1 Lt Watada - I Wont go.

#1
CM of Watada very soon. He is the first US officer who declined to board his plane to Iraq citing an unlawful war and thus unlawful order telling him to go.
Much on the www but the local paper write-up sets out his stall and has some sensible comments to boot.
He has voiced an attitude that seems to have a lot of support. Echoes here as to opinion sought by PoD re legality. I think that at the moment I've put Watada against the wall but I'm delaying the command 'Fire'
 
#2
OldRedCap said:
CM of Watada very soon. He is the first US officer who declined to board his plane to Iraq citing an unlawful war and thus unlawful order telling him to go.
Much on the www but the local paper write-up sets out his stall and has some sensible comments to boot.
He has voiced an attitude that seems to have a lot of support. Echoes here as to opinion sought by PoD re legality. I think that at the moment I've put Watada against the wall but I'm delaying the command 'Fire'
FIRE
 
#4
frenchperson said:
That takes courage.
Doubtless those American soldiers currently fighting in Iraq fully appreciate his show-boating...(sorry, "courage")
 
#5
Dishonourably discharge him, get him to pay back his salary and pay for his probably Mil education and throw him in jail.
Let him be an example, why should he pick and choose, what is next, cannot carry out that order Sir, i beleive the enemy is armed and may shoot me.
 
#6
If a few more were like Watada, politicians like Bush and Blair would not get such an easy ride when wrapping themselves in their respective flags and appealing to some twisted notion of patriotism.
 
#7
Watada knew what he was in for when he volunteered. Thousands have deployed while being opposed to the war, but they know what they signed on for, understand that they signed the dotted line voluntarily and do what professional soldiers do. Nothing in Iraq rises to the level of the "following orders" defense of the Nuremburg trials (an argument he and his supporters have tried to foist on everyone) especially since court martials have resulted in prison for transgressers.

While he has ever right to an opinion, by refusing to deploy he's lost the moral high ground. As an officer and junior leader he let down the soldiers in his platoon. There's no greater judgement against him than that in my opinion.
 
#8
gallowglass said:
frenchperson said:
That takes courage.
Doubtless those American soldiers currently fighting in Iraq fully appreciate his show-boating...(sorry, "courage")
I was going to add a comment of my own, but Gallowglass said everything I wanted to say.
 
#9
Tend to agree - he's had almost 4 years to make a point by resigning. Nothing but showboating and deserves everything coming his way.
 
#10
frenchperson said:
That takes courage.
Watada is a coward and a disgrace to all those in uniform and his country. As an officer he's let down all those Soldiers he's supposed to be leading. He deserves whatever punishment is due to him.
 
#12
Reading the comments posted below the Cape Cod article - looks like he could have an interesting jury: an even, 3 way split between Hawks, Doves and Chuck Norris worshippers.

I don't fancy his chances.

The Invasion of Iraq was never legalised by the U.N, but the USA just steamrollered over Kofi and the boys, and by the time KA got round to (politely) saying "That was a crime", it was too late.

As a face-saving measure, and - I suppose - recognising that no bugger else had the wherewithal to think about doing the job, post-war US/Coalition ops in Iraq have a UN mandate.

So, whatever your personal views about the rights and wrongs of the mess Bush is making in the mid-east, Watada's lawyers are going to have a tough job on their hands, and even with the US approval ratings showing nearly 70% against continuing involvement in Iraq, I wouldn't expect Watada to get much backing from Joe Public.
 
#13
At first, I was going to side with Watada, thinking back to my own views with regard to the invasion of Iraq. As the intention was to overthrow its government, an action not sanctioned by the UN, I considered the invasion as highly probably an illegal act and if ordered to attend, my conscience would have demanded that I formally recorded my objection to the order. Loyalty to my unit, which would have been outside the decision-making process, would also have prevented me from refusing to go.

But that's the invasion.

Post invasion, the scenario became one of peacekeeping (or making amends (not to be confused with atonement)), so subsequent presence ceased to have an air of illegality and my conscience was clear when I went. If you like, something needed to be done and we were best placed to do it.

Watada's comments hold true, but only if the timing is right. These views, expressed on the eve of the invasion, would have been just. 3 years later, in very different circumstances, the comments cease to be relevant - he was aware of his government's policy but chose to remain in the Army until he was about to be deployed.

So, mindful of the fact that the US Army deserves some return for the time and money spent training him, I'd bust him to PFC and give him a job as an unarmed CMT in one of the front line units. Surely he'd have no objections to that.
 
#14
It seems to me the bar is being lowered, and the normal checks and balances eroded with each war the US (and poodle) gets involved in.

This 'War on Terror', which began a matter of hours after 9/11 (seems peculiar - see 9/11 posts passim) is in response to a threat that's been magnified beyond all proportion. It needs exposing for what it is - a red herring - immoral, fraudulent and a far greater propagator of death and destruction than the supposed threat it's been set up to counter.

