Thursday, November 15, 2007
Deserters
What do you think should be done with deserters? Canada recently decided that American military personnel who came to them seeking refugee status would be refused asylum. This opens the way for them to be deported to the United States, where they could face court martial for going AWOL. Under military law, desertion during wartime is punishable by death, but as far as I know, there aren’t any deserters on death row. Apparently, most deserters are just dishonorably discharged. It seems to me that if someone volunteered to join the military, and then changed their mind and wanted out, they should be allowed to get out. I think a dishonorable discharge is fair. It goes on their record and will follow them for the rest of their life. Chalk it up to poor decision-making and move on. I don’t think there should even be a threat that they might have to spend time in jail. We have enough people who are willing to serve in the military without making it uncomfortable for those who want out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I'm a pacifist, and this is still a tough question.
At one time, folks served for a free eduction. Now, they face death or loss of limb and not much compensation for their loss. The Health Care is inadeguate. To me it's criminal what these folks are asked to do for so little in return.
My answer then is, let them opt out.
I think a dishonorable discharge is fair too. I realize that the soldiers signed up on their own free will.. However, it seems like lately most of the troops being sent to Iraq are in the reserves. In those cases I can see how they might be in over their heads and want out of the military. I know a lot of people that signed up for the reserves before the war to make extra money for their families, pay for school, etc. And they ended up doing up to two or three tours in Iraq. I think a dishonorable discharge is a fair way to let soldiers opt out. Imprisonment seems too harsh a punishment to me.
I don't think they should put them in jail. The military is just like any other job and you should be able to quit if you don't like it. There are plenty of people who like being in the army, let them do it.
Opt Out!?
Volunteered!?
You do not volunteer, you sign over 65 pages of material and contracts that require by law that you serve your country for the next 4 to 8 years. It is a contract and serve your country not a volunteer program.
If you sign up and put your word to do something, then you should uphold to your word and what you said.
This society mindset that you can just make decisions and choices and not be responsible for them after you go back on them, is Crazy!
When you sign up for the military, you sign to protect the Constitution and America at all cost from all foreign invaders and etc. They did not tell people come and we'll put you through over 12 weeks of training then if you like it stay and if you dont like go ahead leave. The military is not something for the weak hearted nor is it something for those who want to play cops and robbers on the weekend and then go back to there regular lifestyles. It is something that you sign up and you put your life on the line for others and your country.
Letting people opt out is just another way of letting people go back on their word. Don't sign up if you don't want to put your life on the line....Don't sign up if you dont want to be challenged and worked hard. period. Join the Police Academy, but dont join the military. WAR is not bloodless nor is it easy, people die, people are injured if you can handle the heat stay out of the kitchen(and Don't Join, because if you do then we expect that you're going to hold to what you say and put your life on the line for America).
Those who Opt Out should have a stay and place set for them at Ft.Leavenworth.
-Nathan Guest
Nathan, I'm talking more about the Reserve. I can see if you signed up for a regular branch of the military but the Reserve is different to me. The U.S. Army Reserve website says the Reserve is supposed to perform "a complementary role to the Active component". But that just hasn't been the case in recent years. Soldiers in the Reserve have been the ones sent to Iraq because they can't get people to join full time branches of the military with an unpopular war going on. They tempt Reservists with promises of bonuses, funding for college, etc. to get them to sign up. I know a guy in the Reserve that signed up before the war. He has been sent to Iraq THREE times. He's tried to get out of the tours because it's interfering with his work, school, etc. (And honestly, how many times can they send you before you don't make it back at all?) I think the soldiers in the Reserve have been doing all the dirty work. I can totally see how it would turn out to be more than they expected when you thought you were signing up to get money for school then land in Iraq. Thus the "opt out". ;)
Something else to consider is that many of the deserters are very young. When you combine that with the assertive recruiting tactics that the military uses, I can understand how these people may have got sucked into something that they didn't want. I know a guy that went into a recruiting office to get some information on the military, and two days later the army came to take him to training. He wasn't even sure what was going on or how he ended up in the army. Yes....he wasn't the brightest person I've ever known, but still. If a person starts out unsure and then signs documents they didn't understand, they shouldn't have to go to jail over it.
I think the dishonorable discharge is fine. If they want out, that's their decision. They know what kind of harassment they will get for quitting. It's not called a dishonorable discharge for nothing. If they joined thinking it was a chance to be all gung-ho action hero, but faced the reality of it, why make them stay in that hell?
I think they should be allowed to opt out and have a discharge on their records. I mena death or losing limbs... Thats taking it too far. They arent convicted repeat killers or psychotic. They just made a bad decision.
First of, there's a big difference between seeking a separation from the service and deserting. Desertion is more like running away from the front lines and not stopping. And as a point of technicality, we're not "At war" in the official capacity, so shooting them on sight is off the table.
This is a tough question. I'm sympathetic to the it's a job thing, Especially for those in the reserves and national guard who signed up before the war. This thing has drawn out longer and been much more casualty-ridden than anyone thought it would be, much less what anyone would have dreamed of in 2000. There is another side tho, it is a contract. In civil law, we're all very quick to defend the rights of a contract. If this is what you agreed to, you have to do it or else you forfeit all your gains and can be penalized w/ significant fees. In this case of course, the wronged party is the government and it's military law, not civil so awarding monetary damages would be odd.
to liz m:
I do believe you are right, in relation to the reserves and enlisted men and officers come under different circumstances. Most reservist are in college and earning their degrees to become officers, and I do not beleive that should be pulled away from teir studies. However, for those that are enlisted, for us to say it is just ok to opt out, is excusing their responsiblity of their word.
-Nathan Guest
I believe that they should be hung like they did in the old days. If someone makes a promise to their country and can't uphold that promise because of fear then they don't deserve the choice to live. Remember that the military is entirely optional and a person chooses to enter. A real soldier and a real American is someone that will do anything for their country no matter what may happen to them or what they are getting in return. The chance to serve and protect the country they live in is the ultimate reward for a real soldier and if a soldier can't uphold this why should they be let out without a punishment.
Post a Comment