He also wrote an important anti-war article in the Washington Post, entitled, "What's An Iraqi Life Worth?"

bacevich article

Then your government doesn't just cover up information, but directly LIES to each and every American to start a false war, again this nulifies the 'volunteer' aspect of the army.

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:
I refuse to blame some kid who was patriotic and thought he was doing the right thing to protect his family and friends.

---

While I tend to agree that the responsibility for the murderous activities of the U.S. forces should be laid at the feet of their political-military leaders, I really can't feel too warm and fuzzy about some "kid" who thought he was doing "the right thing".

What I'm saying is that getting sent somewhere to die due to lies isn't the kids fault.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:

Now, his son is reported dead in Iraq. Read the article, and then ask whether it wouldn't have been better for that young man to have come to Canada.

---

No, I'm quite happy with him being dead.

He should have considered his career choices with greater care.

[ 15 May 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:

An army ceases to become volunteer when you no longer have the option to leave it. Such is the case now with longer "tours" and shortened stays home.

---

That underscores the importance of reading the fine print when signing a contract.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
Slumberjack, how do you know he was never taught anything about the world? It is possible to know things about the world and still put on a uniform. Do all Canadian soldiers know nothing about the world...oh, of course not, they're Canadian. Give me a break.

---

I deal with US soldiers all the time, and can tell you that many who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan have thought in a sophisticated way about what they are doing, and its implications.

It's a mistake to demonize people because they've decided that their duty is to become a soldier.

We don't have to agree with that. I certainly don't. But I respect people who make the contrary decision.

1) The propaganda the media puts out about Iraq. The media are complacent in the way people see the "War on Terror". They are doing a very grave disservice to the American people. The media in the US is a joke.

2) The propaganda the US government is involved in. How many times does that chimp and the members of his posse of oil buddies have to be on TV? How often must the lies of Iraq be repeated by these clowns? I have never seen such a barrage of Rah Rah, Go USA in any other country I have been in. The uber patriotism the US government propagates is beyond disturbing.

Both 1 and 2 above contribute greatly to the amount of 'real' world information people in the US are given in order to make an informed decision.

This isn't a slag against the people of the Us of A. This is a slag against that treasonistic US government and there media lapdogs.

So, yes a soldier these days absolutely can know for sure this war is BS. But they cannot escape the propaganda.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
Slumberjack, how do you know he was never taught anything about the world?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trevormkidd:

That is true. I was surprised when I read an article about Pat Tillman that every single one of my preconceived notions (about him being a mindless, poorly read, right-wing, overly patriotic, christian, Bush loving football player) were completely wrong.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
It's a mistake to demonize people because they've decided that their duty is to become a soldier. Not only that, but I think we should recognise the economic pressure that many Americans are under, and their decision to become a soldier, perhaps only to get medical treatment for their kids. We in Canada don't have that worry, so we should be careful not to judge those who do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
[QB]Sure it's possible to know things about the world and put on a uniform.....So, yes a soldier these days absolutely can know for sure this war is BS. But they cannot escape the propaganda. [QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slumberjack:

You missed the part about him taking part in the invasion of another country populated by people who had nothing to do with anything.

---

quote:

---

Not many people will buy the idea that Wehrmacht and SS soldiers were poor and misguided kids who were simply doing their duty in an immoral cause.

---

If you are suggesting that ordinary German soldiers were guilty of war crimes by merely invading other countries on the orders of their superiors, you're wrong.

As it happens, I know this law inside and out.
The Nuremberg Tribunal spoecifically exempted ordinary foot-soldiers from responsibility for the crime of participating in an illegal war, and said that this is a "leadership crime only".

quote:

---

157] In summary, this jurisprudence establishes that an individual must be involved at the policy-making level to be culpable for a crime against peace: see Davidson, above, at pp. 122-124, and the Papers for the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court (the "Princeton Papers"), United Nations Documents PCNICC/2002/WGCA/L.1, and PCNICC/2002/WGCA/L.1/Add.1.

[158] That is, the ordinary foot-soldier is not expected to make his or her own personal assessment as to the legality of a conflict in which he or she may be called upon to fight. Similarly, such an individual cannot be held criminally responsible merely for fighting in support of an illegal war, assuming that his or her own personal wartime conduct is otherwise proper: Davidson, above, at p. 125. See also François Bugnion, Just Wars, Wars of Aggression, and International Humanitarian Law, International Review of the Red Cross, No. 847, Vol. 84, p. 523

---

Please note that I think that a soldier who does not wish to be associated with an illegal war should not have to participate.

But that does not mean that doing so makes one a criminal.

[URL=http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-eliisa/highlight?language=EN&courtScope=fc&all=hinzman+complicity+illegal+war&title=&citation=&path=http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2006/2006 fc420/2006fc420.html&query=%2Bhinzman+%2Bcomplicity+%2Billegal+%2Bwar]hinzman case[/URL]

[ 23 May 2007: Message edited by: jeff house ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trevormkidd:
I can't say that I understand his reasons for enlisting in the military, nor am I a supporter of the military campaigns in Iraq or Afghanistan, but I do feel that you appear to be espousing a narrow view of military personal, while complaining that they all hold narrow world views.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Please note that I think that a soldier who does not wish to be associated with an illegal war should not have to participate.
But that does not mean that doing so makes one a criminal.

---

quote:

---

Memorial Day orators will say that a G.I.'s life is priceless. Don't believe it. I know what value the U.S. government assigns to a soldier's life: I've been handed the check. It's roughly what the Yankees will pay Roger Clemens per inning once he starts pitching next month.

Money maintains the Republican/Democratic duopoly of trivialized politics. It confines the debate over U.S. policy to well-hewn channels. It preserves intact the cliches of 1933-45 about isolationism, appeasement and the nation's call to "global leadership." It inhibits any serious accounting of exactly how much our misadventure in Iraq is costing. It ignores completely the question of who actually pays. It negates democracy, rendering free speech little more than a means of recording dissent.

---

Dear Mr. President, Send more troops, and you go too.

quote:

---

Sir, listen to me. You have to send in MILLIONS of troops to Iraq, not thousands! The only way to lick this thing now is to flood Iraq with millions of us! I know that you're out of combat-ready soldiers -- so you have to look elsewhere! The only way you are going to beat a nation of 27 million -- Iraq -- is to send in at least 28 million! Here's how it would work:

The first 27 million Americans go in and kill one Iraqi each. That will quickly take care of any insurgency. The other one million of us will stay and rebuild the country. Simple.

Now, I know you're saying, where will I find 28 million Americans to go to Iraq? Here are some suggestions:

1. More than 62,000,000 Americans voted for you in the last election (the one that took place a year and half into a war we already knew we were losing). I am confident that at least a third of them would want to put their body where their vote was and sign up to volunteer. I know many of these people and, while we may disagree politically, I know that they don't believe someone else should have to go and fight their fight for them -- while they hide here in America.

---

And a non-tongue-in-cheek one with excellent points:

quote:

---

There are many ways to liberate a country. Usually the residents of that country rise up and liberate themselves. That's how we did it. You can also do it through nonviolent, mass civil disobedience. That's how India did it. You can get the world to boycott a regime until they are so ostracized they capitulate. That's how South Africa did it. Or you can just wait them out and, sooner or later, the king's legions simply leave (sometimes just because they're too cold). That's how Canada did it.

The one way that DOESN'T work is to invade a country and tell the people, "We are here to liberate you!" -- when they have done NOTHING to liberate themselves. Where were all the suicide bombers when Saddam was oppressing them? Where were the insurgents planting bombs along the roadside as the evildoer Saddam's convoy passed them by? I guess ol' Saddam was a cruel despot -- but not cruel enough for thousands to risk their necks. "Oh no, Mike, they couldn't do that! Saddam would have had them killed!" Really? You don't think King George had any of the colonial insurgents killed? You don't think Patrick Henry or Tom Paine were afraid? That didn't stop them. When tens of thousands aren't willing to shed their own blood to remove a dictator, that should be the first clue that they aren't going to be willing participants when you decide you're going to do the liberating for them.

---

[ 30 May 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]