http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspxOn Feb. 5, the court martial of a U.S. Army officer began at Fort Lewis, Washington.  Lt. Ehren Watada is charged with refusing to deploy to Iraq with his unit, a Stryker brigade combat team, and with two counts of conduct unbecoming an officer stemmingen-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60608.1)http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50308Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:52:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50308Gary, Dekalb ILHmmmm, we are not defending the Constitution of the United States in Iraq. If he swore an oath to defend the Constitution, he should have George W in his crosshairs!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50327Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:09:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50327Steve Myers, Wabash, INDoes one still hold to the oath when it conflicts with ones conscience and higher convictions? Are there higher convictions? Or do you consider your oath the highest of all convictions? I question whether it was a good thing that you blindly followed your oath and seemingly ignored your conscience in unjust conflicts.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50328Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:10:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50328Jason JohnsonSo the oath is: "…I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, …I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…." I don't see how you that entails an oath to "obey the orders of those above you." It seems to me that you're just making an oath to defend the Constitution and a pledge of allegiance to it. How does that translate into an oath to obey (what Watada argues are) illegal orders?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50329Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:10:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50329maggie carlisle, memphis, tnAgainst all enemies is up for interpretation....as far as I'm concerned, President Bush is the enemy.... Who can tell which ones are the enemy in Iraq....sounds like everybody's getting into the fray these days and the lines of distinction are getting pretty damned hazy. I do not blame anyone for refusing to go into that crazy, insane, horrible situation. Why should the foot soldiers have to lay their lives on the line every day when the one who's telling them to go (President Bush) refused himself to go to Vietnam and hid out in the guard until it was safely over!! How can the American people be so stupid to let a man who has never been in combat, never seen the first day on the ground anywhere near a war zone, order thousands to go and face death? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50333Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:17:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50333Randolph GohHe did the right thing by standing up to those who abused the Constitution. The war is illegal and he is not violating it since it is evidently a crime and an act perpetrated against humanity and the interest of Americans and the world http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50334Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:18:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50334Robert, SF, CAone word best describes Lt. Watada. Coward. Perhaps he should have read the fine print BEFORE signing that oath. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50336Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:19:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50336James Locke, Portland, MaineNo he should not have President Bush in his crosshairs. He should do what he's been ordered to do, which is to deploy to fight a war that isn't concerned with his opinions. He joined voluntarily after Iraq started, he knew full well that he would be deployed wherever he was needed, and when called upon he backed down. Soldiers don't get to choose whom they fight, once their president has deemed them a threat to the country, not without suffering whatever consquences come of it.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50337Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:19:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50337Ray, Fox River Grove ILI am not in the military, so I don't feel qualified to comment on Watada's decision. At some point, if he is willing to shoulder jail and the scorn of his brothers in arms, that's his choice and I guess I can respect that. If he complains about having to pay the price for his decision, I would have a harder time respecting his decisions. But in any case, I do respect and gratefully thank Lt. Col. Francona, and all other servicemen and women, for their service in protecting our country and the Constitution. I only hope we civilians do as much at home to protect our Constitution from those who would ignore it to pursue the war on terrorism. On a side note, I would be interested in Lt. Col. Francona's thoughts on the public reaction to this unpopular war in comparison to the last truly unpopular war (Vietnam). I hope that servicemen and women realize that the majority who oppose the war do so because they care for the troops, not because the want to undermine them. Not being in harm's way myself, I can only guess how they might feel about it. In any case, thank you all.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50339Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:19:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50339Staff Sgt. CDH, USMC, Hampton, Va.In the case of Mr. Watada, here is perhaps a more appropriate excerpt from that same oath: "...and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me..." There is no part of that oath that allows us to uphold it only when we feel like it.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50342Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:23:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50342Michael Harley, Miami, FloridaHe swore an oath to obey orders of those appointed above him, I think that is the key issue. As a gulf war combat veteran, I am ashamed of Watada's behavior. We are at war. Agree with the cause? It doesn't matter. You are duty bound. And an officer too? He should be shot as a trader. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50343Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:23:44 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50343John Doe 1, Orlando, FloridaWatada does not deserve court martial. He had tried everything including resigning. To put him through court martial would be wrong. Instead, put Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice to court martial and to Iraq, they're the ones that wanted a war without a cause anyways.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50344Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:24:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50344Charles R. Kimpston, Polk City, Iowa 50226Somebody hasn't studied their history as the Administration failed to do. Iraq was not our enemy until Mr. Bush made it one. All one has to do is look back on how Rummy and the boys were providing Saddam with his weapons for use against Iran. There was not one single person in Iraq that had hurt or killed an American, until Mr. Bush decided to occupy their country. Service people have a right to refuse to serve in an unjust action otherwise the West would not have been able to try German soldiers after WWII. They too were just following orders, but we condemned them. Besides, Iraq is not a country that was established by the people. It is a creation of the West (England). The only thing that was holding it together was a strong dictator. If Mr. Bush and the boys had learned that piece of history, then they could have seen the results they have now. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50349Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:26:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50349dave murdaugh,phoenix,az.Hmmmmm,guess we weren't defending the constitution in nazi germany either.anyone that has taken the oath realizes it's importance and the responsibility that goes with it.it basically says that you will defend the freedom and well being of all americans,including left wing lunatics that sit around bitching all the time.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50350Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:26:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50350Tom Hutson"Against ALL enemies both foriegn AND DOMESTIC" George Bush is guilty of lying to the American people when he used what he knew to be false facts about the cake in Niger which he refered to in his address to the American people. I served in the Army and Watada IS defending America and our constitution from illegal wars and crimes committed by a DOMESTIC terrorist, namely George Bush AND Dick Cheney! Both traitors to America and our way of life and should be impeached!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50352Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:29:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50352john doe 1When a so called war is unjust and ill-conceived the soldier should have the option to resign. If what the author of this article saying is true, then every person in US is a soldier because by the constitution every citizen in the country has to defend from its enemies, however, that is not the case. One has to realize what is right and what is wrong here, and follow orders blindly will lead to a quick and swift death which no one will remorse.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50354Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:29:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50354Robert "Bruce" McAlpine, Burbank, CA"Did I agree with all these operations or commitments? Maybe, maybe not – it did not matter." IT DOES MATTER! You sir are a free man not a mindless killing machine to be pointed in any direction the President or any superior would have you go. If you do not agree with the orders you are given by a superior you have a responsibility to stand up and say so. I realize this action takes courage, conviction and intestinal fortitude that maybe you were lacking in at the time you decided to follow orders you didn't agree with. No soldier officer or enlisted is obligated to follow an illegal order. This is the basis of Lt. Watada's claim that the war in Iraq is illegal. So, in his defense, he is faithfully discharging the duties of his office by defending the constitution of the United States.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50355Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:30:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50355Larry A. - San Diego,Ca.This soldier should never enlisted in the military ! This appears to be a courageous act to the war protest movement as was the draft dodgers who ran to Canada in the Vietnam era -- He wanted the "benefits" but refused to do his assigned duties! These acts of "cold feet" should be rewarded with a Dis-honorable discharge and loss of any future benefits! Maybe we can depend on the war protestors to defend this country in the future ?? Not My war - I dont agree with it. ( BS ) Let's support those who past and present defended this country by not rewarding the current group of the emerging "whats in it for me" generation ! May we all live in peace and never have to go to war ever. This is my dream. Is there ever a just war ? I also believe in a draft for all americans (male and Female, rich, poor,black,hispanic,white) May we all participate and appreciate being American's !http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50365Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:38:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50365felix gonzalesDear Hard Balls it is one thing to do your duty it is another to be a part of an illegal war. I think Mr. Watada is very aware of that. It takes courge to do what Mr. Watada is doing. He has shown that he is not afraid to fight just not willing to be a part of something that in itself is reprihensible. It scares me to think that you think the way you do. What you are saying is that if Bush decided to march on one of our own cities you would do it just because he thinks he is the "decider". At some point a soldier has to realize that his morals and common sense guide his descions as a soldier, as a man and as a human being. To give your life away to every Mad Man who calls himself king well.. I guess you have your own ideas on that. Personnaly the only man I will ever follow blindly is not George bush, aka the decider. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50369Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:41:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50369Jason JohnsonThanks to Staff Sgt. CDH for providing the more relevant language from the oath. Clearly, Watada did pledge to obey orders. However, this doesn't exactly settle the question of whether he is blameworthy for violating it. I assume we can all agree that there are circumstances under which it is appropriate to break with a previously taken oath. Granted, these will be extreme circumstances only, but it is conceivable. The Nuremberg principles state: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him." Please note: I AM NOT comparing Bush with Hitler or the US with Nazi Germany. The Nuremberg principles didn't just apply to the Nazis; they apply to everyone everywhere. The point of the above language is in some situations, an officer of the military might be morally required to disobey his orders, regardless of whether or not he had made a previous pledge to obey them. If the orders are blatantly immoral and illegal, his general moral duty as a human being trumps his duty as a soldier. Now, this still leaves open the question of whether Watada's orders were, in fact, immoral and illegal. He argues that they were. My point is just that IF they were, he had not only the moral right but the responsibility to disobey them.