Watada's courageous to do what he's doing. He'll probably suffer the consequences. But every grain of doubt, no matter how small, placed in the minds of young Americans before they consider signing up for illegal invasions, (planned under the pretense of defending America) may deter some and therefore ultimately save more innocent lives across the world.
 
#15
frenchperson said:
It seems to me the bar is being lowered, and the normal checks and balances eroded with each war the US (and poodle) gets involved in.

This 'War on Terror', which began a matter of hours after 9/11 (seems peculiar - see 9/11 posts passim) is in response to a threat that's been magnified beyond all proportion. It needs exposing for what it is - a red herring - immoral, fraudulent and a far greater propagator of death and destruction than the supposed threat it's been set up to counter.

Watada's courageous to do what he's doing. He'll probably suffer the consequences. But every grain of doubt, no matter how small, placed in the minds of young Americans before they consider signing up for illegal invasions, (planned under the pretense of defending America) may deter some and therefore ultimately save more innocent lives across the world.
Do you spout this sort of guff whilst standing in front of the mirror with the masses cheering you to the rafters ('the masses' being in your imagination)?
 
#16
Virgil said:
Watada knew what he was in for when he volunteered. Thousands have deployed while being opposed to the war, but they know what they signed on for, understand that they signed the dotted line voluntarily and do what professional soldiers do. Nothing in Iraq rises to the level of the "following orders" defense of the Nuremburg trials (an argument he and his supporters have tried to foist on everyone) especially since court martials have resulted in prison for transgressers.

While he has ever right to an opinion, by refusing to deploy he's lost the moral high ground. As an officer and junior leader he let down the soldiers in his platoon. There's no greater judgement against him than that in my opinion.
I was opposed to the war - got depolyed just as the 6 nations was starting. Takes a fottie 'ker to screw it up!
Am not going to open my mail till sunday - rebellion starts at home :headbang:
 
#17
Frenchie,

Agree entirely with your argument above. Sadly, I don't see the US public signing up.

If I read them correctly, they (mostly) disagree with the continuing Iraq involvement (somewhat belatedly), largely because it's all gone pete tong: not on moral grounds.

On the other hand - paradoxically, you might say - 9/11 has induced a kind of wartime mentality in the US: many (most?) Americans seem to continue to buy into the idea that TWOT 'needs to be won', even if they haven't a scooby-doo what that really means, thinking that the Tom Cruise Top Gun approach'll git 'em every time.

Meanwhile, US Army surveys I've read recently show that many US soldiers genuinely believe they are better to 'fight the terrorists in Iraq than in Ohio'.

So - not much cause for encouragement there, then.
 
#18
gallowglass said:
frenchperson said:
It seems to me the bar is being lowered, and the normal checks and balances eroded with each war the US (and poodle) gets involved in.

This 'War on Terror', which began a matter of hours after 9/11 (seems peculiar - see 9/11 posts passim) is in response to a threat that's been magnified beyond all proportion. It needs exposing for what it is - a red herring - immoral, fraudulent and a far greater propagator of death and destruction than the supposed threat it's been set up to counter.

Watada's courageous to do what he's doing. He'll probably suffer the consequences. But every grain of doubt, no matter how small, placed in the minds of young Americans before they consider signing up for illegal invasions, (planned under the pretense of defending America) may deter some and therefore ultimately save more innocent lives across the world.
Do you spout this sort of guff whilst standing in front of the mirror with the masses cheering you to the rafters ('the masses' being in your imagination)?
Not at all. At least, it seems I might do in your imagination, but I don't in reality, which is where I prefer to operate.

You're attacking the person again GG, rather than the message. So the message is there, waiting for you to attempt to refute and dismantle it. I know you're more than capable.
 
#19
Lt Watada is anything but courageous.

He is either pathetically naive, cretinously ignorant of the world around him, or deliberatly calculating a publicity stunt to discredit somebody - the Bush Administration maybe.

He joined the US Army post Iraq invasion. He joined a active branch of the military. It was inevitable that at some point he would be called upon to serve in Iraq. If he didn't realise that, then you have to question his intelligence and awareness of the real world. At any point in his career, he could have said, sorry, this is not for me. Bye!

On the other hand, if he is so worked up about not serving in Iraq, and prepared to go to the lengths that he now has to court publicity - you have to suspect that this is pre-planned and deliberate political stunt.
 
#20
By standing up for what he believes in and doing the right thing, this man has shown he has true courage.I appluad the fact he refuses to take part in an illegal war where thousands and thousands of innocent Iraq's are getting murdered by the US and the UK.
Whatever happens to him he won't be coming home in a box like the rest of the cannon fodder out there!!

Well done that man! I take my hat off too you.

Pity the rest of the armed forces are too gutless to follow his example.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads