Ottawa to make Canada less inviting for U.S. deserters

[petros]

I wouldn't want to be in their head. Would you?

 

[EagleSmack]

I wouldn't want to be in their head. Would you?

Heck no for many more reasons than seeing combat. I don't wear it on my sleeve but I have. It sucked but I deal with it and that is all that I will say about it.

I wouldn't want to be in their head because I can't and never dreamed of deserting. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes either. I assure you, Canada is not doing them any favors by keeping them and keeping them in limbo as they are.

Since this thread I've read a lot more on them and every day they hang by the phone waiting to see if they are being deported and how their case is going. Canada has already deported a few so the others are just waiting. Some have lost their families as they just can't stand that type of life.

How are you helping them?

 

[JLM]

Ottawa to make Canada less inviting for U.S. deserters - CTV News

:-?

There is obviously something wrong with my thinking as the solution TO ME is just too simple. I think this is a matter where the thinking heads of each country should get together. What is it these objecters are objecting to? My guess is it is violence and killing.............I can relate to that........as there is no way I want to be in a position where I have to kill an innocent person. Surely to God out of a population of 300 million people not all them have to be ear marked to take up arms. Is there not a way they can serve their country peacefully.....................like cooking for the soldiers or washing their socks or dressing their wounds? I guess if they object to those sort of things then there is a problem.

 

[EagleSmack]

There is obviously something wrong with my thinking as the solution TO ME is just too simple. I think this is a matter where the thinking heads of each country should get together. What is it these objecters are objecting to? My guess is it is violence and killing.............I can relate to that........as there is no way I want to be in a position where I have to kill an innocent person. Surely to God out of a population of 300 million people not all them have to be ear marked to take up arms. Is there not a way they can serve their country peacefully.....................like cooking for the soldiers or washing their socks or dressing their wounds? I guess if they object to those sort of things then there is a problem.

However it is not that simple. Some of the deserters have seen their share of the sh** and just have had it. Others did not even go over there and went AWOL. One guy wasn't even going over there and F***ed up in the states and ran to escape justice. He was in the USAF for crying out loud and now he is running around Canada as if he actually saw something.

You say that it should be simple and let them change jobs. It's not that simple because it does not work that way in the military. I was in the infantry and at times it sucked. At times I wished I was passing out weapons from the armory, chilling in some admin office with women Marines, or driving AMTRAKs. I could not say...

"Sir, the Grunts (infantry) suck and I'd rather be fixing radios."

When you do that for one, then you have to do it for anyone who decides they'd rather be doing something else for whatever reason. You give one guy a break and don't give another guy then the morale falls and you have dissent. If you're a grunt and your unit is being deployed...you're going...that's that.

 

[JLM]

However it is not that simple. Some of the deserters have seen their share of the sh** and just have had it.

Yep, I hear you, there's times in life when everyone just has to "bite the bullet"- pun not intended. I do not believe in conscription however, unless as a last resort.

 

[EagleSmack]

Yep, I hear you, there's times in life when everyone just has to "bite the bullet"- pun not intended. I do not believe in conscription however, unless as a last resort.

None of these folks have been conscripted.

 

[JLM]

None of these folks have been conscripted.

I realize that, but there was a time when they were.

 

[Cliffy]

I believe the proper term in the US is drafted, as in draft animal.

 

[Machjo]

Just a point about conscientious objection. There is actually no international law that guarantees a right to conscientious objection. Even according to international laws there is no restriction on a country to conscript soldiers. That said, a soldier does have a right and a duty to uphold the Geneva Convention.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Two dumb wars, those deserters are heroes.

 

[Cliffy]

Two dumb wars, those deserters are heroes.

Is there such a thing as a smart war? War is ignorant and stupid but it is profitable. Some people think that is cool.

 

[Machjo]

Two dumb wars, those deserters are heroes.

How so? If the wars were illegal, could they not have challenged it in court? Heroes don't run from a chance to challenge what they believe to be injustice.

 

[Cliffy]

How so? If the wars were illegal, could they not have challenged it in court? Heroes don't run from a chance to challenge what they believe to be injustice.

I think that you are naive if you think they would have a chance to challenge it in a court of law, domestic or international. The economy of the world runs on war. No court will challenge the right of companies to garner obscene profit from the death of insignificant peasants. Any judge would seal his/her own death sentence for interfering with profit from war. The world condemned the Iraqi war as illegal. Was anything done about it? Could anything be done about it?

