not a criminal? He signed up for the military and then abandoned his post once he changed his mind. Yes, I don't agree with this war in Iraq, but never the less, that man has a responsibility. Us taking in deserters during Vietnam was different, there was an unjust draft back then. These are volunteers, and just because their opinion on the war changes, doesn't mean they get to abandon their duties.
Canada is actually very ridged and harsh with our deporting rules. Here in Vancouver we've deported street racers and the critically ill, despite massive outcry's from the minority groups they belong to. I have never, ever, heard of a caught terrorist, or a caught drug smuggler that was allowed to stay in Canada without being sent to jail.
- jabberwolf, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663276/
- orthodoxDrew, on 07/15/2008, -9/+4wow, just wow.
- Jhiaxuz, on 07/15/2008, -4/+9The root of this issue is not of the Canadian Government but by the choices a person makes on their own and their inability to see the future consequences of their own actions.
- Mikhail101, on 07/15/2008, -8/+3Oh yea and why dont u go to a third world country and live there im sure youll be happy... IDIOT! Im sure the governments there will shine your shoes and suck your balls too.
- barius, on 07/15/2008, -1/+6Our nation(s) maintain a level of peace and stability mainly because we encourage the peaceful expression of different viewpoints. Every individual can have his say, and the democratic process allows us to find compromises that don't involve violence. Telling someone who disagrees with you to leave the country not only makes *you* the idiot, it also makes you a traitor to the very values that the U.S. (and most 'Western' nations) was founded upon. You might as well burn a flag while you're at it, comrade.
- crowbar77, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6Terrorists according to who? The US watch list that has more than a million people on it, the same one with nelson mandela? Unlike the US we can't just send them to gitmo, they actually have to be proven guilty first.
- use2bacanadian, on 07/15/2008, -4/+1You dumb ass! The watch list is not a list of known terrorists!
- tjex, on 07/15/2008, -6/+5Sad day for Canada
- ryenski, on 07/15/2008, -1/+8I'm pretty sure that desertion has always been a crime.
- Mikhail101, on 07/15/2008, -20/+12I want links about drug smugglers and terrorists in our country right now that have been found and are not deported or your claim is 100% *****
- SuperWinner, on 07/15/2008, -46/+215Hey, the politicians in Canada are just following more orders from their real bosses... the U.S. government.
- paulf2k, on 07/15/2008, -5/+23the sad thing is that your statement is 100% true... way to be a tool Harper...Canada is so proud of you
- metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -4/+1You sir, obviously have no understanding of politics and probably just vote based on whatever party you like, regardless of their policies. Canada's economy is thriving right now under the Conservative government. There have been no liberal policies cut including the Gay marriage bill or the decriminalization of small amounts of pot.
The Conservative party has been true to it's promises and for once, I am completely happy with my government.
Also, if someone were to call my government a tool of the Americans to my face, regardless of the party they represented, I would strike them. Traitor. - paulf2k, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0I actually vote based on a party's platform. I found Harper to be really good at the beginning because as you have mentioned, the economy is doing very well (minus the fact Ontario is now headed towards a recession). However, just because the economy is doing well, doesn't mean I should applaud Harper's "bend over for Uncle Sam" policy. This news story and Digital Copyright Bill C-60 (although not in effect, yet) are just a few supporting arguments.
I voted Harper in, since he seemed like the best bet since the Liberals have been useless and there is no way I will ever vote NDP. Next election, I am going Green.
Also, don't go around calling people traitors just because they badmouth a crappy government. It's people like you who voted in Bush, TWICE.
- metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -4/+1You sir, obviously have no understanding of politics and probably just vote based on whatever party you like, regardless of their policies. Canada's economy is thriving right now under the Conservative government. There have been no liberal policies cut including the Gay marriage bill or the decriminalization of small amounts of pot.
- geardosdotnet, on 07/15/2008, -5/+10Actually the army deserter should have been following the orders of his real boss, the one he voluntarily signed up for.. the U.S. government. I'm Canadian and I am against the war but if you join the army voluntarily (and in his case AFTER the Iraq invasion had already began), you are signing a contract that states that you will follow orders. Unless he was forced to commit crimes against humanity and has real grounds to forfeit his contract, he's stuck in the army.
- WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -9/+4Canada = America Jr
- VeritasAequitas, on 07/15/2008, -1/+10I thought Canada = America's Hat?
- SuperWinner, on 07/15/2008, -4/+3America's asshat maybe...
- ComstockGordon, on 07/15/2008, -3/+6Canada still has a few morals left.. we didn't invade Iraq because we didn't want to be a part of an illegal war. The only thing our troops are doing is killing the Taliban in Afghanistan and protecting the contractors we sent over to rebuild their infrastructure. If Canada was 100% behind the US I think we'd be in Iraq by now.
