Rubber Soul
“A country without a conscience is a country without a soul, and a country without a soul is a country that cannot survive.”
--Winston Churchill, quoted by Ron Ridenhour in his letter to government exposing My Lai
--Winston Churchill, quoted by Ron Ridenhour in his letter to government exposing My Lai
First Lieutenant Ehren Watada is serving as a whistleblower by challenging the legality of the Iraq invasion and ongoing occupation by the United States military.
If a soldier hadn't petitioned the government and the press in 1969 over his concerns regarding the brutality inflicted by members of the U.S. Army upon Vietnamese civilians, then the story of the My Lai massacre would have gone unpublished and unexposed. Lieutenant Calley would have quietly taken the fall, and later been sprung.
Returning GI Ronald Ridenhour risked censure, but he followed the dictates of his conscience. As did helicoptor pilot Hugh Thompson, who actually intervened to halt the killing. This same urge, I presume, is what has motivated Lt. Watada's refusal to participate in the Iraq venture.
If soldiers can't talk to the press, then how does the U.S. taxpayer--the real commanders-in-chief, as we pay the salaries of our elected officials--come to know that vehicular HUMVEE armor is ineffective? What about outmoded body armor? Ditto contractors failing to provide adequate rations and water, and all other fraud, waste and abuse issues. Soldiers must have the right of free expression in such cases, even if the facts are embarrassing or derogatory to the Army.
If a Nazi soldier in 1939 had refused orders to invade Poland, France or Russia, he would've been killed, but today he'd be hailed as a hero. Watada has the right to refuse illegal orders requiring him to support an illegal war of agression, under the Nuremberg rules imposed by the Allies after the Nazi defeat.
Wars of aggression and planning and executing them are hanging offenses. If Watada is guilty, the Nuremberg will be shown to be nothing but victor's vengeance.
But more than all of this, why didn't the military simply re-assign Lt. Watada, as had been his stated request? Why make this a Federal issue, when it need not have been. Why not transfer him to the ready Reserves, releasing him from active duty voluntarily? This is a self-inflicted would for the Army.
It makes one wonder who has allowed this 1st Lieutenant to grab media attention for his protest. He will get time, and perhaps even less than the six years being discussed. If so, the peaceniks will claim it a great victory for their side. A lot of energy will have been expended and they will all bask in their hollow success. But to presume a script would be to ascribe too much forethought to this administration. This is probably just another blunder.
If a soldier hadn't petitioned the government and the press in 1969 over his concerns regarding the brutality inflicted by members of the U.S. Army upon Vietnamese civilians, then the story of the My Lai massacre would have gone unpublished and unexposed. Lieutenant Calley would have quietly taken the fall, and later been sprung.
Returning GI Ronald Ridenhour risked censure, but he followed the dictates of his conscience. As did helicoptor pilot Hugh Thompson, who actually intervened to halt the killing. This same urge, I presume, is what has motivated Lt. Watada's refusal to participate in the Iraq venture.
If soldiers can't talk to the press, then how does the U.S. taxpayer--the real commanders-in-chief, as we pay the salaries of our elected officials--come to know that vehicular HUMVEE armor is ineffective? What about outmoded body armor? Ditto contractors failing to provide adequate rations and water, and all other fraud, waste and abuse issues. Soldiers must have the right of free expression in such cases, even if the facts are embarrassing or derogatory to the Army.
If a Nazi soldier in 1939 had refused orders to invade Poland, France or Russia, he would've been killed, but today he'd be hailed as a hero. Watada has the right to refuse illegal orders requiring him to support an illegal war of agression, under the Nuremberg rules imposed by the Allies after the Nazi defeat.
Wars of aggression and planning and executing them are hanging offenses. If Watada is guilty, the Nuremberg will be shown to be nothing but victor's vengeance.
But more than all of this, why didn't the military simply re-assign Lt. Watada, as had been his stated request? Why make this a Federal issue, when it need not have been. Why not transfer him to the ready Reserves, releasing him from active duty voluntarily? This is a self-inflicted would for the Army.
It makes one wonder who has allowed this 1st Lieutenant to grab media attention for his protest. He will get time, and perhaps even less than the six years being discussed. If so, the peaceniks will claim it a great victory for their side. A lot of energy will have been expended and they will all bask in their hollow success. But to presume a script would be to ascribe too much forethought to this administration. This is probably just another blunder.
posted by rangeragainstwar at 5:11 PM
6 Comments:
Although unprofessional, nothing listed in UCMJ can limit an enlisted soldier from vocally opposing the Commander in Chief; at worst they may be indirectly blackballed or a recieve a negative NCOER. However, officers are commissioned representatives of his office and subject to severe punishment for such an infraction.
We are a professional all volunteer force and do not serve for polital motives. Missing movement is not a freedom of expression afforded to any service member. I hope he has fun making big rocks into little rocks.
Anon.,
A lot of officers were hung at Nuremberg for not questioning orders, and they were the epitome of the professional officer. A professional army does not imply a mercenary army.
Re. your comment that those in the Army do not serve for political reasons, this administration has done everything in its power to politicize our Army, and to militarize our intel functions.
Jim
Anon.,
A lot of officers were hung at Nuremberg for not questioning orders, and they were the epitome of the professional soldier. We err if we confuse a professional army with a mercenary army.
Re. your comment that officers do not serve for political motives, this administration has done everything in its power to politicize the military and to use all DoD intel functions for political purposes.
Jim
Anon.,
A lot of officers were hung at Nuremberg for not questioning orders, and they were the epitome of the professional soldier. We err if we confuse a professional army with a mercenary army.
Re. your comment that officers do not serve for political motives, this administration has done everything in its power to politicize the military and to use all DoD intel functions for political purposes.
Jim
Missing movement is illegal; obeying an unlawful order is illegal too. He is exploiting this position to fuel antiwar propaganda.
Of course, we agree, both items are illegal.
As for propaganda, it's alright if the administration uses agitprop w/o letup, but somehow, it is inappropriate when used by the antiwar side. Why is one o.k., but the other unacceptable?
Do Watada's statements really equate to propaganda? Truth and propaganda are two different concepts.
If he is being used as a tool, then that is unsavory. However, his message is still a valid one.
Post a Comment
<< Home