|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 04/27/2009 : 11:49:19 [Permalink]
|
He couldn't do worse than he'd already done without ruining his credibility for the purposes of the resisters' movement.
|
Again, you're getting something that I didn't see. Banks said Dishonorable Discharge. He didn't get that. That was the official army position, and who knows what they might do to set an example? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 13:23:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Again, you're getting something that I didn't see. Banks said Dishonorable Discharge. He didn't get that. That was the official army position, and who knows what they might do to set an example? |
By the time of the hearing, the Army wanted to just give him a general discharge, and he refused it. The worries he had about what might happen at the hearing were all crap. Your own reference, saying that the Army had no jurisdiction to compel him to serve, show that all his worries were over nothing. If the Army has no jurisdiction, then they can't bring you to Court Martial, thus they can't dishonorably discharge you, and Banks was just blowing hot air. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 16:35:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
| "Deployed" as used by the US military is to station personnel in a foreign country. This is no euphamism. |
And what do you have to add to the discussion besides your opinion? |
A military deployment is a movement of personnel and equipment away from their home port or base; in the case of Sgt. Chiroux, it is a change of duty station overseas. I have been deployed many times in my 12 years in the Navy; not one of those deployment has been anywhere close to "a euphemism for murder" as you so eloquently put it.
Why, Gorgo, do you assume that Valiant Dancer's answer is just opinion? Don't you think it would be more conducive to the discussion to check his references rather than just assuming he's making stuff up? |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 16:49:27 [Permalink]
|
Why, Gorgo, do you assume that Valiant Dancer's answer is just opinion? Don't you think it would be more conducive to the discussion to check his references rather than just assuming he's making stuff up?
|
I didn't assume he's making anything up. I'm not sure what you mean by references. I'm evidently missing something. Help me.
I also didn't say you were using "deploy" as a euphemism for murder. I said he was. He doesn't like the idea that the 18+ year (or more) war against the people of Iraq is murder. I'm glad that you've been deployed and haven't been part of any of the empire-building or attacks on other countries, economic and military that the U.S. has engaged in. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/27/2009 16:52:30 |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 16:58:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Gorgo
Again, you're getting something that I didn't see. Banks said Dishonorable Discharge. He didn't get that. That was the official army position, and who knows what they might do to set an example? |
By the time of the hearing, the Army wanted to just give him a general discharge, and he refused it. The worries he had about what might happen at the hearing were all crap. Your own reference, saying that the Army had no jurisdiction to compel him to serve, show that all his worries were over nothing. If the Army has no jurisdiction, then they can't bring you to Court Martial, thus they can't dishonorably discharge you, and Banks was just blowing hot air. |
It appears he got an Honorable Discharge from Active service, and a General Discharge from the Inactive Ready Reserve.
Every military commitment is for a minimum of 8 years. If you sign a 4-year enlistment, the remainder of your time is spent in the IRR; you become part of a force of personnel who had been recently trained and can be called up in time of national need. There is no drilling requirement in the IRR, you don't get drug tests, you don't need to shave or cut your hair; you only need to keep your service component informed of your contact information.
This is where the "backward draft" propaganda came from. "Former" servicemen and -women became agitated because the military actually called them in rather than attempting to impose an actual draft. This should not have been a surprise to anybody. It's right there in every contract, directly above your signature. It tells you that you are signing up for 8 years, X of which are Active Duty time; typically either 2, 4, or 6 years, depending on initial training requirements.
The Army began calling people back to Active Duty, and only about half of them responded. The rest just ignored their contractual obligation (and the oath they had each sworn). The Army decided it would be a greater waste of resources than it's worth to track those people down, and gave them the benefit of the doubt: perhaps they did not get the letter.
Since IRR personnel are not Active Duty, they are no longer subject to the UCMJ (unless they report for duty); however, the Army can and will discharge somebody from the IRR if it becomes apparent that person is disobeying a legal order to deploy.