- artfuldodga, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2got that right, its pretty sad
- berzerker76, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Did anyone actually read the article? The U.S. doesn't even care about deserters -- this isn't 1969, and we don't have a draft. We almost never prosecute deserters (per the bottom of the article and other pieces on this since 9/11) because it really isn't worth our time. We have an all volunteer army, and it's really not too safe to have someone in a war zone who doesn't want to fight. It's like trying to take a cat for a walk on a leash -- it doesn't work very well.
If anything, this is probably Canada trying to get rid of an undesirable -- I wonder what else this guy did to get kicked out of Canada? Nothing in this article says that we are in the least interested in getting this guy back.
Btw, I think prob. most Canadians would resent the implication we're their boss -- they seem to be quite independent enough up there. - metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3Thank you Berzerker, at least one American has some common sense.
This entire thread is one of the most offensive things I've ever read on Digg, America has no say in what we do. What we do together, it's because it's mutually benificial. Canada and American have long been friends, we are each other biggest trading partners (Yes, that right, Canada, not China, is your biggest trading partner) and frequently we share similiar values as we are both civilized western nations.
Do NOT think, even for a moment, that us working together means that we're your bitch, because you need us just as much as we need you.- WNW3, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3This is one of the most offensive things you've ever read on Digg? It's not even the most offensive thing I've written today. Heck I stole it from Homer Simpson! I agree that the US/Canada relationship is mutually beneficial, but only in the way those birds who stand on the backs of hippopotomi are. You scratch our back and we keep you from sinking.
Then again as hippos we tend to wallow in our own *****. Huzzah!
- WNW3, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3This is one of the most offensive things you've ever read on Digg? It's not even the most offensive thing I've written today. Heck I stole it from Homer Simpson! I agree that the US/Canada relationship is mutually beneficial, but only in the way those birds who stand on the backs of hippopotomi are. You scratch our back and we keep you from sinking.
- paulf2k, on 07/15/2008, -5/+23the sad thing is that your statement is 100% true... way to be a tool Harper...Canada is so proud of you
- Murrabbit, on 07/15/2008, -30/+47Aww come on Canada, we thought you were cool! Where the ***** am I gonna desert now when they draft me to go to Iran? Better bone up on my Spanish I guess.
- tyho, on 07/15/2008, -33/+16There will never be a draft, besides they don't want pussies like you anyway.
- rudeboyskunk, on 07/15/2008, -5/+19Oh yeah, we're real cowards for not wanting to fight a useless war over nothing. I intend to protect my family (wife and kids), and if that means making sure I'm alive to protect them by dodging a draft and moving to another country, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
- byronm, on 07/15/2008, -4/+3Is that what one pussy says to another pussy?
- Cuchanu, on 07/15/2008, -4/+8You brainwashed idiot not wanting to fight a unjustified corporate war doesn't make somebody a pussy.
If it really was a justified war that was protecting our country I'd be there in a heartbeat. But I'm not interested in fighting wars that make rich people richer and kills more than a million poor people to achieve that goal.
And if you don't think there will be a draft if it was REALLY necessary you are just naive. The same reasons there were drafts in the past could make them start it up again, just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it wont happen. I don't think it will be anytime soon, but let's not elect McCain just to find out. - crazy0, on 07/15/2008, -1/+0no not at all...what you wrote on the other hand, byron is pussy...
- johndavidjack, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2@cuchanu
"You brainwashed idiot not wanting to fight a unjustified corporate war doesn't make somebody a pussy."
There is difference between not wanting to do something, and actually not doing it. This 'pussy' signed up for the military, but deserted because he didn't like the direction of the war, etc. Do you think policeman like shooting people? Do you think public defenders like defending child molesters in courts?
It's called obligation and responsibility. It would be like having a child with a girl, then after seeing how difficult/expensive it is to raise a child, just fleeing the country. Please understand the concept, because I am not advocating raising a child being equal to a war... - Cuchanu, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1@johndavidjack:
I agree with you but policemen and public defenders are free to quit there job if they want. This guy in the article signed up after the war started so he probably is just afraid of dying. And he probably shouldn't have joined in the first place, it was a bad choice. And I realize that in a war you can't have people just leaving whenever they want, but I sympathize with people who find themselves fighting a war they think is BS who don't want to be a part of it anymore. Bush lied, we all know that, so I think many people signed up for military service under false pretenses. That should void any contract they signed. - TheLoneHoot, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^›
- davidjunit, on 07/15/2008, -1/+18The Mexican government would deport you also; they wouldn't want any illegals running around there.
- CrushThemTorg, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1Tyho just proved to the entire internet that his penis is bigger than yours.
- Cuchanu, on 07/15/2008, -2/+6@Murrabbit: Practice your Spanish anyways because when you retire you won't be able to afford to live in the US anymore at the rate things are going.
- jonsangster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+18Hey, if there's a DRAFT in the USA, you bet your ass we'll welcome the draft dodgers up here with open arms.
It's something completely different when you volunteer for the army and then chicken out half way through. - altgeeky1, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4Even the US generals admit, if higher education were free (or now that the updated 'GI Bill' passed), enlistment will suffer.
Everyone I know who joined the US military did so because they had 'few options'. Once they're in, the realize they can't get the promised job... a job that may have only been available to contractors in the first place. Complaining will get your ass beat at lights out, so they convince themselves they joined for other reasons.
So... the biggest threat to US Homeland Security is... free education! - tillerman00, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1yo ya he aprendido espanol entonces estoy preparado porciacaso necesito correr de esta puta madre.
in short, i'm already prepared to flee. - KingGorilla, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Canada still cool! We deport later!
- tyho, on 07/15/2008, -33/+16There will never be a draft, besides they don't want pussies like you anyway.
- Hetman, on 07/15/2008, -29/+108There is a big difference between Iraq and Vietnam. In vietnam people were drafted. He had to go out of his way to join the army. He should be held responsible for the contract he signed.
- askantik, on 07/15/2008, -24/+14Why don't you go to Iraq in his place?
- superkendall, on 07/15/2008, -6/+9I would myself but I am too old.
- Jhiaxuz, on 07/15/2008, -2/+13That's a very common throw down when you try to deflect the issue. You don't have to serve your country by carrying a gun and dropping bombs but to be a moral, productive person which benefits the progression of your fellow country and man. The armed forces is but one of many ways to benefit and serve for your country.
So what about those who are to old? To sick? To young? Are they not of any more use to serve their country? What about the factory workers who supply the war efforts. Are they not doing their country a service?
It's typical elitist attitude to think the army is the only way to serve your country.
- Deaconstructed, on 07/15/2008, -17/+12I hear your argument but keep in mind that a LOT of young people are falsely led into the army with notions of 'patriotism' [Which is almost as bad as religion as far as wars go, as they both tend to blind people terribly] only to learn truths of their cause later on.
- Mjeacoma, on 07/15/2008, -1/+16ignorance does not = excuse
- usaf1984, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1I just want to know what these lies are they are telling people to come into the military?
- Hetman, on 07/15/2008, -3/+32He did join after the war was started. Its not like he was unaware of the situation we were in.
- spongya77, on 07/15/2008, -11/+4As the government for the laws it broke. Not to mention he was lied to when he signed the contract.
Too bad you can't see the distinction.- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -4/+7I keep hearing that he was lied to. Was he under verbal contract?
No. He had a written contract of which they insisted he read and then he had the option to sign. If he didn't like the terms of the contract then he should have brought that up with the recruiter BEFORE he signed. He could have made them guarantee a certain A school and duty station after boot camp.
But, nobody held a gun to his head and MADE him sign. - spongya77, on 07/15/2008, -6/+2I see you can't really understand the last five years' history. You know, the administration lied about the connection between Hussein and 9/11, lied about certain WMDs, and such, making a case for an illegal war. Now, if someone had a little education, it was evident back then, as it is evident now. But for some poor sod who only knew how to slap a magnetic flag on his car, it might have been a strong argument to go to war against Iraq.
Do you understand now? I hope it cleared up the falsifying the truth part. He signed up, because he thought (however stupid he was) that he is protecting his country. Because he was lied to about the threat. I can't spell out any simpler than that. I hope it reaches your gray matter. - keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3Did they force him to sign, YES or NO?
I don't need your BDS derived babble. There are no grey areas to consider.
Just a simple YES or NO will suffice.
Or, is that too hard for you?
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -4/+7I keep hearing that he was lied to. Was he under verbal contract?
- gyrfalcon, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Just like the mortgage idiots...
- ChileanGoD, on 07/15/2008, -7/+3What if the army told him to start shooting american civilians for the sake of control because the population won't obey anymore? Or wants to change the government?.. Up to what point a soldier has the right to think for himself?
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8Then he had better be ready to be shot back at.
Thus is the reason the dems want to get rid of the 2nd amendment. - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/15/2008, -0/+11A soldier is allowed to refuse to obey an illegal order...provided he is willing to accept the consequences and not run off to Canada.
- ChileanGoD, on 07/15/2008, -4/+2what about an stupid order?
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3If you don't like getting stupid orders, I suggest going to Officer Canidate School. Then you can GIVE stupid orders yourself.
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8Then he had better be ready to be shot back at.
- BabyWookie, on 07/15/2008, -6/+4That would make sense, but I know what kind of tactics the recruiters use in order to get these kids. Blatant lies and clever psychological manipulation are common.
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8Did they force him to sign?
NO. - loganrapp, on 07/16/2008, -2/+1Clever psychological manipulation? Please. They're about as clever as a local used car advertisement.