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50371Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:44:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50371john doe 1, Orlando, FloridaIf Watada is a coward, then everyone in US is a coward. I think what Watada did was very brave. He took calculated risk by joining the armed forces. For those of you who thinks that he's a coward, perhaps you want to go to Iraq and die gloriously by getting picked off by a sniper?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50372Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:46:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50372kathy johnson freeport, ILIf it is true that you "obey the orders of those above you", then there would not be so many young military sitting in prison for obeying orders.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50378Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:48:44 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50378Nasir Aziz, Dallas, TXJust like the other commentator has already mentioned, Iraq War's pretext and ongoing reasons are dubious and have nothing to do with the constitution. Your commentary presumes that this is what US doing in Iraq: Defending the Constitution - and that is the actual crux of the reason Watada refused. Your over simplification and assumptions will not cut through this debate at all.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50384Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:53:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50384Ivor HughesI am a British vet and I fully support Lt Watada. He is a courageous soldier. It was American jurisprudence at the Nuremberg War Crimes trial that stated that 'I was following orders' is not a defense for war criminal acts. Impeach Bush and Cheney! Bush broke the law and Watada is on trial .. The half Colonel that was detailed to try Watada has already shackled him by restricting his defence. The half Colonel has obviously been briefed by his masters as to the results they want. They have to make an example of Watada in case his actions spread. Is this the true face of American justice? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50387Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:58:18 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50387Hank WaitGiven that Iraq was not our enemy and that we started this war on false grounds how is Watada disobeying anything in the oath you just posted “…I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, …I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same….” One could say Bush is the enemy of the United States as his policies have done great harm to the country. More harm than Saddam Hussein ever did. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50388Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:58:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50388Aaron C. Roberts, Columbus, OhioFor those of you that are confused about the Oath that one takes, I took the liberty of looking this up. Some are confused about the "following of orders" and what consitutes an enemy. I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Does this mean that he has no choice but to follow orders? If he enlisted in the US Armed services, YES, it does. Does this mean that he has to agree with the command decisions made by those above him? NO, it doesn't. The Oath that a serviceman or servicewoman takes outlines the rules that they must follow, it doesn't tell them how or what to think about those rules. That's what makes this the United States of America and not Communist China. In conclusion, there is no sense in ranting about Bush is guilty, or Cheney is guilty or that either of them are the enemy...yadda yadda yadda. This case is about a solider that woke up one day and didn't like the decisions that HE made which put him where HE was at that time. Watada is a fool and should be tried and sentenced for breaking his commitment to his God and his country, period. Hindsight is 20/20, and in his case, I'm sure Watada would rather have not volunteered, however, he did. He will be found guilty because he is guilty...end of case. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50391Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:59:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50391Robert Jay, Greensboro, NCI TOTALLY agree with Tom Hutson.Bush/Cheney/ Rice/Rumsfeld and all the others who blindly supported these people and their self serving lies should be impeached and or tried for war crimes as we promoted in Bosnia and elswhere.These idiots are responsible and should be held accounatble for not only every American death buit for every Iraqi's as well.The Iraqi's didn't ask us to do this and still want us out of Iraq. Enough is enough. Impeach and try these common criminals now before they destroy the world with their stupidity http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50399Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:08:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50399Robert, Ft Lauderdale, FLThis is NOT about Bush or any other administration official and many of you seem to miss that part. It is not even about Iraq or any other conflict. How sad has society gotten to where it seems acceptable to have no honor or desire to uphold it? Have we really gotten that bad??? Regardless of your stance on the war or the president or even the government, the bottom line is THIS: Lt Watada took the oath mentioned above. He made the commitment to defend the constitution which clearly states that the President commands the Armed Forces which in-turn means he serves under the President. Now, I am sure that he did not enlist in the military just to serve under Bush but maybe more to defend his country and its citizens. Though I commend his willingness to serve in other combat situations, he is needed in Iraq and his refusal to go where he is needed means that he is not upholding his oath, not following the orders he swore to obey, and is (especially with his public statement to the media) insulting to the service and the country. If you don’t agree with the war or any other part of requirements for serving in the Armed Forces, then don’t enlist; no one will hold it against you. If you make the decision to enlist in an all volunteer army, then you need to accept the responsibility of that decision. Any other time in world history, he would be killed for treason and made into an example for others. Fortunately, in a more civilized world, he will get a much less severe punishment. Ultimately, even though I do not totally agree with the events concerning current situations we are in, nor am I a big fan of Bush, he deserves to get punished for his actions. In the end, he will serve his punishment, be dishonorably discharged, and will be able to tell his grand kids about proud he is of what he did and how he got to meet a few Hollywood stars who only gave a damn because for a brief moment he was aligned with their agenda. And in a year from now we (including the people rallying behind him) will say Lt. Watada who???http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50402Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:10:34 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50402Mohamed, Sf SDit takes a man like this officer to stand in front of the tyrant of the white house, and say loud and clear NO to this scam war. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50407Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:13:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50407Nicholas Riddell, Washington DCWhile I am not in favor of the Iraq War, and believe that President Bush's decision to go into this war is perhaps the biggest foreign policy blunder in U.S. history, I cannot support the actions of a military officer who can decide to choose when and where to serve. I believe that it would set a dangerous precedent for anyone who can choose which orders to follow. Speaking on a lack of experience because I have never served, I believe that soldiers are not policy makers and they give up certain rights when they take their oaths to serve. There are those that speak of conscience vs. service, and that may be a valid argument, but this has always been the consquences to serving in the military. Soldier follow orders, they are not allowed to question them or people die. If they believe they are doing wrong, then when they get out maybe then they can try to become policy makers and try not repeat past failures. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50410Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:18:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50410KBlind obidience should never be expected from a person, including a soldier. If an army officer tells you that a bunch of war protesters are enemies of the State and to open fire on them, should a soldier just "follow orders"? At what point does a soldiers concience and personal responsibility take over? It's like the old debate if the soldiers of Nazi Germany were in he wrong when they commited horrible acts as they were just "following orders." While a soldier is expected to defend thier country and follow orders, there is a point where every man, including soldiers, has a moral responsibility to stop and say, "No. This is wrong."http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50412Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:20:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50412Katrina, Hood River OregonWell said Lt. Col. Francona. Jason Johnson, educate yourself. "...and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me..." In case you still don't get it, it means you have sworn an oath to follow OUR President and his appointed staff whether you like it or not. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50416Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:22:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50416Karl Drumm, Slatington Pa.Bush and Cheney and all other liars should be on trail for not telling the truth and then starting an unjust war and NOT Lt. Watada.When is this going to happen?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50419Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:23:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50419Steve E, New YorkThink of what our country and military would be like if Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, Alec Baldwin, Richard Gere,Janine Garafolo and Michael Moore replaced the Bush cabinet. The Bush team made many mistakes out of impatience to deal a blow back to the 911 terrorists. They should have focused completely on Bin Laden and his followers. It's done. We can't change it now. We also can not tell 3000 American families their sons and daughters died in vain. We must declare victory, congratulate the Iraqi government and pull our troops out of the Middle East completely. As long as we are there, however, Lt. Watada is bound by the oath he took. He made a contract with the military and broke it. He made a contract with his brothers in arms and broke it. He made a contract with the American people and broke it. He must be made to suffer the full legal consequences of his actions so that no other soldier, sailor or Marine follows his terrible lesson http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50420Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:24:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50420mr MEISTER well i was 18 in 1965 . i & everyone i knew didn't want anything to do with nam. after all thru my teen yrs every day on the news were the body bags & assorted bad news.however i didn't burn my draft card.i ENLISTED in the reserves. thankfully i got in just before i would have been drafted. its a tough call. on the 1 hand i swore the oath. if my unit was called up ,i would have gone. its hard to risk your young best yrs of your life literally.especially if you don't believe in the war they want you to fight. i couldn't care less if s. vietnam as it did went commie. so what. give up the good life of a 20 yr old for what & for who. i believed like many others that saddam needed removing. but since we didn't administrate the place like japan or nazi ger. that is 100% pacification. disarm the entirev country . round up those responsible or kill them in battle. we should have been calling the shots as soon as victory was declared. democracy in the mideast =unworkable with arabs. we appoint some puppets & pull their strings & tell them in no uncertain terms we are sparing them to comply with what should have been a formal surrender of the nation. we should have sent 50,000 men & seized the oilfields & undersell opec to the rest of our allies. we'd of been heroes. of course 3 yrs later. it was a hollow empty nothing gained for the american ppl thing. the area is much too volatile for our troops who are not accomplishing