A discharge from the IRR does not carry the same weight that a discharge from Active Service carries; however, it will pull up on any background investigation and may limit any potential job or any kind of federal aid. |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 17:10:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
| Why, Gorgo, do you assume that Valiant Dancer's answer is just opinion? Don't you think it would be more conducive to the discussion to check his references rather than just assuming he's making stuff up? |
I didn't assume he's making anything up. I'm not sure what you mean by references. I'm evidently missing something. Help me. |
By implying that Valiant Dancer's clarification of the word "deploy" was only his opinion, you marginalized his contribution to the discussion, suggesting that he was just making it up. If you doubted his statement, don't you think it would have been more productive to ask where he got that idea, rather than dismissing it out of hand?| I also didn't say you were using "deploy" as a euphemism for murder. I said he was. He doesn't like the idea that the 18+ year (or more) war against the people of Iraq is murder. I'm glad that you've been deployed and haven't been part of any of the empire-building or attacks on other countries, economic and military that the U.S. has engaged in. |
I am beginning to understand your point of view. I had interpreted your statements to say that any time the word "deployment" was used it was a euphamism for murder, not just when Valiant Dancer used it.
Why do you feel that our presence in Iraq is a "war against the people" there? Why do you feel it's murder?
For what it's worth, I too am glad I haven't had to attack anybody, and I sincerely hope I never have to. Unlike you, however, I also understand there are times when it may be necessary. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 17:38:07 [Permalink]
|
Unlike you, however, I also understand there are times when it may be necessary.
|
I don't know why you think I think there are not times when it may be necessary
And you're right, maybe I could have stated my disagreement with V. Dancer better, I don't know. That's why I asked if he was going to post more than opinion. That's what I meant. Where are the facts that back up what you say, and please have those facts attempt to engage something I've said. Don't post a link to the entire text of the Geneva Convention.
I have posted information about why I think the way that I do in these numerous discussions, and I agree with what Sgt. Chiroux said about the illegality of the war, so follow the links that I've posted if you want to see what I think about it. If you need more explanation or links, I can find them, or you can look at old discussions.
I have to say that Dave's comments are appreciated. I don't know Chiroux's character. I agree with him, maybe I assumed that because he spoke out in a way that agreed with me, I thought he was a good guy. Maybe not, I still don't know. I appreciate Kil and 'Mooner's points. V. Dancer, I've evidently misunderstood. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 18:36:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
"Deployed" as used by the US military is to station personnel in a foreign country. This is no euphamism.
|
And what do you have to add to the discussion besides your opinion?
|
It's a definition, Gorgo.
You don't want it to be.
Too bad.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 19:30:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
I have to say that Dave's comments are appreciated. I don't know Chiroux's character. I agree with him, maybe I assumed that because he spoke out in a way that agreed with me, I thought he was a good guy. Maybe not, I still don't know. |
I started out really wanting to like the guy, too. But then I started reading what he was saying, and checking that against the facts that I and others have learned about the IRR, and my judgement of his character changed for the worse. Chiroux is obviously seen as courageous by many, but for me, courage has always implied some out-of-the-ordinary risk; some penalty for failure that, if you weren't courageous, you wouldn't choose to toy around with. Chiroux, so far as I can tell, faced no risk at all (and he must know this by now even if he did not 11 months ago), but he's still riding the "courageous" train for all its worth, claiming a "righteous" victory. And he's publicly trying to get others to follow his lead, without publicly acknowledging that he followed a safe path.
Imagine (if you will) a dangerous, craggy mountain, the slope up covered with cacti, vipers and wasps, and Chiroux standing on top, unharmed, waving his arms and shouting at others to come join him, without telling them about the stairs around back.
Kil, does that help distinguish the "asshole" war protestors from the non-asshole ones? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 22:18:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
| Unlike you, however, I also understand there are times when it may be necessary. |
I don't know why you think I think there are not times when it may be necessary |
I apologize if I have misunderstood your point of view. I do not recall you ever conceding that point; in fact, you have only been outspoken against any military action that I can think of. Are there any wars in history with which you agree?| And you're right, maybe I could have stated my disagreement with V. Dancer better, I don't know. That's why I asked if he was going to post more than opinion. That's what I meant. Where are the facts that back up what you say, and please have those facts attempt to engage something I've said. Don't post a link to the entire text of the Geneva Convention. |
How's this?