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

How so? If the wars were illegal, could they not have challenged it in court? Heroes don't run from a chance to challenge what they believe to be injustice.

I'm not saying these war are illegal, wars are political creations, not legal creations. We can invade Iceland/Japan/Greenland if we want, but if we do we will pay a steep political price. Just like the US is now paying a steep political price by being seen as reckless. They are unable to reel in the military-industrial complex. These dumb endless wars have more cost than benefit to the majority.

There's a lot of rah rah patriotism in the US that convinces people to do things in the US that Canadians have little awareness of. Then these dumb guys realize they are cannon fodder for the military psychos and want to get out. Unlike women, they cannot get pregnant and leave the military.

I have a modest understanding of this Americanism because I went to a high school where during basketball and football season we had rousing weekly pep rallies on Friday afternoons to spur the teams on. They were are 2:45 so all the students had to attend or you were skipping out and would be punished.

At one of these pep rallies, when we ran outside, I saw an opposing team football player being burned in effigy and hurled into a big fiery drum. It was very exciting. State sanctioned enthusiasm that causes groupthink for the big game/war.

Let all these deserters stay in Canada as long as they want I say. :canada:

Is there such a thing as a smart war? War is ignorant and stupid but it is profitable. Some people think that is cool.

Not all wars are totally dumb. WW2 was okay, Hitler had to be stopped. There are/were colonizers out there who treat their colonized brutally, and I don't want to stop them from being less oppressed. So they have to rise up. But less war is better, especially for us.

 

[CDNBear]

I know you can be a very effective debater.

Right back at you.

And I still feel you are avoiding my point.

I'm not, but on this issue, though I have an extremely broad view, I still give no quarter.

This is exactly how you are avoiding my point. I know you can see beyond my exaggerated scenario of soldiers ordered to rape women.

Ya, so? There are no orders that remotely compare to that, being made. If you're given an order that you question the legality of, there are channels that you can take to make that known.

My point exactly: The moral judgement of a deserter must be based on the moral actions of the army. I used an exaggeration to clearly demonstrate this. Clearly you wouldn't condemn a deserter if he deserted because he was ordered to rape women or kill innocent people.

Yes I would. As I said, there are channels that must be taken. Running away does nothing but prove your cowardice. A truly brave Soldier would take the appropriate action, disobey the order, file a report outlining why and then proceed through the appropriate channels to make sure the Officer that gave those orders was dealt with.

And surely you wouldn't condemn an old German guy who fought in the Nazi army but at one point in the war, decided to desert after finding out what was going on in the concentration camps.

Yes, actually I would, unless he was a guard at one of the facilities.

This is on the extreme side of the spectrum. My point is that there IS a moral spectrum and as far as I know, the Irak war pretty much falls into the ambiguous middle of it in Canada. The way I understand it, the way you judge a deserter depends on the situation in which he deserted.

True, somewhat.

Personally, I don't think the US army was right to go into Irak the way they did. And it seems obvious to me that the biggest incentive to do it was NOT out of humanitarian concern for the people of Irak and NOT out of concern for the safety of Americans. It was purely done out of long term economic interest for the fat cats who live off selling weapons and oil.

I actually agree. But that is why the US has a standing Army. To protect and advance American interests.

That is what I think of the Irak war.

I know, which is where I saw your bias.

So who would I be to throw stones at someone who deserted to avoid the Irak war? A hypocrite. That's what I think of those who don't agree with the Irak war but vilify deserters who avoided that war.

Then I'm a hypocite, I can live with that. It's not like it's a brand new revelation anyways.

But as has been pointed out, the US Army has a classification for Soldiers that wish to be non combatants. Even if those applications are rejected, they aren't in the business of putting those people on the front lines anyways. It's counter productive, dangerous and waste of resources.

Not to mention, if you go through the chain of command, or file a complaint with the JAG, about being given orders that you felt were against the rules of armed conflict, or the Geneva Convention. The Army is most likely going to find some quiet little corner of the world to store you in for the duration.

And when it comes to our national position on the issue, I see some form of hypocrisy in the idea of condemning deserters for deserting a war we didn't want to fight.

Again, if they have an issue, they have channels they can follow/take to either leave the service, or be billeted in some situation where they are not a danger to their fellow Soldiers, or have the issue corrected.

Of course, the fools should have known what they were getting into. That's obvious.

The US did go into Vietnam not so long ago.

Right, which makes this conversation pointless.

One ought to know that the US army tends to actually do some fighting around the world and sometimes for questionable reasons. And I'm curious about your opinion on that matter. What do you think of Vietnam deserters considering there was a draft?

This is a tough question, I'm torn between knowing dodgers and deserters that I found to be high quality men, while having to balance that against my opinion of desertion and avoidance. While fully grasping the effects of combat during that action, that I have seen first hand, in family members. I also think that mandatory service is a good thing, although I do not believe that anyone serving their nation as part of mandatory conscription, should be forced to perform combat duties.

But even viewing the Vietnam war with a contemporary eye, I would have enlisted voluntarily, had I been old enough, or even born, lol. You are talking to someone that has a very deep seeded Warrior mentality, who honestly believes there are but two honorable ways to die. In combat or giving your life for another.

Honestly, I just can't wrap my head around running away. It says clearly on my arm, "Honour, Courage, Loyalty. Never Retreat, Never Surrender."

I'll try to drop the condescending tone. But I'll keep my bias as you keep yours.

Fair enough.;-)

Let's say they are not... (North Korean and Iranian deserters)

Without having any real knowledge of their military jurisprudence, standing orders, and so on, I really can't comment with any real honesty. Anything I did say, would be pure conjecture and based on a preconceived notion of what their military jurisprudence would be, based on my opinion of their nation as a whole.

I'm sincerely glad you weren't raped in prison.

You think you're glad!!! lol...;-)

 

[EagleSmack]

Two dumb wars, those deserters are heroes.

Well then...send them home so we can give them their heroes welcome!

Let all these deserters stay in Canada as long as they want I say. :canada:


.

Nah, send them back so they can be punished properly. Then after they do their time in jail, pick up their Dishonorable Discharges THEN they can go back to Canada and you can take care of them forever.

 

[s_lone]

Ya, so? There are no orders that remotely compare to that, being made. If you're given an order that you question the legality of, there are channels that you can take to make that known.

Yes I would. As I said, there are channels that must be taken. Running away does nothing but prove your cowardice. A truly brave Soldier would take the appropriate action, disobey the order, file a report outlining why and then proceed through the appropriate channels to make sure the Officer that gave those orders was dealt with.

All right. I do get your point. There are ways to make your point about not agreeing with what you are ordered to do within the rules and philosophy of the army. I can go by with that.

Yes, actually I would, unless he was a guard at one of the facilities.

But I am still surprised about the Nazi soldier guy who doesn't want Jews to be burned in ovens. I mean, what was going on in the concentration camps were orders coming from the top, how do you seriously believe a soldier could rise against his own army and be taken seriously?

And that is mostly the point I'm trying to make. Desertion becomes a sensible option when the whole mission of the army you are in becomes perverted (in the sense of the deserter of course)

I actually agree. But that is why the US has a standing Army. To protect and advance American interests.

It's very debatable whether or not the Irak war truly advanced American interest. It advances some rather limited American interest. It's a total humanitarian and financial drain on the country. International opinion of the US has plummeted since they decided to go in unilaterally. They're supposedly fighting terrorism but are obviously planting the seeds for more. In my opinion, those who truly benefit from the Irak war don't give a **** about their country's future and their common citizens.

Then I'm a hypocite, I can live with that. It's not like it's a brand new revelation anyways.

But as has been pointed out, the US Army has a classification for Soldiers that wish to be non combatants. Even if those applications are rejected, they aren't in the business of putting those people on the front lines anyways. It's counter productive, dangerous and waste of resources.

Not to mention, if you go through the chain of command, or file a complaint with the JAG, about being given orders that you felt were against the rules of armed conflict, or the Geneva Convention. The Army is most likely going to find some quiet little corner of the world to store you in for the duration.

Again, if they have an issue, they have channels they can follow/take to either leave the service, or be billeted in some situation where they are not a danger to their fellow Soldiers, or have the issue corrected.

How do you honestly think a soldier would be treated if he openly stated (within the rules) that he does not agree with the Irak war and does not want to go?

This is a tough question, I'm torn between knowing dodgers and deserters that I found to be high quality men, while having to balance that against my opinion of desertion and avoidance. While fully grasping the effects of combat during that action, that I have seen first hand, in family members. I also think that mandatory service is a good thing, although I do not believe that anyone serving their nation as part of mandatory conscription, should be forced to perform combat duties.

But even viewing the Vietnam war with a contemporary eye, I would have enlisted voluntarily, had I been old enough, or even born, lol. You are talking to someone that has a very deep seeded Warrior mentality, who honestly believes there are but two honorable ways to die. In combat or giving your life for another.

