Federal Court rules in favour of U.S. war resister

[SLM]

Well for what it's worth my feeling is that if you agree to conditions upon signing up, you abide by those conditions or accept the (known) consequences of non-acceptance. Simple as that. This guy really doesn't have my sympathy irrespective of what the court has decided.

 

[L Gilbert]

Well for what it's worth my feeling is that if you agree to conditions upon signing up, you abide by those conditions or accept the (known) consequences of non-acceptance. Simple as that. This guy really doesn't have my sympathy irrespective of what the court has decided.

Mine either. Were I in his shoes and a lot younger, though, I'd sooner stay in the States and do my damndest to bring the entire issue of the Iraqi war as a massive, tragic, flagrant waste of human and gov't resources based upon a load of BS. But then back when I was younger I could do quite well for myself simply living in the bush.

 

[CDNBear]

Mine either. Were I in his shoes and a lot younger, though, I'd sooner stay in the States and do my damndest to bring the entire issue of the Iraqi war as a massive, tragic, flagrant waste of human and gov't resources based upon a load of BS.

And that would garner my respect.

I bet it would even garner ES' respect too.

 

[EagleSmack]

Mine either. Were I in his shoes and a lot younger, though, I'd sooner stay in the States and do my damndest to bring the entire issue of the Iraqi war as a massive, tragic, flagrant waste of human and gov't resources based upon a load of BS. But then back when I was younger I could do quite well for myself simply living in the bush.

He had every opportunity to do that. He chose to join the Army instead.

 

[L Gilbert]

He had every opportunity to do that. He chose to join the Army instead.

Um, yeah. I mean even if I were in the military. So I'd have likely been drummed out with a DD on an Article 92 and/or Article 10 (I think. the one about speaking out against policy and whatnot).
Rabbitting ain't my thing.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Honestly... why should we touch this. You're saying the invasion of Iraq is the same as Hitler's Germany killing jews gypsies etc. Am I right?

It is not the same as Hitler's orders to kill all Gypsys and Jews, but it is the same as him invading France & Poland and all the others. They were no threat to Germany and Iraq was no threat to the US. That makes both actions illegal invasions of foreign sovereign nations to control territory and resources that belong to others. That is really the heart of the matter here. Why should these soldiers take part in such action?

 

[Ron in Regina]

Closed the Thread until the opportunity arises to run through it,
as it seems theres been some hanky-panky in here somewhere
that warrants further review.

 

[Ron in Regina]

If members want to play the FIFY game, have at it, but be sure to highlight the altered text or alert us to it. But do not surreptitiously change a members' words when you include their original quote. That type of underhandedness will be dealt with with a little time in the closet or cooler. Your choice.


We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

Ah.....yeah.....what he said!

 

[DaSleeper]

Back on again...

 

[Cliffy]

Iraq Veterans Against the War Speak Out (1 of 4) - YouTube

Who is the real terrorist? Amazing Speech of Iraq Veteran Against War - YouTube

iraq war: us soldier throws his medals and stars!!! and quits - YouTube

 

[Spade]

judgment at nuremberg verdict - YouTube

From the script, quote:

"There are those in our own country too who today speak of the “protection of country” — of “survival.” A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient — to look the other way.

"Well, the answer to that is “survival as what?” A country isn’t a rock. It’s not an extension of one’s self. It’s what it stands for. It’s what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult!

"Before the people of the world, let it now be noted that here, in our decision, this is what we stand for: justice, truth, and the value of a single human being."

 

[CDNBear]

What are you trying to debate Spade, the Iraq war or the charge of desertion?

 

[earth_as_one]

Actually if you read the first post, I believe the topic is related to a federal court ruling in favor of an American soldier and outspoken critic of US foreign policy. The judge ruled that this outspoken American proved he wouldn't get a fair court martial hearing in the US

 

[CDNBear]

Actually if you read the first post, I believe the topic is related to a federal court ruling in favor of an American soldier and outspoken critic of US foreign policy. The judge ruled that this outspoken American proved he wouldn't get a fair court martial hearing in the US

I read the OP.

If you could follow along, you would have noticed that the discussion has taken a turn.

 

[taxslave]

I read the OP.

If you could follow along, you would have noticed that the discussion has taken a turn.

Only EAO is permitted to change the course of a discussion. You should know that by now.

 

[CDNBear]

Only EAO is permitted to change the course of a discussion. You should know that by now.

I know, my bad.

 

[EagleSmack]

Actually if you read the first post, I believe the topic is related to a federal court ruling in favor of an American soldier and outspoken critic of US foreign policy. The judge ruled that this outspoken American proved he wouldn't get a fair court martial hearing in the US

More likely they know he is guilty as charged and he would for sure be convicted.

Oh well... keep him... support him. Someday he will return home and will be caught. They all come home someday.

 

[earth_as_one]

That's not the way Canada's refugee laws work. If in the judge's opinion (based on the evidence), the American soldier would get a fair trial, he'd have been sent home. Our court didn't determine his guilt or innocence.

 

[EagleSmack]

That's not the way Canada's refugee laws work. If in the judge's opinion (based on the evidence), the American soldier would get a fair trial, he'd have been sent home. Our court didn't determine his guilt or innocence.

C'mon... they know he's a deserter and they know he will go to jail. It is an open shut case and they know it.

Regardless... he'll be home for a funeral or other event and he will be met by the proper authorities.

 

[CDNBear]

That's not the way Canada's refugee laws work.

How would you know?

I read legal rulings for sh!ts and giggles. I don't know how the whole of Canadian refugee laws work.

Your claims about international law have been proven erroneous more times than I can remember.

If in the judge's opinion (based on the evidence), the American soldier would get a fair trial, he'd have been sent home.

That depends on what the Court determined to be fair.

Ing was kept in Canada because of the death penalty.

The Judges ruling cited the harsher sentence that Tindungan would face, with little recourse, and balanced it against Canadian and international law, as his reasoning.

That's not an indictment of the fairness of the Courts Martial process, thankfully, especially since the Canadian system is quite similar.

Comparing the military justice system to the civilian courts is a major error in judgment.

Our court didn't determine his guilt or innocence.

LOL, that's not what ES said.