If you're stupid enough to fall for their so-called manipulations, then you really deserve what's coming to you.
In this day and age, the personnel who try to use patriotism to recruit lose. They instead kick up the shoot-'em-up aspect, which for those who fall for it, they know what they want, and they should own up to that little piece of paper they signed.
I sign any contract with any major entity, that contract is going to get fulfilled. If I am in breach, I am penalized. I should know that if I sign a contract with the GOVERNMENT to expect my metaphorical ass to get kicked when I try to breach that agreement. Governments in general do not take kindly to that.
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -5/+8Did they force him to sign?
- askantik, on 07/15/2008, -24/+14Why don't you go to Iraq in his place?
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -41/+141in the U.S. we elect war deserters president.
- SimonTB, on 07/15/2008, -7/+44Why the ***** are you retards burying this? It's true.
- Jareth86, on 07/15/2008, -5/+12Because Digg is slowly being taken over by right wing sociopaths.
- spkrcity, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4Its true. Did you see all the love for Tony Snow the other day? I wanted to vomit.
- Jackson0909, on 07/15/2008, -26/+3Nice attempt at spinning the story.
- BabyWookie, on 07/15/2008, -3/+24Oh, c'mon! Someone needed to defend Alabama's air space against the frequent bombing raids by the North Vietnamese People's Air Corps.
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -8/+1He was talking about kkklintoon.
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -3/+7clinton was a draft-dodger, like cheney. bush was a deserter.
- edd17, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Then this man has a bright future ahead of him.
- loganrapp, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Which one? The National Guard frat boy or the guy who went to Canada?
- SimonTB, on 07/15/2008, -7/+44Why the ***** are you retards burying this? It's true.
- ender7074, on 07/15/2008, -25/+18It's about damn time.
- Mier, on 07/15/2008, -34/+24Let him stand up in front of a judge and a jury of soldiers that served in Iraq. See how long his pansy ass can look them in the eye.
- doiveo, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4Yes an emotionally charged tribunal by heavily biased peers - that would be justice.
Then again, I wonder how long they could look him in the eye when they realize they didn't have the guts to stand up to this ***** war. - jakeson2, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1And I bet you think that Black jury judge O J Simpson fairly and without bias. American law reads, "a jury of your peers", that is the law and a jury of his deserted army fellows would be indeed a jury of his peers.
- doiveo, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4Yes an emotionally charged tribunal by heavily biased peers - that would be justice.
- bigfinger, on 07/15/2008, -34/+28Coward, cow·ard – noun 1. a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -10/+19sheep: someone who follows orders blindly
- SimonTB, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4You just made my day. I love you.
- AeonTorpor, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1By definition "conservative" would be the lemming and sheep. But it's just so easy to mud sling rather than speak the truth.
- doiveo, on 07/15/2008, -4/+8Brave - adjective. A person who possesses the courage to follow their morals and values in the face of prosecution or personal suffering.
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -10/+19sheep: someone who follows orders blindly
- freezerburn666, on 07/15/2008, -29/+24he wants his benefits and his paycheck he better follow through, i'm tired of free loaders in ***** canada.
- tykwondingo, on 07/15/2008, -10/+52He could have talked to someone in psych and told them he conscientiously objects to the war and (as a vet, I'm 99.9% sure) would be let out under honorable conditions. They won't send someone to fight if they think you're a risk because of your beliefs. It would've been tough but he should've talked it out... poor bastard.
- rudeboyskunk, on 07/15/2008, -15/+6Nope, tried that one with a recruiter, and he just looked at me with a blank stare and said, "So?"
- legolas68, on 07/15/2008, -3/+11It's not for a recruiter to make the judgement. Nice try.
- tykwondingo, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5Yeah, well, if you read my comment it's relating to a person that's IN the military. If you are in the military and your beliefs have changed enough that putting you in a life or death situation could be a risk to others, you would probably be discharged. Most likely you'd lose the majority of your benefits but that'd be a small price to pay compared to your life or that of a brother in arms because you hesitated or something... get it?
- grantino9, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The conscientious objector thing only works if you totally oppose war under any circumstances. You're not going to be able to make individual judgments between "just" and "unjust" wars. Just try to imagine the type of chaos that would cause in the military when mobilizing and fighting any protracted war.
Given that we have the all volunteer force, I think it'll be pretty hard to show that you're against all war, as opposed to specific wars. Tough luck, but he should have entered the Peace Corps instead.- tykwondingo, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Not true but I understand where you're coming from.
In an all out war, the scenario I proposed probably wouldn't work but in today's military it would. - grantino9, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Actually, I think I'm right. Gillette v. United States, 401 U.S. 437.