Honestly, I just can't wrap my head around running away. It says clearly on my arm, "Honour, Courage, Loyalty. Never Retreat, Never Surrender."

All I can say is that we are very different. We come from very different places. I have quite the antithesis of a warrior mentality. I've barely had to deal with serious violence in my life, and my agressive tendencies are very limited.

A few days ago I played a war game at ''La Ronde'', an amusement park in Montreal. I sucked. Big time. If I was drafted, I'd probably benefit the enemy. I'd be the type of guy to panic and end up shooting myself in the foot or one of my fellow soldiers in a freak accident. I was not born to fight.

On the plus side, I am very patient and am good at taking care of people. I'm a musician, I make a living out of giving piano and guitar lessons to people of all ages, among which are dropout teenagers who need positive role models and some sort of motivation in life. This summer I'm also doing replacement in a day care so I basically spend my days playing with and taking care of children. That's not really the profile of a soldier is it?

I have good things to contribute to society but fighting ain't one of them. So if I was drafted in a war, you can be sure I'd contemplate desertion if nothing was possible to avoid it. And here you go, there is my positive bias towards the deserters.

But the deserters we are talking about were not drafted so I get most of your point.

 

[CDNBear]

All right. I do get your point. There are ways to make your point about not agreeing with what you are ordered to do within the rules and philosophy of the army. I can go by with that.

Of course you would, you've always been one of the most reasonable people I've ever debated with, and you and I have been down a couple rocky type debate roads.

But I am still surprised about the Nazi soldier guy who doesn't want Jews to be burned in ovens. I mean, what was going on in the concentration camps were orders coming from the top, how do you seriously believe a soldier could rise against his own army and be taken seriously?

I'm referring to the guy on the front lines. If you asked me if a guard at Auschwitz, deserted, I'd say I'm with him. If you ask me if a front line Trooper ran off the lines, I'd say he was coward.

I've met several German immigrants that were Infantrymen during WWII (LWF), and a couple Tank Commanders. One whose son was a close friend and cellmate while I was in prison, lol.

The common thought amongst all of them has been, they were fighting a just war, and for the benefit of their nation. When you bring up the subject of what happened in the concentration camps, the POW camps and the death camps, they get angry, very angry.

Not at you, but at the their leaders, and those that wore the same uniform and did such horrible things. They feel disgraced and dishonoured by being in the same Army as those "tiere".

And that is mostly the point I'm trying to make. Desertion becomes a sensible option when the whole mission of the army you are in becomes perverted (in the sense of the deserter of course)

Not on the whole, because I do not believe that in the case of your German Soldier analogy, that they, the whole of the Armed Forces knew what was going on, in those places.

It's very debatable whether or not the Irak war truly advanced American interest. It advances some rather limited American interest. It's a total humanitarian and financial drain on the country. International opinion of the US has plummeted since they decided to go in unilaterally. They're supposedly fighting terrorism but are obviously planting the seeds for more. In my opinion, those who truly benefit from the Irak war don't give a **** about their country's future and their common citizens.

I really can't argue with that sentiment.

How do you honestly think a soldier would be treated if he openly stated (within the rules) that he does not agree with the Irak war and does not want to go?

Honestly? Poorly.

All I can say is that we are very different. We come from very different places. I have quite the antithesis of a warrior mentality. I've barely had to deal with serious violence in my life, and my agressive tendencies are very limited.

And yet I still think you're a decent man, despite your opinion of yourself. I see you differently though. You're aggressive and passionate, with words. You're intelligent and factual, and for that you get my respect. Just because you can't see yourself manifest that passion in a violent manner means nothing to me. In this world you have people that will fight wars with words, or with weapons. You have your frontlines, I have mine. Neither is wrong in my mind, and they both serve a grand purpose.

A few days ago I played a war game at ''La Ronde'', an amusement park in Montreal. I sucked. Big time. If I was drafted, I'd probably benefit the enemy. I'd be the type of guy to panic and end up shooting myself in the foot or one of my fellow soldiers in a freak accident. I was not born to fight.

I know my opinion is only based on a couple years of online chatter, but from our heated debates on Quebec, I fully believe that if push came to shove, you'd have the stuff to stand and deliver. And I have no better thing I can say to compliment someone then that.