anything. haliburton & the bush cheney biz interests gained nobody else . thev crooked contractors & such. like oil & water judeo -christians & muslims don't mix. there's no reason that 1 of them should be residing in this country. just as we don't belong or would want to live there. these ppl are primitive ,violent,untrustworthy ,& disloyal. in a way i don't blame the guy. but he has 0 to say about it. he enlisted .somehow became an officer.noones said how. hes totally out of line. the only way soldiers are kept in line is that they see their buddies & thousands of other in the same spot as themselves. you don't let down the next guy. he should be airdropped over sadr city .he did not keep faith with all those who have gone before .compared to other wars .this is nothing . a battle is fought involving maybe 200 men. what kind of war is that. we've got 130,000 troops. they control nothing . never mind the wasted billions,while those at home ---vets,the disabled are given thimblefulls to live on. its shameful. i have no sympathy for this guy. wrong as keeping our men there is .this man was not under duress when he enlisted or took his commision . he doesn't have any recourse or a leg to stand on. those jerks who've rallied to his cause celebre do it for their own personal agendas. imagine if even 5% of our officers were like him. if there were mass desertions somehow. those ppl wouldn't be lying so safe in their beds tonite. i see the problem as being more internal .they still can't hurt us from there. but huge muslim pop. living here is something else again.we have been invaded without a shot being fired. texas does not have an anglo majority.nyc is populated by more hispanic + other minorites than caucasians. this is the present danger. thats why we need the troops back. this kid will be made an ie. of.but hes very insignificant & should be on the back pages. we need a 5-10 moratorium on immigration. just so the ins can straighten itself out. so the illegals by & large can be ferreted out & sent packing. as far as ths guy goes ,maybe the poster calling him a coward is the most correct. for every combat soldier in a war zone there are 99 men supporting him behind the lines.the story is vague. what is his mos ,branch of the service. what led him to believe he would be sent to the front. or put in harms way.something doesn't ring true here. i'd like more facts. not the media cashing in http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50425Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:29:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50425Mike Kennesaw, Ga.I love the response of the liberals to this.So typical from a group that hates our country and our military. The fact of the matter is when you take the oath, you don't have the right to refuse. where would we be today if the "Greatest Generation" had all felt like Penn and Sarandon? We would all be speaking Japanese.......http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50426Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:29:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50426Brooks, Cupertino CaWell, I trust the military legal process on this. But I don't like the idea that if I'm broke and can't pay my taxes, I may go to jail, but if a military officer objects to do a duty he signed off on, he can weasel out of it. Me and Lt.Watada are about the same age. He signed up after Iraq, I didn't. I stayed home and paid my taxes instead. I'll let the Government throw my money away Iraq, and watch my proxy enlistment on CNN.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50429Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:31:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50429Keenan Kline, Santa Rosa Beach, FL Larry A., Officers don't enlist. OBTW, it's not about benefits, duh. My bias; never really appreciated Rick F's remarks. No AF 05 retiree I know has had boots on the ground. Regardless of this, the oath he and I took upon commissioning is a solemn one, but misunderstood by most. The whole "enemies, foreign and domestic" part is to what I refer. I believe you can make a good case that Bush, Cheney, and their sycophants are guilty of numerous unconstitutional acts and therefore are enemies. The sacrifice this youngster is about to make is one us older guys with all the wisdom SHOULD HAVE MADE! Rick, don't be a pompous, self-licking ice cream cone of a man. Stand up and state the obvious, you're one of the angry old farts who sends young men off to stupid wars. I truely believe that the angry pompous know-it-alls should be on the front lines of any new "pre-emptive" wars!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50431Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:34:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50431JimHe's not doing anything that his President didn't do! What war? congress failed to do its job, Have congress do their job, declarer war and impeach! I doubt that GWB has ever read the "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." I forgot he can't read! http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50433Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:36:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50433sfc h-c new york new yorkit was not an illegal order where he had the right to refuse..this man is a so called leader and for him to act in this manner is truly pathetic.he joined an all volunteer army after the war had begun.no you just can't resign after you disagree with something if it was like that the majority of the force would have submitted resignation papers along time ago.. bottom line he joined at a time of war he got paid to go to school and earn his commision stating that he would repay the department of defense with his loyalty and service to his country. now he want to get out of it alot of us do not agree with this war i have lost alot of friends to this war but as soldiers and leaders we know what we will be facing everyday and by raising your hand and promising to uphold the rules and regulations you know that one day you will be called upon to go fight in a war as long as you wear the uniform..stop bitching and moaning take your punishment like a man and stop dishonering our brothers and sisters in uniform who paid the ultimate sacrifice http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50434Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:36:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50434Frank L Tull Sicklerville New JerseyWe as Americans had better remember there are evil men in this world wether we like it or not. Ever since the fall of man there has been evil in this world. The sad fact is too many of us try to deny that such thing exist as evil...that's the real state of denial. Unbelief will destroy you.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50437Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:37:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50437Moose,Sarasota,FlHe is a disgrace to this country, himself and his family. As a volunteer in 2003, he was fully aware of military action in progress. Did he refuse his pay, benefits, or medical care? Probably not.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50438Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:37:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50438Moose,Sarasota,FlHe is a disgrace to this country, himself and his family. As a volunteer in 2003, he was fully aware of military action in progress. Did he refuse his pay, benefits, or medical care? Probably not.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50439Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:38:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50439Keenan Kline, Santa Rosa Beach, FL Robert from Ft. L, You fail to see the sacrifice he's making for you. Writing about "his duty" blah blah blah is about all the sacrifice you will make against the unconstitutional actions of the Pres/VP. What a tough guy?!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50440Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:40:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50440Frank L Tull Sicklerville New JerseyWe as Americans had better remember there are evil men in this world wether we like it or not. Ever since the fall of man there has been evil in this world. The sad fact is too many of us try to deny that such thing exist as evil...that's the real state of denial. Unbelief will destroy you.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50446Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:44:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50446Keenan Kline, Santa Rosa Beach, FL It's amusing to watch the Bush dead-enders on this site talk about "his duty and his oath." Your good buddy George has absolutely no credibility on the whole "service to country" thing given his own abominable record in the Texas Air National Guard. If you haven't been to war or haven't seriously thought about what a "domestic" enemy to the constitution is you should shut up and color when it comes to this particular oath.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50449Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:46:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50449Pvt. Joe SnuffyAmen. The millitary is not a democracy; you don't get to choose what orders you follow. I hope he gets the maximum punishment for disobeying a Direct Order. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50456Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:52:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50456Darrel In Pa Mr. Watada took the oath of service, did whatever was required to become an officer (at taxpayer's expense, I might add), and now wants to quit after being ordered to deploy? He has made his own bed, and now must lie in it. From everything I have ever read about the oath of service, he has broken the law of this land. He is responsible for any punishment to be meted to him. Period. To Mr. Harley, what was Mr. Watada trading that made him a criminal? To Mr. Murdaugh, you need to realize that many, many people whom you lump together as "left-wing lunatics", are in fact more patriotic than you would ever credit them. Just beacuse someone's opinion is different from yours does not make them your enemy. Let the proper authorities do their jobs. As for the "celebrities" Penn and Sarandon, their opinions are valid, but are not my opinion. Why their opinion means so much more that they get it into print is beyond me. I believe it's just "celebrity envy" on the part of journalists, because I know that any time I hear an opinion from a "celebrity", I immediately ignore it. Journalists would do better to get opinions from average folks on the street, who more often have a much better grasp on the subject at hand than most (including "celebrities"), and whose thought process hasn't been clouded by "celebrity", or whatever it is they take in Hollywood these days. As far as "higher convictions" or "higher authorities", one must weigh those ideals against the oath to be taken, and decide BEFOREHAND which is the greater, not AFTER. By taking the oath of service, Mr. Watada decided that the oath of service was more important, and is therefore beholden to that oath. I hate this war just as much as most citizens of this country do, but I support my troops in service, and do my best to convey that support. I believe that Mr. Watada was wrong to enter the military (based on his convictions), but did so anyway, and now must live up to the expectations of his position. His choice to refuse deployment was his, and he is responsible for the ramifications of his decision. "Git-R-Done" and "Git-M-Home". My thoughts go out every day to you guys trudging through that sandy mess in Iraq and Afghanistan. Come home soon......... http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50459Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:56:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50459Eric, Charlottesville, VAThere seems to be much confusion here between a soldier's obligation to obey the orders of the President and the inherent obligation to disobey illegal orders. They apply in two very distinct situations. The oath that officers take upon commissioning is different than an enlistment oath and does not include the portion "obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed above me." Watada swore the following oath: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter." The question in Watada's courtmartial is whether he has well and faithfully discharged the duties of his office. Part of "well and faithfully" discharging your duties as an officer involves obeying lawful regulations and orders. Now's the tricky part, there is very long precedent indicating that the legality of a conflict is determined by Congress NOT an individual officer. It is not LT. Watada's right to decide on his own whether or not to deploy to Iraq. He is certainly allowed to have his own opinion of the conflict, all soldiers are allowed that. But he is not permitted to make a personal decision to not participate. The obligation to disobey illegal orders applies to "jus in bello" issues such as patently obvious war crimes. A soldier has an obligation not to intentionally kill civilians or prisoners even if he is ordered to do so. Referring to the Nuremburg principles we never prosecuted military officers for participating in an illegal war (crimes against peace) but we did prosecute them for obeying illegal orders to commit war crimes. LT. Watada is facing court-martial because he failed to do his duty as an officer and deploy with his soldiers. The legality of the war has absolutely nothing to do with this. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50461Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:57:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50461Jason JohnsonKatrina from Oregon: "Jason Johnson, educate yourself. "...and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me..." In case you still don't get it, it means you have sworn an oath to follow OUR President and his appointed staff whether you like it or not." Right, and if you read my second comment, you'll see that I fully understand that --- but that wasn't the language quoted by Francona. I was asking how the language he pointed to entailed a pledge to obey orders. Clearly, the part of the pledge you point to does indicate such a pledge. I wasn't disputing that members of the military do in fact take such a pledge; I was just asking a (sincere) question regarding how the language Francona supplied demonstrated that. As for my other point, though, the mere fact that you've taken an oath to do X doesn't mean that it is always right for you to in fact follow the pledge and do X. There are situations --- maybe extraordinary --- which call for doing not X, even in the face of a previously made oath. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50465Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:00:21 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50465Miguel OrihuelaMr. Watada volunteered for the wrong war then changed his mind when he realized like 70% of all other americans that we had been lied to. If enlisted military man and woman are allowed to vote they should be allowed to exercise their freedom of speech and dissenthttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50470Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:03:18 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50470Nick BLt. Watada accepts the consequences of his actions. He knows he could've gone to Iraq and "laid low" just to get by...would that have been the american way that we should all be proud of? No. Instead he decided to do what only Congress is truly capable of doing...declare the war in Iraq illegal. He will be found guilty, he will goto jail. But maybe, just maybe, he'll wake enough people in this country up to get off their lazy butts and start writing their repesentatives to start taking action.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50481Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:13:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50481Dan Grants Pass, ORFreedom of speech is a wonderful thing. in some country if talked the way some of you do you would be secretly rounded up and shot. I think some times some of you forget what a wonderful country this is. US American Have great rights if we disagree with the administation we can vote in a new one. One of our great right's as American is that we can volinter for service NOW. he had to know what was coming. maybe he should't of volintered. it's hind sight now he should face the punishment http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50487Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:16:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50487H. JohnsonSome people still do not understand, this issue has nothing at all to do with whether or not you approve of our "war" in Iraq. It has to do with voluntarily giving your oath as a member of the military services to, among other things, obey the orders of the president of the united states and obey the orders of the officers appointed over you. This means that you must obey these orders, whether or not you like the orders. This disipline is absoloutly necessary for the military to work. If a person does not agree with this, then DON'T JOIN the military.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50496Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:21:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50496Kat C, Tucson, AZYou all seem to be forgetting that he VOLUNTEERED after we had already enetred Iraq. I'd say he made his choise then. This isn't about weather the war is right or not. It's about a persons word. If Iraq is an unjust conflict and it's wong, is it not also wrong to lie? Or is it that no ones word means anything any more? Thats sad.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50499Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:25:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50499TobskyThose who are not in the military, it is hard to make comments if you haven't heard anything about Articles of War. You can have the right to make comments if you understand what it meant. You will understand what it is when you are inside the organization.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50502Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:27:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50502Matt, American Canyon, CALt. Watada is in a tough spot- one that I don't envy. It is wrong, I believe, to call him a coward, 1) because he has stated that he would serve in Afghanistan, indicating that this his motivation is not simply to avoid combat and 2)agree with him or not, it is a rare individual who will stand up for their principles even in the face of severe consequences. I too took the oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States"- twice, once as a sailor and once as a police officer. To me, it has a two-fold implication: one the physical defense of our nation and community as a means of preserving our Constitutional Republic, and 2) a reference to our founders strong belief that power tends to corrupt and that security is frequently the justification for the creeping deprivation of liverty. Supporting and defending the Constitution means the principles as well as the document. As distatseful as it seems, Iraq is considered by many to be a war of aggression- a notion that many if not most Americans are uncomfortable with. The sense that none of the reasons that were used to build the case against Iraq panned out to be valid has further increased that sentiment. As I understand Lt. Watada feels, as do many Americans, that his patriotism and trust in his commander-in-chief was abused by the specious rationale for the invasion of Iraq. In a way, he is also honoring another American tradition that hasn't been discussed much. America's behavior following the Second World War was unprecedented for a victor nation. We showed mercy and re-built our enemies. We didn't pillage but rather helped construct the Nurmemburg trials and touted the Rule of Law. A key precedent to come out of Nurmenburg was that "I was only following orders" would not be recognized as a valid excuse for unjustified actions in warfare. Lt. Watada's actions raise difficult questions for many Americans because they capture and highlight one of the most troubeling long-term concerns about America's involvement in Iraq, were we right and morally justified in using our awesome war powers in this case? Have we, ultimatley, done a good thing? This rightly concerns many of us and Lt. Watada has, in a sense, become our conscience on the question. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50503Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:28:24 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50503Joe, St. Clair Shores, MIIs It time for another revolution? Government no longer acts in the interest of it's people, but rather it's investors (i.e. forign governments, big business, etc...). Unless dramatic changes take place, I think it's about time to wipe the slate clean and start all over again. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50504Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:29:51 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50504R "Bruce" McAlpine, Burbank, CAThe oaths of office that have been previously cited on this post ARE the ENLISTED soldiers oath of office. They are different. Officers DO NOT swear allegiance to follow the orders of the President!!! Here are BOTH oaths: The Oath of Enlistment (for enlistees): "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." The Oath of Office (for officers): "I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50508Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:31:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50508K U, Danbury CTDoes the Military Code of Justice allow for torture? Staying silent when crimes are committed? Obeying Illegal orders? As atated above the LT signed up to the following "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." Again according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The defendant has an obligation to obeya lawful order, the question is ' was the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses a "lawful" order?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50510Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:32:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50510 real americaeven 70% americans want to end the war, the senators want to continue war, well no one listen to us. so nothing can be done, and Lt.Watada wasted his futer for nothing. as 70% can not chage the course , wht he can do , poor man will spend 5 yrs in jail.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50511Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:33:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50511Staff Sgt. CDH, USMC, Hampton, Va.Watada did not receive an illegal order he could refuse. The legality of the war is not for him to decide. That task is left to Congress. Reguardless of public sentiment now, they voted then for America to make war on Iraq. Watada's orders were to deploy to Iraq with his unit. If, once he actually had boots on the ground, he were given an illegal/immoral order (kill innocent civilians/POWs, destroy property, etc...) then, and only then, could he begin the process of refusal he so ignorantly began while still in garrison. Now he needs to be stripped of the uniform of which he is so ashamed. And why is he ashamed of the uniform when it is the President and the war he is protesting? I'm thankful he's not in my particular branch of service, let alone my chain of command. We need officers who are made of better stuff than that.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50512Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:34:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50512Eric Lehmann(Long sigh) First of all, LT W. is a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army. He is legally and morally bound by his oath to serve in Iraq or anywhere else President Bush dictates. Whether you like Pres. Bush, hate Pres. Bush, or are a yellow dog Republican who just thinks he's a yellow dog, he is the President. LT. W. is required to follow his orders and the orders of the his long list of subordinates. And no, this does not make him a Nazi or a machine. It's the nature of military service and the penalties for disobeying are quite well spelled out. If you think that's wrong, consider that in a year or two the Democrats will try to put us in the Sudan to stop the genocide there-and rightly so IMO. What will you liberals say to disgruntled Iraq vets who refuse to go for their 2nd, 3rd etc. Middle Eastern tour for Pres. Hillary? "Thanks for following your conscience?" During the Bosnian War a U.S. Soldier was court martialed because he didn't want to be in the "U.N. Army". I don't recall Sean Penn jumping to HIS defense. Perhaps Penn had stronger feelings about genocide (or was recovering from Madonna). Finally, what the media fails to report is that U.S. servicemen in Iraq are more than criminals and targets. If he went to the war, LT W might actually have helped build schools, plan local governments, dug wells, etc (the stuff you never hear about). Or even stopped people that think blowing up a hundred innocents at a time is a good idea. But if he really, honestly has moral qualms about his service, he should plead guilty and go to jail. That would satisfy his oath to the military and his conscience. To do otherwise only displays his attempt to weasel out.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50514Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:35:47 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50514E. SkyhawkI served as a Sgt. in the Army and took the same oath. Fortunately I never had to make the choice of defying my superiors because I felt that we were involved in an illegal war. Why are the Abu Ghraib soldiers in prison? Some are there because they said they were following orders. Where do you draw the line? Obviously Watada has drawn that line and has the courage to stand up to the lie that is Bush's war on Iraq. Just as Hitler's soldiers were tried for crimes, Watada is listening to his conscience as IS HIS DUTY! We went into Iraq illegally, against UN resolutions to enforce UN resolutions! Further, Bush is still attempting to undermine the constitution, but that is a whole other argument. Watada is a hero, and only liars and cowards want to see him punished.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50518Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:39:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50518C.L.Maybe he will be our president one day!!!!!!!! From what I have seen you must have at least one bad thing in your past to be the president!