While I agree that there are ways to make it a tough decision on deployment, conscientious objector status just ain't gonna work. Either way you go, you'll either effectively end your career or end up in Leavenworth.
Edit: I just read your earlier comment on another thread. If you can prove a change of belief, conscientious objector status is possible. Still, it is really tough to show, and you still have to comply with the Gillette standard. - tykwondingo, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Good points and I agree that "you'll either effectively end your career or end up in Leavenworth." I'm sure we can both agree that the poor sonofabitch should've talked to his first shirt before deserting. Probably would've gotten out imho.
- Tanath, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1That's BS. Morality is not absolute. You can be a conscientious objector without having to oppose war under any circumstances, so if claiming Conscientious Objector Status requires it, then it's presuming false premises. It's not the place of government to impose "absolute morality." Can such a requirement be constitutional?
- tykwondingo, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Not true but I understand where you're coming from.
- phoenixshard, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4He joined in 2003, how is he going to say he's a conscientious objector when the fighting was already going on.
- Lyk4n, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1He never said he opposes all war, just an illegal war in Iraq..
- barius, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4Pure BS. What really happens is this:
Private: "You lied to me, I want out because I think this war is immoral"
Army: "Are you really sure? Look you're doing a great job over there and we really need you, why not tough it out for a while longer?"
Private: "No, I really think I made a mistake and I want out now"
Army: "But you'll be letting down your entire unit, you don't want to do that do you?"
Private: "No, I like my unit, but this war is immoral!"
Army: "Well, we won't discharge you but we'll let your unit know that you don't want to fight so they can give you other stuff to do."
Private: "But they'd kick my ass if you do that! Plus, I don't want any part in this war even if it's as a cook!"
Army: "Well, you signed up to server your country, if you don't love your country then I can't help you."
Private: "Hey, wait a minute, I know my rights. You have to let me out if I'm a conscientious objector."
Army: "Yeah, but we decide whose an objector and who isn't. I think you're just a coward pretending to be an objector"
Private: "You can't prove that!"
Army: "I don't have too"
Private: "Let me out or I'll complain to the public"
Army: "Complain to the public and we'll smear your name across the country. After your unit is done gang raping you, every hillbilly hick in Kansas will want a piece of you."
Private: "Why would you be so evil?"
Army: "Because we can't afford to let soldiers think that they can join and leave the army any time they like. We have to maintain order, even when it means pissing on the little guy"
Private: "Fine, I'm going to Canada"
Army: "See ya"- tykwondingo, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2not quite...
but what would I know? hahaha - usaf1984, on 07/16/2008, -2/+0You lost me at the racial slurs.
- Lyk4n, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Hillbilly hick is not a racial slur, you could be one while being black, white, yellow, or blue. You sir, are an idiot..
- tykwondingo, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2not quite...
- usaf1984, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1I believe you get let out under a general discharge.
- tykwondingo, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Yep, 'Under Honorable Conditions' is a General Discharge.
- tykwondingo, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1From what I understood anyway...
- rudeboyskunk, on 07/15/2008, -15/+6Nope, tried that one with a recruiter, and he just looked at me with a blank stare and said, "So?"
- Deaconstructed, on 07/15/2008, -26/+12I don't say this often but ***** CANADA for this one. Only in America can a war deserter become the learder of the country and run an illegal war - have others try to desert their 'CAUSE' only to be punished.
- travis1982, on 07/15/2008, -6/+6please leave.
- CoMpUtErITGuY, on 07/15/2008, -44/+38Finally, Canada is doing something right. What do you think the military is? A vacation? What did you expect?
- thesonofdarwin, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9WMDs.
- keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Found them. Now what?
- Jonascord, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1You candy asses say "WMDs" like there weren't any, and that poor ol' Saddam was just funnin' when he used them in Kurdistan.
- marx2k, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Oh... now we actually FOUND WMDs?
- Jonascord, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Google 'Chemical Ali", *****. He is about to hang in Iraq for using poison gas (that's a "WMD", *****!)
Before the fighting started, the stocks still on hand were shipped to Syria on "commercial" flights by the Iraqi military. We (Allied Intel) spent two years looking for them, where they were made, stored, (oddly the Ba'athists were not real forthcoming about them.) and found out where they were and where they went. The stores and shells were sent out with the idea that the Syria would give them back to the Ba'athists when they asked. The Syrians, however, "failed to remember" that part about giving the them back. Occasional IEDs have built around chemical shells, but, thanks to 7Th century knowledge, they do not disperse well.
Just because the Dhimmi Ministry of Lies chooses not to issue a memo to you does not mean that the truth is not out there.
- thesonofdarwin, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9WMDs.
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -24/+54this happens when you start wars based on lies and get people to sign up based on those same lies.
- ventralnet, on 07/15/2008, -10/+3oh *****, he is a big boy and made the decision to sign up. its not like its an open draft
- johndavidjack, on 07/15/2008, -9/+2He probably signed up for the 'college plan'...