On the plus side, I am very patient and am good at taking care of people. I'm a musician, I make a living out of giving piano and guitar lessons to people of all ages, among which are dropout teenagers who need positive role models and some sort of motivation in life. This summer I'm also doing replacement in a day care so I basically spend my days playing with and taking care of children. That's not really the profile of a soldier is it?

You'd be surprised.

I have good things to contribute to society but fighting ain't one of them. So if I was drafted in a war, you can be sure I'd contemplate desertion if nothing was possible to avoid it. And here you go, there is my positive bias towards the deserters.

I understand and respect your view.

But the deserters we are talking about were not drafted so I get most of your point.

;-)

 

[JLM]

However it is not that simple. Some of the deserters have seen their share of the sh** and just have had it. Others did not even go over there and went AWOL. One guy wasn't even going over there and F***ed up in the states and ran to escape justice. He was in the USAF for crying out loud and now he is running around Canada as if he actually saw something.

You say that it should be simple and let them change jobs. It's not that simple because it does not work that way in the military. I was in the infantry and at times it sucked. At times I wished I was passing out weapons from the armory, chilling in some admin office with women Marines, or driving AMTRAKs. I could not say...

"Sir, the Grunts (infantry) suck and I'd rather be fixing radios."

When you do that for one, then you have to do it for anyone who decides they'd rather be doing something else for whatever reason. You give one guy a break and don't give another guy then the morale falls and you have dissent. If you're a grunt and your unit is being deployed...you're going...that's that.

Since you posted this and I ended up agreeing, I thought and rethunk it and reflected on it from every angle and one thing keeps "shouting" back at me. Nobody would recommend an unsuitable person should be a doctor or bricklayer or plumber or carpenter or policeman. Why should an unsuitable person be a soldier? :smile:

 

[EagleSmack]

Since you posted this and I ended up agreeing, I thought and rethunk it and reflected on it from every angle and one thing keeps "shouting" back at me. Nobody would recommend an unsuitable person should be a doctor or bricklayer or plumber or carpenter or policeman. Why should an unsuitable person be a soldier? :smile:

That's a good point JLM. One of the deserters up there seems to have been an ideal soldier. He was Airborne, a Sergeant, applying for Ranger School when he got orders to go over to Iraq or Afghanistan again. This would have been his 2nd or 3rd deployment. He seems to have just had enough of it. He chose to run to Canada instead of facing off with the Army. I think that was an awful decision. I also believe he will have to face up to that decision one day. So he was more than qualified for the job, he just didn't want to do it anymore.


When I was in the infantry, there was a motar man that could not carry a pack. Let me explain better. We used to do force marches and we called them "Humps". Thats when you get all geared up, weapons, helmets, flack jackets, heavy packs and just HUMP. You step off with all your gear and do 10, or 15, or 20, or 25 miles depending on where you were going. It was so hard and the hardest part of the Marines for me. Some folks could hump their pack (LOL....easy fellas) all day long. Rain, heat, cold...no difference. Some struggled but got it done.

This Marine I am speaking of simply could not make these marches. I felt bad for him. He was fresh out of infantry school. When the march started getting hard he would start faltering. I remember hearing his Mortar Crew...

"Oh F***.... there he goes again."
"Get your F***ing azz back in line"

... but he couldn't. I'd see him dripping sweat, white as a ghost, panting like a dog. So he'd fall back and as he slid his way back the mix of taunts and support would follow him as he slipt by each platoon.

"C'mon Marine...step it out...you can do this."
"Hey...you must really like humping on weekends."
"Get your F***ing azz back up with your crew."

None of it worked. He feel out and had to do hump that pack while we were all on liberty (free time).

On one particular hump he fell out again only this time he was crawling. I was thinking to myself as I humped up towards him...

"Holy s***, is that the new mortar guy? He's crawling!"

My Fireteam Leader walked up behind him, put his boot on his azz and pushed him over. Now some would think that was cruel but my Fireteam leader called out...

"WTF...he can't do it. The M***** F*er is crawling. He doesn't belong here."

He was right. Long story eh? Well, what I am getting at was shortly after he was discharged from the Marines. Not a bad discharge, just a general discharge under honorable conditions because he simply could not adapt. IF he was a supply Marine, or an aircraft mechanic he never would have had this problem. Nevertheless he was assigned to the Infantry and the Corps just couldn't transfer him to light duty. He was a liability. You can't transfer soldiers or Marines to easy duty because they can't hang or they simply won't follow orders for whatever reason.

Phew...that could be my longest post in awhile.