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50532Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:50:24 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50532Mark, Las VegasLt Watada is not whining about his impending punishment. Indeed, he has already stated that it is a done deal and he will accept the punishment imposed by the court. Anyone who labels his actions as cowardice is sadly mistaken. Like many people in this country (and most people outside), Lt Watada, after researching the decision by the Bush Administration to invade Iraq, has correctly determined that the war is immoral and illegal. The question is whether he will be released from prison once Congress comes to the same conclusion.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50534Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:52:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50534Rick Carter Bremerton WashingtonAs a newly retired Command Master Chief, let me just say that it seems that most are getting caught up in legalities of the oath and weather parts of it are debatable. The truth here is that like it or not we in the military are not allowed the same freedoms of speech (or what ever else one might call it) that civilians are. We protect the rights for others to have their say. It has to be that way for the military to be successful. There are in fact ways that people who have a problem to use the Chain of Command to get things done and LT Watada did not or was not successful in that area which led him to where he is today. The botom line is this fact. If any of us in the military was able to quit anytime we had an opinion about politics, it would leave a big hole in our forces at a time when needed most. Lets not forget the Soldiers who had to make last minuet changes to a team readied for war.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50535Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:52:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50535Jennifer, NY The reality is that if Watada is allowed to decide when and against who he will defend this country, then that would leave all those in our armed forces to decide who and when. That's just not realistic in running a military. Many join the military thinking they might not have to serve and still reap the benefits, and that's just not the case. You don't become a policeman and then say it's against your moral standards to arrest someone in posession of marijuana just because your politics are liberal on the subject. the law is the law, if we begin to allow the average citizen to set our laws it would be chaos. That is why our government is set up by representatives. if you disagree with the war, or Bush's policies, fine, fight it in legislature (good idea might have been not to re-elect). http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50536Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:52:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50536SSGT USAFI THINK WHAT HE IS DOING IS A DISGRACES TO ALL THE SOLIDERS THAT HAVE DIE. HE TOOK THE SAME OATH THAT EVERYONE SERVING IN THE MILITARY HAVE TAKEN. I HAVE NOT SEEN HIM GIVING THAT NICE PAY CHECK THAT HE HAVE COLLECTED FOR THE LAST THREE YEAR FOR SEATING BEHIND A DESK DOING NOTHING. I'M A SOLIDER IN THE AIR FORCE AND WE ARE GETTING TIRED ON THESE SOLDIER COMING OUT AGAINST THE WAR WHEN THEIR NUMBER IT CALL TO GO, BUT I SURE BET THAT WITHDRAWN THE MONEY ON THE 1ST AND 15TH OF EVERY MONTH FOR DOING NOTHING. WE GET PAID TO BE READY TO GO TO WAR WHEN THE PRESIDENT CALL FOR IT. SO DON'T COMPLAIN NOW. AS AN OFFICER HE SHOULD BE ASHAMED BECAUSE A LOT MORE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN PAID LESS THAT HIM DID BACK OUT OF THEIR DUTY.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50537Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:52:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50537george, charleston, scI served for 21 years and 3 months in the Air Force, including two years four months in Vietnam. If more would refuse to serve in this Bush family war we may see an end.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50539Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:54:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50539CW3 (ret.) Mark E. HardenPolitics aside, the Lt. let his troops down- soldiers who depended upon him- the oath does mean something and his decision not to deploy will haunt him someday- as well it should..."and gentlemen in England now a-bed shall think themselves accursed they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day... http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50540Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:55:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50540John Graves, Montgomery, ALIf you have never served a day in the active duty military, you have not earned the right to judge a man that has. Unfortunately, the vast majority of conservatives are those that fit this description and totally disregard that fact. Having taken the oath to serve myself, I get a kick out of those that are the first to judge but never had the guts to take the oath themselves. If our forefathers had been like them, we would be speaking German today as well. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50541Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:55:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50541Tony Granfors, Westlake, OhioI'm not a liberal but I am getting tired of hearing that all liberals hate our country and our military. If someone disagrees with your point of view, it doesn't mean they hate what you love. they just disagree. I would like somebody to define that line you may cross when an order is illegal. How did we decide that the German soldiers following orders then are now guilty of war crimes now? How will the future decide what we are doing now?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50542Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:55:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50542Steve Beresh, Niagara Falls, OntarioOn the side of those who support Watada, you have the viewpoint that while he DID enlist with full knowledge of the war in Iraq, the Iraq war is an illegal action, and based on the Nuremburg trials Watada is entitled and even required to obey what he believes is the correct moral choice. On the side of those that condemn him, you have the viewpoint that the man took an oath to obey orders, and well, an oath's an oath. You don't break an oath. By oath he swore allegiance, and he should be tried for breaking said oath. But here's the thing: a conscience does not swear allegiance to anything except a moral code. You cannot *force* your conscience to commend every decision a higher ranking officer makes. HOPEFULLY, no one in military has sworn their conscience away to ANY president, Bush or otherwise. If America has become a place where the military regularly oaths away their moral compass to whoever's in the White House, then that States are no BETTER than Communist China. In fact, I'd say the States would be even WORSE off - at least China's up front about making it known you're basically oathing your conscience away.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50544Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:56:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50544TTo accuse liberals of not loving America or the military is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard! The Bush administration took the fear of a country after 911 and twisted that fear and newly learned need for revenge towards Iraq with lies and deception to create an illegal occupation of a country that did us no harm! If you go back a little bit in your history you will see who put Saddam into power in the first place and gave Iraq weapons! This goes deeper than most of you but not all of you know and our precious soldiers should not be meer puppets on strings awaiting orders to be picked off in Iraq! Can you recognise a terrorist if you saw one on the street, can you recognise a sniper, a suicide bomber ... NO! But with all our soldiers in uniform they are recognised easily and picked off like sitting ducks! Not only is this war illegal but how do you fight a war against an invisible enemy unless you become invisible yourself? This young man has every right to not want to police a civil war of millions where the enemy can not even be recognised but our soldiers can!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50545Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:57:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50545Ryan neI agree with Mike in GA. Big surprise here that the left backs this tuck and run idea. Its exactly what the left wants us to do in Iraq.. This soldier is a coward and should have known in the first place what he was signing up for. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50547Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:57:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50547John Doe, Salt Lake City, UtahAccording to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, American military personnel are allowed to refuse unlawful orders. However, the judge in this case has refused to consider any testimony regarding the legality of the Iraq War. This is a shameful travesty of justice.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50548Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:58:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50548Pepe MirandaLt. Ehren Watada is the "stupid one" to sign his name on the dotted line. He volunteered to join the US Armed Forces without undue influence. As a former member of the US Navy, I was in many conflicts and the Persian Gulf War. If he wanted to exercise his freedom of speech, he joined the wrong club. He wanted his voice to be heard, the military is the last place to be. He must be punished to the maximum allowed by law for his insubordination, desertion and conduct unbecoming of an officer. He is a stain in an officer's rank. He wanted peace, he should join the Peace Corps and not the USArmed Forces. They normally go to war. And to all of those who think otherwise, they do not appreciate the sacrifices of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the this "FREEDOM" we are enjoying. I have a son who is currently serving the Armed Forces and his wife is also in active duty. If the event that I loose either one, it will be a PAIN that I have not experienced in my life. It will probably hurt so much but that is life. It is NOT the fault of the Chief Of ALL the Armed Forces if he give his life to protect us. It is our FREEDOM we are protecting. I would rather bring the war to them than fight them in our backyard...at any cost.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50549Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:58:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50549Aaron Bonar, Omaha, NEI can't believe the incredible shortsightedness of many far left ideologues. Do you really want a military that picks and chooses what instructions from the civilian government it will obey? Though a military that follows orders is dangerous to it's own people when the elected government is out of line (now?) a military that does not follow orders is dangerous under any circumstances. The world of the military is not an armed version of the civilian world. The feelings, rights, and even the lives of the people in the military are necessarily secondary considerations when placed against the goals and missions set for the military by the civilian government. The rights and lives of people outside the United States are of even less concern when placed against the needs of the service. It is an ugly truth that carries so much danger with it that the only possible reason for taking this risk is the horrid certainty that failing to maintain a military will result in worse. Having said that, if the man truly objects then he has my admiration. Any good officer realizes that he may be called upon to sacrifice the lives of himself or his men for the greater good. It is sad to see that for many sacrificing their careers and "good name" is more difficult. A man who makes a stand in the full knowledge of the consequences, good and bad, personal or general, is done a disservice by those who attempt to excuse or dilute his sacrifice.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50551Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:59:53 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50551JerryCThe Nuremburg trials held that 'following orders' was not a defense for illegal acts. Look it up. Shrub could be indicted and convicted of war crimes for what he has done, which to some was lying us into this catastrophe, and to others was being too stupid to keep us out. Pick one. He's not only the worst in history but the full effects of this disaster won't be known for years, as the Chinese use our money to overtake us amoung other things. But, to the matter at hand, it's an illegal war fought under false pretenses.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50552Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:59:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50552Kurt Christensen, Tampa, FlThe LT is a coward! He shoulds be court-martialed! Military personnel obey the office of the Commander in chief--not the person! Get grip you idiot leftist cowards! If you hate the USA so much get the hell out! LTC(RET)Khttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50553Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:00:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50553Dave, Dallas, TXHopefully the FBI and Homeland Security will be scrutinizing this thread and adding some of you to their watch lists.