From the website: "Deployment is defined as any current or past event or activity that relates to duty in the armed forces that involves an operation, location, command, or duty that is different from the military member's normal duty assignment(DoD, JP 1-02, 1994)"| I have posted information about why I think the way that I do in these numerous discussions, and I agree with what Sgt. Chiroux said about the illegality of the war, so follow the links that I've posted if you want to see what I think about it. If you need more explanation or links, I can find them, or you can look at old discussions. |
I disagree with your opinion that US military operations in Iraq constitute a war on the civilians of that country. I have not seen sufficient evidence for your ideas (most of what you present is far from unbiased and is of dubious validity). |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 00:11:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Kil, does that help distinguish the "asshole" war protestors from the non-asshole ones?
|
Dave, we really were asshole's much of the time. We did many stupid things. Our success was that we managed to turn the country against the war, because ultimately, we were right about our reasons for being there, and somehow we got the press on our side. But boy howdy.
I get what you're saying. But the truth is, we would have exploited a story like Chiroux's, turning it to meet our own ends, in a heartbeat. We wouldn't have even noticed the problem.
I'm proud of what we accomplished. But I'm not proud of everything we did. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 00:33:59 [Permalink]
|
I'm proud of what we accomplished. But I'm not proud of everything we did.
|
Well, a lot of what young people do is immature and based on misinformation so let's hang them all. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/28/2009 00:54:34 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 00:48:29 [Permalink]
|
I have not seen sufficient evidence for your ideas (most of what you present is far from unbiased and is of dubious validity).
|
I know the definition of deploy. That is not an issue. I was talking about its use as a euphemism.
That's fine that you disagree, but you haven't brought anything to the table which directly addresses the point. The U.S. is a signatory to the U.N., which prescribes a process by which military action is legal. The U.S. could not even meet the undemocratic, cold war relic definition of legality by going to the U.N. to attack Iraq. The Constitution makes the U.N. Charter the law of the land. Soldiers are bound to uphold the Constitution as is the President. Nuremberg sets a precedent which states that attacking other people without some kind of due process will be held as a crime.
But, let's get away from legality, as that's a secondary issue. The law serves the people. Why is it more ethical for the United States military to attack people outside its borders than it is for other militaries to attack people?
Why is it better for the U.S. to attack Panama, or Nicaragua, or Haiti or Yugoslavia or Iraq, than it is for Iraq to attack Kuwait? What makes each of them right or wrong in what context? Because one states a grievance against another? What is right about the continuing U.S. impoverishment and murder of the Iraqi people? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/28/2009 06:03:47 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 00:52:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally posted by Gorgo
"Deployed" as used by the US military is to station personnel in a foreign country. This is no euphamism.
|
And what do you have to add to the discussion besides your opinion?
|
It's a definition, Gorgo.
You don't want it to be.
Too bad.
|
Sorry if I said something wrong. When I asked you to back up your opinion, I wasn't talking about this particular definition. I was talking about the entire conversation.
(edited to correct a sentence) |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/28/2009 09:47:30 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 06:42:32 [Permalink]
|
| I apologize if I have misunderstood your point of view. I do not recall you ever conceding that point; in fact, you have only been outspoken against any military action that I can think of. Are there any wars in history with which you agree? |
No apologies necessary. I have said that I don't rule out war totally, but that I have been a member of the War Resister's League for a while. In order to join now, you have to agree with this statement of purpose:
| "The War Resisters League affirms that all war is a crime against humanity. We therefore are determined not to support any kind of war, international or civil, and to strive nonviolently for the removal of the causes of war, including racism, sexism and all forms of human exploitation. |
Having said that, until the causes for war are removed (if that's possible) there may be some large scale military actions that could be necessary, but still a "crime" against humanity. Not crime in the legal sense, but in the sense that we have failed as a society if war seems necessary. War (in the sense of a large group of people trying to kill or control another large group of people) is always a crime in the sense that it is unjust, disgraceful and senseless. It leaves the poor poorer, the sick sicker, and the living deader.
I'm pretty well ignorant of most military actions, so I can't say that I'm against all of them. If I were in present-day Iraq, or in war-era Vietnam, I suppose I'd wonder if taking up arms against the U.S. was a pretty good idea. I don't know. Kil said that protestors stopped the war against Vietnam, but we have to add the Vietnamese who were killing soldiers in the mix there somewhere.
I'm not a nonviolent pacifist, and I am not a very good supporter of the WRL. I'm not one to think there is some magical property to nonviolent resistance, and I see no point in, for instance, refusing to pay my taxes. So, I don't know whether there's any point in remaining as a member.
That's pretty long-winded so I'll chop it there and hope that clears something up a little. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Refuses illegal war