Typical limp dick cum drunk nancy boy...Hopefully he gets what he deserves, his ass kicked... - Jonascord, on 07/15/2008, -4/+1Are these "lies" you keep screaming about the ones that gassed all those Kurds?
- Belin, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1No, those "lies" are the ones the US gave Saddam so he could fight with the Russians.
Also, I don't detect any screaming.
- Belin, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1No, those "lies" are the ones the US gave Saddam so he could fight with the Russians.
- plaunie, on 07/15/2008, -14/+28Your all assuming that he made a sound decision about joining up based on the available information; that he was not mis-informed, persuaded, or otherwise coerced into signing up... I would submit the DOD $1.4 Billion advertising and recruitment budget (as of 06, i'm sure it hasn't gone down any) as evidence that they do everything in their power (ie 1.4 billion dollars worth of powe... that's with a B folks) to make sure you come to the 'right' decision
- superkendall, on 07/15/2008, -9/+6So are you saying he was too dumb to resist simple advertising? That's not very kind. There are plenty of other products heavily advertised that no-one buys.
- Ph34rb0t, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9FACT: Advertising works on the target market.
If you saw it as simple advertising, you are outside of their scope. :) - pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4superkendall: you are calling him dumb, but you still believe those lies.
- Ph34rb0t, on 07/15/2008, -2/+9FACT: Advertising works on the target market.
- Hetman, on 07/15/2008, -3/+11Really? You are telling me when I join the army I do not automatically turn into a mountian climbing sword swinging bad ass marine? Because I was under the impression that everything I see on T.V. is real.
- UrlorJkron, on 07/15/2008, -1/+9You don't become any kind of marine when you join the army.
- skipdog172, on 07/15/2008, -1/+7wow. it baffles me how many diggs this comment has. so, folks can no longer be responsible for their decisions if their decision was a part of an ADVERTISEMENT! lol. sad
- plaunie, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Advertising's goal is to help you decide to buy/do/think whatever they want. It works. If it didn't work, it wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry.
Maybe he's the only person the $1.5B advertising budget has convinced to join the army, then he found out it was nothing like the commercial.
remember; the army is so strong, they don't need verbs.
ARMY STRONG - Belin, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Regular advertising has some rules about fairness. Like you can't advertise a product as having features that it doesn't.
Apparently, the Pentagon has been sponsoring press liaisons that advertise various talking points. It turns out that those talking points are in many cases, lies.
- plaunie, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Advertising's goal is to help you decide to buy/do/think whatever they want. It works. If it didn't work, it wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry.
- Eyaluth, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The fact that he did not show up twice when required to Canadian Authorities, which is why he is currently under arrest shows something else.
- superkendall, on 07/15/2008, -9/+6So are you saying he was too dumb to resist simple advertising? That's not very kind. There are plenty of other products heavily advertised that no-one buys.
- deathsythe, on 07/15/2008, -25/+12That's what you get for dodging the draft / deserting your nation
- jpop, on 07/15/2008, -1/+7Just to clarify, he wasn't dodging the draft since he wasn't drafted...
- CanceledCzech, on 07/15/2008, -4/+2Yeah, also, ***** my nation. Bunch of imperialistic "manifest destiny" *****.
- deathsythe, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2If you don't like it then get the ***** out - we don't want you.
- seraphisset, on 07/15/2008, -16/+51American here - It seems like Canada is falling more and more in lock-step with the US every day. Do you Canadians get the same impression?
- jorisb, on 07/15/2008, -17/+6Canadian here, no. I'm sick of accommodating U.S. army deserters.
I don't believe Canada considered the invasion of Iraq a violation of international law. And so this guy does not qualify as a refugee.
Besides, he will probably just get a couple weeks in prison. That's what happens if you break a contract like that.- AchaIemoipas, on 07/15/2008, -3/+8'I don't believe Canada considered the invasion of Iraq a violation of international law."
Yes it did. That's why we aren't there. The decision was made that Iraq was unjustified and we always side with the UN, who declared the war to be illegal.
And the sentence for deserting the American army under contractual obligation ranges from 3 years in prison to death by hanging depending on the circumstances. - Bittermanscolon, on 07/15/2008, -3/+5Canadian here and I don't agree. The invasion of iraq was illegal, and the guy has every right not to participate in an illegal war he doesn't believe it.
Now, he could have done something different, I don't know his options but...anyway. Canada is just the ***** little brother of the US doing ANYTHING they say.
Place hold Afghanistan for me would you please while I commit more crimes in Iraq, OK?
Why also are YOU accommodating deserters? You have them over to your house? Have to put up with them waltzing around your property or something?!?! wtf, you don't "accomodate" anything pal.