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50557Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:04:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50557Cat Smith, Frederick, MDI have just about had enough of all the bleeding hearts supporting this guy. He joined the military, plain and simple. He was trained to fight. Who did he think he would be fighting? Did it ever occur to him when he was cashing his big fat officer paycheck that he could possibly go to war? Hello? Did he realize there was a war going on when he JOINED???? This chicken is not standing up for what he believes in! He is shaming the military and what it stands for. He is slapping mud in the face of every US service member stationed throughout the world. He should be ashamed of himself. He should be made to repay every single cent that he "took" from the taxpayers of this country, if he does not want to hold up his end of the deal. He should be court martialed, stripped of rank, and be given a dishonorable discharge, as well as be forced to reimburse the US taxpayers for all his training and salary which was fraudently obtained. He has let his fellow servicemembers down. He is a coward. His family should hang their head in shame as well. Everyone who supports this "man" should pack up their belongings and move themselves and their families to Iraq. Maybe they would be happier. Not our problem you say? Yes, it is our problem. President Bush made the decisions he did based on the information he had at the time. That is called an informed decision. Those people that support this spoiled rotten brat, have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. You all shame every servicemember who ever served in the United States military. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50558Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:04:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50558Don Boe, Boise, IdahoI doubt that someone who has not served their country should comment on this but freedom encourages that. Turn off your TV if you don't like what you see, don't enlist or commission if you don't believe in your duties, don't critize a person if you don't agree with their views. This is freedom of choise. I doubt some of the blogs would be as hateful or opinionated if that person had the responsibility of the President of the United States. Further education in the duties of government office would be very entlightening to most of the people America. What a great country!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50559Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:04:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50559Mark Moore, Kansas City, MOI believe LT Watada enlisted in the military to become a commissioned officer in order to pull this stunt. Everything about him is packaged just right to be the poster boy for the anti-war movement by refusing to deploy. He is a disgrace to the United States Army. Give him a few years in the DB at Leavenworth to find out if it was worth it. For all the whiners out there that disagree with me, I've been there, done that and have the CIB to show I wasn't a Fobbit. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50560Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:04:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50560D WheelerLook at this another way, Here is a guy that volunteered to do a job, but as some point he decided that I do not want to be accountable for my decision so I will change my mind and do something else. I will not honor my commitments or duty. This type of person is not someone I would hire nor would it be someone I would want my daughter to marry. If you cannot stand up and do your duty and make yourself accountable in this case, I would doubt few people would trust you in any thing else. It is not about the war, agree with or disagree with, it is about being accountable for your decision's.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50562Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:04:58 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50562Paul C, Los Angeles.That kind of blind faith "You Took an Oath" BS is old and tired. People really should think for themselves and if something is obviously wrong TAKE A STAND. I'm sure all the WWII Nazi's could say "I was following orders" but who's going to say they were correct and loyal ?? I take my hat off to this guy for standing up against dumb and stupid superiors, plus all the flag waving fools who will now vilify him.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50563Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:05:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50563Greg Spaulding"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.) Since 1775 all military personal have taken some oath of allegiance similar to the one above. Lt. Watada took the same oath that all military officers have taken for nearly 50 years. Enlisted personal take a similar oath. No where in the oath does it say, I will follow orders only if I feel like it or if I agree with the commander-in-chief. Lt. Watadas ledership and actions are supposed to instill trust in the troops under him. By breaking his oath he has broken the trust of all those around him, both junior and senior. Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon wouldn't understand what trust or honor is though. Just look at the wrecks their personal lives are; divorces, children out of wedlock, etc. etc. Lots of trust there. It's sad that so many people, including the media, look up to the wacko entertainers and celebrities. They'll be the first ones to hide and scream where's our military when the next 9/11 happens rather than step up in support of our military. As a US Navy veteran I for one would be happy to see him get a dishonorable discharge and what ever else he brought upon himself. Lt. Watada should consider himself lucky if that's all he gets. By shrugging off his duties as an officer and purposely missing movement he probably save himself from being shot and killed by friendly fire. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50564Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:06:47 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50564Adrian Armold, Oceanside CAMost posters here are missing the point. The armed services, to an individual, are disempowered to refuse obedience to the lawful orders of the president of the U.S., and rightfully so. Military coup and junta are not in the best interests of the American people and the constitution protects against that. The Lt's argument that deployment to Iraq constitutes an illegal order is predicated on some deference to international legitimacy in determining legality. It is a weak legal stance, one that didn't even make it into trial. The fact that this war was initiated on specious justification is certainly a problem, but it's a problem that should be corrected through the checks and balances of our government. The legislature has the means and the responsibility, as did the voters of this country in 2004. Anyone that suggests that it is in the best interest of America for Lt Watada to set the precedent of refusing orders to affect political change hasn't picked up what the founding fathers have put down, and should be careful what they are asking for.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50566Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:08:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50566Larry LouwellinYou folks coming to Watada's aid, you amaze me. This soldier "volunteered" for this duty and took the oath. Court-martial him, by all means. If he didn't agree with the oath he was taking he had his opportunity to walk out during the oath taking ceremony. If he wanted a "kush" job he should have looked else-where outside the military. Oh, BTW, John Doe 1, how about a real name instead of hiding.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50567Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:08:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50567Jack; Fairfax, VAWe put Watada on trial because he DID NOT obey orders from those above him. And, in Guantanamo, we are holding hundreds because they DID obey orders from those above them. Two faced.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50568Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:08:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50568q mollinI'll never forget the images at the start of the war.........iraqis attacking our 50 million dollar tanks with 1974 little white datsun pick ups with a machine gun bolted to the back..........sheesh.........and these guys were a threat to the united states..........this wasnt a war....its an invasion........its wrong and watada stands against it.....good for him...!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50569Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:09:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50569Tom TodiaBEing put into a brig is better than killing civilians and ening up in many small pieces. We are occupying, the war is over. The military didn't lose, they beat the enemy, they captured Saddam, they met every mile stone that we told them was there "Current" purpose. Bush has left them in harms way to do a job they never agreed to do, and I wouldn't go either. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50570Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:09:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50570Lynn, Washington DCI want to start by saying that I didn't vote for Bush, either time around. But I married a soldier, Army reservist, who did a year tour in Iraq. When he joined the reserves eight years ago noone could have forseen 9/11. My husband was in Bosnia at the time and ended his deployment there knowing he'd be heading somewhere else to fight. He did his tour in Iraq and returned home unharmed and for that I am grateful. Not once did he complain about going to war. He signed up and knew when he took his oath that the US military could send him anywhere at anytime. As a LT. he gave orders to men that could have gotten them injuried or killed, and they followed them. He himself lead convoys in Iraq, all the time on the look out for ambushes and IEDs. He followed orders because thats what soldiers do. They don't get to decide which orders to follow and which ones to ignore. Soldiers follow orders. I'm ashamed of Watada. He's supposed to be a leader of men. Instead he turned out to be a coward. His men went off to war, regardless of how they feel about President Bush and Iraq. They went. Watada should have gone as well. My husband went just as thousands more have gone, many more than once.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50572Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:10:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50572Mary Crosby, Little Rock, ARI remember the draft unlike many. I'm also a liberal. To many individuals enlist in the military for the paycheck and education benefits. During war time chances are you are going to the war. If he has a conscientious objection or didn't want to go to war he should not have signed the contract. Not only do I feel like he should be court martialed but he should spend time in Leavenworth. This is not about Bush, this is about the Uniform Code of Military Justice, integrity and ethics. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50575Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:12:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50575jeff havelocklet us not forget, he knew we were at war BEFORE he enlisted. He was aware of all the facts BEFORE he enlisted. If he did not wish to support this war he should have not enlisted. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50576Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:12:53 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50576Marvin WoodyIt a good thing that the soldiers of the 1940s didn't interpret the Japanese threat the same way many of the current respondents are. Let's see; So the Japanese attacked Hawaii, no skin of my nose, I'm not going! I will personally decide what actions I join. This will certainly make a poor military! As a soldier, one is expected to obey command. Nobody asked Watada to do anything but support US policy. Not genocide, not burn and pillage. Not loot and destroy. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50577Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:13:44 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50577Ruffneck, Philly, PAI have a few questions: Is it okay for a police officer to not arrest and detain a criminal, because the man is the same skin color as himself, and because he is either sympathetic towards the black panther party or the white supremacists? Does that police officers personal conscious rank higher than his duty to his sworn job? How about a paramedic who would refuse treatment at a scene of a shooting because he thinks the man he is working on was the shooter? Does the paramadic have the right to refuse the treatment because his conscious says something different than his sworn duty? I find it a scarry thing that people are willing to make a social rule that personal convictions should some how stand taller than sworn duty, responsibility, and honor to ones own sworn commitment. They would make this rule only because it involves politics and a single war that they don't agree with? I'd hope when the day comes when you need a police officer to do their sworn duty to protect you, that the officer refuses that protection because they don't like your stance on politics or because he finds fault in the place you work at. It won't happen because our police carry higher values in their sworn duty. I would expect nothing less from our all-volunteer military.