Take the morally high road and help out a person who doesn't want to be shipped over so they can shoot women and children.
Douche. Shameful Canadian. - jorisb, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3I'm just going to respond to the two replies I received.
@AchaIemoipas
It turns out Ottawa does not consider the invasion illegal, you were wrong about that. And our courts are not allowed to rule whether or not it was illegal. The U.S. didn't join the international criminal court, and so they can't be tried for it. So I guess it's more of a technicality.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/l ...
A quote from this very court ruling about the punishment of deserters.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM ...
"The vast majority of American deserters have not been prosecuted for desertion, according to evidence before the court, the judge stated in a four-page decision. About 94 per cent of U.S. deserters from 2002 to 2006 were being dealt with administratively, receiving a less-than-honourable discharge from the military."
@Bittermanscolon
Just because you and many canadians personally don't agree with it, doesn't make the war illegal.
And the guy absolutely doesn't have the right to determine whether or not to go fight, when you join the army you lose many of the privileges that civilians have. Imagine every soldier had the option to bail out before being shipped to a war zone...
Finally, my sister had a deserter live in her student rental house. He is an illegal immigrant, without social insurance number. He doesn't pay income tax.. you get the point.
Anyway, there's some more realistic facts. I know you won't care about it, because opinion matters more around here.
- AchaIemoipas, on 07/15/2008, -3/+8'I don't believe Canada considered the invasion of Iraq a violation of international law."
- TheDooku, on 07/15/2008, -4/+44Another Canadian here: We do get the same impression, his name is Harper and he's a giant douche with his nose jammed so far up America's ass he doesn't know what to do with our own citizens...so he'll do what he's asked with someone else's. We need an election too.
- metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2Another Canadian here: I get the same impression, his name is TheDooku and he's a giant douche with his nose jammed so far up his own ass he doesn't understand anything about internation politics or the fact that Canada and America have always shared similiar policies, so anti-conservative groups just like to push that issue without any basis to make Conservatives seem un-patriotic.
- jeffman12, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2Speak for yourself TheDooku
- VanD, on 07/15/2008, -2/+19Canadian here - Every day, I'm tired of this. The American government is making wrong decisions and I laugh. Then the Canadian government does the same *****, or worse and I cry.
- digidevil, on 07/15/2008, -2/+6Absolutely. Ever since we were stupid enough as a nation to vote the ***** Conservatives into power, its been a long slow dive right down to the political standards of the Americans. It's really, really sad, and it can never be reversed.
- cros, on 07/15/2008, -1/+6Canadian here: you're right and TheDooku nailed it with Harper though I think it runs way deeper than just him. The entire conservative party up here has been groomed by the republicans from the US. You can basically figure out what their next move on a subject will be by asking yourself "what would George W and his gang do?" The really sad part here is voter complacency in Canada. I hope the next election will prove me wrong but honestly, people don't realize that we still can have a say by voting.
- 4321234, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Harper has his head up Bush's ass. Of course. That explains why all that ***** keeps coming out of Bush's mouth.
- metroidragon, on 07/16/2008, -6/+1Canadian here:
I am ashamed that you people actually call yourselves Canadians. Our country's economy is thriving right now under the Conservative government, they have upheld all the liberal policies they promised that they would, they have kept to their promise, and they have not, ever, backed down to an american demand or tried to appease america with something that would not benifit Canada.
I ask you, let's see some proof here, give me some links; at least to back up these claims, because I think you all have your heads up your collective asses, not Harper.- digidevil, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4Well, let's lead off with an article that just gets right to the point:
http://mostlywater.org/fifty_two_reasons_to_drive_ ...
A few various articles dug up via casual Google search:
http://www.comicbookbin.com/news1187.html
http://www.slaw.ca/2008/06/12/bill-c-61-copyright- ...
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/06/12/tech ...
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/01/19/conserva ...
(one of my favorites-- he looks like a transvestite in the included picture! The point of this article is that we have here a man who wants to impose HIS definition of marriage on everyone and feels justified doing so - and yes I realize he's since declared the same-sex marriage issue "closed," but only because he lost that one BIG time:))
Harper calles the Kyoto accord a "socialist scheme":
http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/environmental ...
Privatization of schools:
http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/canada/2008/P ...
Harper hanging out with some of his evil warlord buddies in Afghanistan:
http://69.28.198.79/articles/canada/2006/Harper-Sh ...
Mulroney vs. Harper: Who's Worse?:
http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/canada/2006/M ...
Canada will no longer appeal on behalf of imprisoned Canadians in foreign countries facing the death penalty:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ...
Privatization of healthcare:
http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/harperpromise ...
http://cupe.ca/health-care/Letter_from_Paul_Moi
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/jul/22/in ...
Harper brings US style media control to Canada (clip from The Hour):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvE9EN4YPGM&feature ...
Prison privatization:
http://www.straight.com/article-119340/stephen-har ...
I think that's enough for now, happy to dig up more in my spare time if you need em. Thanks.
- digidevil, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4Well, let's lead off with an article that just gets right to the point:
- jorisb, on 07/15/2008, -17/+6Canadian here, no. I'm sick of accommodating U.S. army deserters.
- santaliqueur, on 07/15/2008, -15/+31I don't get it. This feels like another story to demonize the US, but the man signed a contract, and I'm pretty sure it didn't say anything like "this contract becomes invalid if your duties evolve, and you no longer believe you are doing the right thing".
Like it or not, he signed a contract.- meekerunger, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4Here's the problem:
Lots of people in America don't like to take responsibility for their actions. - Hawk313, on 07/16/2008, -1/+0The contract is null and void if he was not given accurate information before the contract was signed. You "contract" people need to realize that. The United States Congress was lied to as well so they voted for the War Authorization Bill under false pretenses. It's no secret that George Tenant and his "Slam Dunk" comments were total fabrications. Cheney was fully culpable in making that happen. I think he is totally justified in refusing to join in this madness! The warmongers will stop at nothing to get fresh meat for their wars of aggression.
- santaliqueur, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1The contract is NOT null and void. Try arguing that in court, they will laugh you out of the place. I feel for the guy, but his contract is valid, no matter what happens. If there is no war, if there is an unjust war, or if the military is randomly shooting people in the face. It has nothing to do with the legal document he signed.
- meekerunger, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4Here's the problem:
- Mikhail101, on 07/15/2008, -14/+16I dont see whats the problem, you signed up for service didnt you? Its our country we can't just let Americans come in when they want.
- grmclaren, on 07/15/2008, -31/+34I feel ashamed for Canada.
- darylyounge, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1Then get the ***** out.
- superkendall, on 07/15/2008, -10/+30Taking in people not wanting to participate in an involuntary draft (which we no longer have, nor will we again because it just doesn't work) is TOTALLY different than taking in criminals who take an oath by choice and then seek to break it.
Should Canada also take in people on the run from the law for other crimes as well?- orangefly, on 07/15/2008, -3/+8crimes as in when people in the US get more prison time for growing pot than murderers and rapests....yes they should....
by the way, they will take sex offenders in the US military but not drug offenders....nice huh....- hdhock3y, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Because we all know people are not capable of making their own decisions that (some) drugs are bad and we need people to tell us which ones we can and can not use, duh.
- Resiroth, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1About the draft. Why the ***** did we reinstate the selective service? It should be banned plain and simple. At least women will have to go the next time which means there will be even a bigger uproar compared to Vietnam.
- orangefly, on 07/15/2008, -3/+8crimes as in when people in the US get more prison time for growing pot than murderers and rapests....yes they should....
- jcastillo81, on 07/15/2008, -8/+29He signed a piece of paper to go over there and die fightin' for Iraqi freedom! If he feels lied to and cheated, too bad, send his ass to... Oh, excuse me I have to go refill my coffee.
- f3d0r0v, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Best reply in this thread. Most the nerds on this site will never have to worry about their life being taken from them to push a corrupt governments agenda.
- PeterBWiggin, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1That is because most the nerds on this site won't sign up for the military.
- f3d0r0v, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Best reply in this thread. Most the nerds on this site will never have to worry about their life being taken from them to push a corrupt governments agenda.
- rbk303, on 07/15/2008, -6/+3Thanks SPP!
- spkrcity, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1He's referring to the Security and Prosperity Partnership you idiots.
- ericjohnson0, on 07/15/2008, -3/+7Meanwhile, they don't intend on giving this one back anytime soon:
http://thesaloon.net/blog/_archives/2008/7/15/3794 ...- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3he was crossing the border with an undeclared pistol?
Shope was arrested because he didn't declare that he had a pistol, said Canadian Federal Prosecutor Michael Robb.
If Shope had told customs agents about the firearm when asked, Robb said he would have had three choices: leave it and pick it up upon returning; ship it to a U.S. address; or turn around and go back to the States.
http://www.middletownjournal.com/news/content/oh/s ...
- pintomp3, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3he was crossing the border with an undeclared pistol?
- LongBong, on 07/15/2008, -16/+6BLAME CANADA!!! BLAAAAME CANADA!!!
- WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Awww, I can't believe you're getting buried! You have my consolations.
- ericjohnson0, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Same here. I love that song and movie...
- WNW3, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Awww, I can't believe you're getting buried! You have my consolations.
- smacksaw, on 07/15/2008, -8/+14Sorry. That's not how you solve a problem with refusing to participate in the war. You use your chain of command. You use procedure.
And I say good. I was immigrating to Canada two years ago, totally legally from within Canada on an inland sponsorship and *I* got deported for