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50578Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:13:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50578 SFC US Army look alot of the people on this board are really makeing me sick. As a soldier and oif vet myself i can sum this up real quick. Lt Watada does not descide foreighn policy. The president and Congress decide that. His job is to lead soldiers. By not doing this he has bypassed both the Army values and Warrior ethos. But something tells me he wasnt mutch of a leader to begin whith.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50579Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:13:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50579Mark Moore, Kansas City, MOKeenan, it is true officers don't enlist, but LT W. did enlist and went to OCS to become an officer. Larry A. is correct about him enlisting in the Army. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50581Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:15:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50581J. Pritchard, Bend, ORI had opportunity to listen to Lt. Watada and found his position to be thoughtful and diligently researched. He came to his conclusions while studying the war and its basis in an effort to know how to prepare his men for deployment to Iraq. Clearly, he intended to go, except his research led him to conclude that he could not follow what he believes are illegal orders. If the orders are legal, Watada should be punished, if they are not legal, he should be exonorated. Unfortunately, the legality of his orders will not be examined by the military court and Watada has been barred from presenting this issue in his own defense. In defending the constitution Watada has a sworn duty to defy unconstitutional orders as well as illegal and inhumane orders. His conclusion that this war is illegal has merit. Only Congress can declare war. Read your constitution. Congress did not do that. It authorized a use of force, not a war. This issue needs to be tried by the highest courts and I hope it gets there. Watada is a courageous man, regardless of whether he is right or wrong, because he was willing to take a stand for conscience. I salute you Lieutenant. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50582Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:15:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50582Jim ThompsonLet me see, George Bush, wrong. Dick Cheney, Wrong. WMD, wrong. Mission accomplished, wrong. Oil will pay for war, wrong. Troops greeted as liberators, wrong. Insurgencey at its last throws, wrong. Need more troops wrong. Watada took an oath and now refuses to do his duty, wrong. Since when does 1,000 wrongs and 3000 young men and womens deaths make a right.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50584Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:16:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50584Mark VonFangeWhile I am baffled by the fact that Mr. Watada joined after the (arguably illegal) invasion of Iraq, this really comes down to established case law, not political opinions. As Jason Johnson pointed out, the decisions at the Nuremberg (sp?) trials are relevant to this case. I believe there is also case law from Vietnam & possibly other conflicts where individual soldiers were held accountable for war crimes, even though they were following orders. I'm pretty sure that there is some sort of a consciense clause that has been established in case law. However, as this is a military court marshall, Watada would have to convince the military itself that the war is an illegal invasion according to international law. I find it highly doubtful that he will be able to succeed in that. I am personally just hoping that his personal justification can reduce his sentence greatly from the maximum possible 8 years. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50586Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:18:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50586chris D, Manitowoc, WIKeenan, and the rest of the long winded misguided losers, Bill Clinton, Bush and the rest of the prior presidents have the mandate to protect this nation. Talk about GWB being a traitor and ememy is plain silly and naive. If you take the oath, you follow their lead until the next election. Get over your blinded hate, get a job, vote in the next election, and change the president. Everything else is wasted hot airhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50587Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:19:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50587MLT, Annapolis, Md.I am active duty, my husband is in the National Guard, AND I am a Democrat. That said -- this was is legal, whether you agree with it or not. The President ordered us to invade Iraq with the approval of our democratically elected Congress. We are still in Iraq because, so far, our democratically elected leaders are continuing to authorize funding. That oath is all-encompassing... young men & women don't like cleaning toilets, but must do it if they are ordered to do so. The servicemember does not decide for themselves which orders they are and are not going to follow if they know those orders to be lawful. I didn't vote for him, but he's the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces -- unless Congress decides to impeach him or the international tribunal charges him with crimes against humanity, we who wear the uniform are contractually obligated to do what we said we would do. It's hard for me to swallow listening to fellow Americans slam the Oath I took when they obviously don't understand what it really means. I made my choice, of free will, the day I took that Oath -- just like Watada did.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50589Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:19:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50589Bridget, Washington, DCI applaud Lt. Watada for having the courage to stand up for his convictions. The oath stated above vows to protect the Constitution from enemies foreign AND domestic. The Bush Administration has taken every opportunity to try and circumvent the laws and foundations of our nation, hiding it in the name of "war". The use of that word is an excellent example of the Executive Branch's attempts to shirk accountability. The Founding Fathers arranged that the President is the Commander in Chief, but the Legislature declares war. We are in an undeclared war, which means the President thinks he can do whatever he wants (pre-emptive strikes, torture of foreign POWs, etc) and not have to answer for it. Lt. Watada recognizes the domestic threat to the Constitution and I admire him for speaking out.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50590Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:22:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50590chris D, park city, UTOr Russian. Remember the Pershing missle outcry??? Well stated Mike.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50591Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:22:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50591CPT. Stepan Sonnemann (ret./res.), German ArmyMaybe, I am not a specialist for the U.S.-military-law. Anyway, I take it, that also in the U.S. Army (like in most democratic-state-armys) there ist the imparative rule, that any officer, NCO or enlisted is not to follow an illegal order. If this is so, the claim of Lt. Watada is highly understandable as he considers the war in Iraq as illegal and a violation of international and humanity laws (as a lot of people -e included- do). Do not get me wrong: The US- servicemen and -women deserve a respect in their deliverance of what they think is their duty. But in my eyes, this young officer deserves as much respect for what he thinks, his duty is: an upright defense of the constitional values of the U.S. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50610Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:30:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50610Chuck HMost of you are ridiculous. It's not as if we're talking about a seasoned soldier who has spent decades in the military and is now refusing to fight a new battle he doesn't agree with. That could almost be forgiveable, even commendable. This is a new guy, enlisted AFTER the invasion of Iraq, and yet refuses to serve in the comflict that was going on before he enlisted! Like he didn't know that was a possibility? If he's so "moral" why did he join in the first place? And those of you spouting off about Bush and Cheney being illegal, moral, impeachable, etc--your arguments only get watered down and nauseating when you insist on shoving them in every discussion, even ones that are unrelated, like this one.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50612Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:30:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50612Toby HillI only wish the military would have charged him with being a traitor and treason. His position and rhetoric on the war while in uniform has given aid and comfort to the enemy. He's getting off pretty light only facing 4 years. If one can't handle what the military does and follow the orders of their superiors then don't sign up. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50619Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:35:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50619John, Portland, OROne issue that has not been discussed is the Lt Watada has refused to deploy. Deploying to Iraq is not an illegal order. Despite what you might think of the Iraq war as a whole, deployment itself is not immoral or some kind of war-crime. Being ordered to kill civilians is. He should have waited until being given such an order, then taken his stand. The reason he did not is probably because he never would have been given an such order. In fact, there is plenty of opportunities for a conscientious young leader to make a difference in a war to prevent crimes. The fact that he balked before even leaving the US indicates his motives are probably more political than moral. A soldier who makes the right choice in Iraq saves likes and makes a real difference. A soldier who refuses to even go saves no lives, but gets lots of publicity.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50622Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:36:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50622Sam Scowl, Norfolk, VALT Watada did not forfeit his constitutional rights when he volunteered to sereve in the US ARMY. He did swear or affirm that he would support and defend and follow the orders of the President of the United States. LT Watada does not have to agree with the war, but failing to follow an order is time of war is a courts-martial offense and could be punishable by death. 4-years in prison is the wasy way out for him. We have 3000-plus service members who have given their lives and thousands who have been severly injured following the same orders LT Watada fails to follow. Other than the press and the hollywood elite find him and his case special. Why aren't they truely support all those service members who are and have served honorably?? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50623Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:36:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50623jim w. arkansasOne thing that no one seems to be aware of is that the officer in question has said that it was after he enlisted and was sworn in that he learned facts have lead him to believe that the invasion of Iraq was an unlawful invasion. Now that being said, anyway who has taken the oath of the military and served in the US armed services knows that you are also taught that if you knowingly follow an unlawful order you are just as guilty as anyone else. Therefore if this soldier truly believes this is an unlawful invasion then he is simply obeying his oath and doing his duty by refusing to deploy.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50624Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:39:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50624Ron Houston, TXThe US participated in war trials where Nazis and Japanese were executed for "following" orders. It may be a stretch to call Dubya a Nazi but someone who clearly was gunning for Saddam regardless of the facts and who has subsequently lied to the American public deserves no respect. Sadly he continues to send American troops to their death and injuries while trying to convince an ever skeptical public he is right. Now Gates says that this surge may not be the end of it. Whe will anyone in the administration accept that we cannot undo thousands of years of tribal culture and hatred. How does an idiot who cannot even speak the English language (nucular being the prime example) think he is smart enough to win in that environment? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50625Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:41:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50625Kevin, Santa Cruz.Pvt. England obeyed her orders. Look where it got her. I don't understand how torturing people serves to defend the Constitution, but I know that if she had refused, she'd be in jail, just the same. So here's a hypothetical question for Col. Rick. You are ordered to shell an Iraqi city with white phosphourus. You know that the city is full of women and children. Do you obey your oath??http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50627Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:42:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50627Brian S Moorestown, NJSoldiers are not politicians. If he wanted to protest or change the direction of this country or this war, then he should have gone into politics. Oops, he volunteered. Even if the US had a conscription policy, the idea is the same. Too bad if you don't agree with the mission. It's about following orders and *nothing* else. Watada cannot make a valid argument as to why he won't serve. The protection and subsequent freedom that our military provides us, is able to do so based on the premise of following direct orders without question. There is no debating this fact. Sadly, a majority of Americans today cannot fathom pledging to fight to their deaths for this country no matter the mission, and therefore the debate continues.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50628Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:43:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50628Scott,Albion,NyAfter reading some of your comments it is obvious; some of you resent that you were drafted, and actually had to fight for the freedoms that you take for granted, some say "This isn't fun anymore. I'm taking my toys and going home". Some haven't a clue ! To some of us that oath to obey our commander in chief had meaning..Our sons and daughters are there, diong what has to be done, not waiting for a 747 to land on their dining room table !Being a veteran of an equally unpopular war 40 yrs. ago, I understand how demoralizing it is, not, to have the support of the country that means SO very much to me and my comrades in arms. I admire and appreciate every one of them. No one sane likes war; unless they profit from it. You can't change your mind in the middle of it, like Mrs. Draft dodger. When you are called, saying NO, is not an option.. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50629Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:43:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50629Michael, Verona, NJCourt marshal this loser to the fullest extent. He volunteered after the Iraq war started. You're either true to your commitment or you're not. With soldiers of that mentality, we will not be able to defend the US. Why don't all the US soldiers just bag their committment - especially those already in the hellhole that is IRAQ right now!?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50630Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:44:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50630Douglas Toms, Cincinnati, OhioDon't volunteer to be part a of the greatest heros and treasures Amercia has to offer unless you have the honor and backbone to match the others beside you. He's a dishonor to himself, his unit, his family and the U.S. Military. He deserves to be prosecuted. Can't pick your fights if you want to be an American soldier. Never have and never will be able to have this choice if we are to remain a free country. Freedom is not free. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50631Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:44:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50631E Lynch, San Francisco,Calif.I think it is interesting to note that Lt. Watada only protested the war when he received orders to go to Iraq. If his convictions were so strong why didn't he protest before he received orders. Not only is he a coward, but he is dragging down the good name of many Japanese-Hawaiians who over many decades set an example of outstanding service to our country in the Armed Forces. I would bust him to private and send him to his unit in Iraq. Why waste time and money sending him to prison. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50632Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:44:53 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50632Linda, OregonYes, we have gotten that bad as a society! When you take an oath, you keep it. Loyalty, these days, is seen as a weakness. I agree with Larry A. We need to have a draft for everyone, rich and poor, black and all other colors, male and female. I believe that everyone, regardless of income, ethnic background, or race, should contribute to their country, whether it is community service or military.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50633Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:45:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50633Wayne Isailovich, Crown Point, IndianaHonorable Americans do not hate the military nor do they hate the government. We are appalled by the fact that our "Commander-in-Chief" has chosen to sacrifice the lives of our men and women in the armed forces to avenge some perceived wrong committed against George I by Saddam Hussein. We are also sickened by the fact that the lives of our military men and women are sacrificed simply so that Halliburton and Bechtel can continue to rape the American taxpayers. We cannot put a price on the lives of our soldiers in Iraq. Evidently the billions already earned by Cheney and Co. isn't enough. They want more. And they're willing to allow our men and women in the armed forces to die for their profits. It sickens me to no end.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50635Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:47:53 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50635Joe, Naples, FLJust another spineless, gutless Lib!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50636Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:48:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50636Shawn Fred, San Jose CAOne thing that makes America great is the freedom of choice. The one thing that keeps us in line is the consequences that go with those choices. I walk into a casino I have the choice to place a bet or not. I can’t place a bet and then take it back if I don’t win. Once you VOLUNTEER for military duty you pretty much give your life to the government. As for following orders in the military. You can’t have people thinking of what orders to follow and what orders not to. The military as we know it would not work and there would be no point to having a military. Another thing that makes America great is we have a legal system to help with the gray area’s of our law. Now lets look at his defense. The war is illegal. No laws where broken. Matter in fact Saddam broke many rules and the UN did not enforce these laws. Saddam broke many of the international rules placed by the International leaders. So in that sense the US was enforcing that laws of the UN. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50637Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:48:16 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50637Michael WilliamsIn case somebody missed something, my oath as an officer in the U.S. Navy did not say I had to obey the officers appointed ove me. It only says that I swore to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. As part of that oath I must obey the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In it, is says I do not have to obey illegal orders. Lt. Watada is arguing that the order he is disobeying is an ilegal order. That is something to be determined at trial and, as is likely, on apppeal. If the war in Iraq is legal, Lt. Watada has violated the law. He is arguing that he has not and that he is indeeded respecting his oath of office under the constitution. Let's wait until the trial proceeds an see what happens.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50639Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:49:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50639spam, durango, coGitmo Bay comes to mind here. Blindly listen to your commanders no matter what? I think not. Anyone who has the b_all to stand up to what they feel is wrong... has a lot more courage than someone who blindly does what he is told.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50642Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:52:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50642Phil Thomas, Portland, OregonIt seems to me that Lt. Watada is following his concience. He is thinking, in other words, instead of blindly following. It comes to mind,that in previous wars, those who carried out orders that they knew were illegal, immoral, against human nature, etc. merely because they were ordered to do so by a superior were prosecuted for war crimes. Why would the United States prosecute anyone, especially a soldier, who objects to a war that so many think is illegal??? There are a number of issues here, not to mention freedom of speech, which make up a number of counts against Lt. Wataba. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50645Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:55:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50645Harold Babb, Rowland Heights, CAI hear what Lt. Watada is saying, and I respect his decision. Now it's time for him to man up and serve his time in the brig or stockade. The military doesn't choose the wars.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50646Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:56:19 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50646Allan StearnsI find it disturbing to read comments that the President is a lier and is the enemy etc. He was elected twice, and he is the Commander in Chief. I am recently retired from the military. While I was on duty, and President Clinton was the Commander in Chief, I would have followed him into battle - because he was the command in chief. He never saw the inside of a military uniform. W was a qualified AF Fighter pilot. There is a difference. Regarding following a president who had never been to war, I would ask the writer if he could tell me how many battles Pres Wilson fought prior to WW I or FDR prior to WW II. Let's face it, Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn and many of their Hollywood friends, have only seen war from the movie screen. If they were asked to serve to protect their country from unseen enemies, how fast do you think they would run to the recruiting office? War is not pretty, war is not for cowards, and certainly war is not for the faint of heart. I am proud of my service, and I am proud of those who served before me and those serving today. I only pray, that when Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon need protecting in the future, that there will be willing volunteers ready to serve to protect their country from "all enemies foreign or domestic". Lt Col Allan Stearns, USAF retiredhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50647Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:56:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50647Action, Madison, WisconsinAll the Nazi's at the Nuremberg trials made the argument that they were "just obeying orders." The tribunal held that unlawful orders should not and must not be obeyed. If you obey an unlawful order you are as guilty as the Nazi that issued it. We don't need a nation of baaaaing republicans - I mean sheep.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50648Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:57:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50648Rich Kerr, G.R., MIIt is quite obvious that many people have the wrong idea or concept of the military and serving in it. As I told my daughter before she enlisted in the army, once you raise your right hand and say "I do" the military owns you. She went and served two tours in Iraq and could possibly be called up again if needed. (So no, I don't feel sorry for the Lt.) You may not agree with what you are told to do while serving, but like it or not you do it. This is especially true now that we have an all volunteer military unlike Viet Nam, where many were draftees who had no real choices; serve in 'Nam, serve in jail, or run to Canada. I would guess that many who criticize the prosecution of the Lt. have never served in the military and do not understand that it is not like being a civilian where you can make your own choices as you please. One of the key ingredients of the military is dicipline, without it you don't have an effective force and will never win a battle, in fact you won't even get to the battle. So if this young man got himself an education courtesy of Uncle Sugar via ROTC, OCS, a military acdemy/school, or West Point he is going to have to pay the price of serving until his required duty time is up. Once you join the service you can't just quit because you don't feel right about serving in a particular place. I can see that we as Americans place no importance on taking a vow, whether it's marriage, military, or anything else. Too many people in America today believe it's ok to ignore the oath they took and just quit when it suits them (or gets too tough for them). It's no wonder we have such a screwed up country and government!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50649Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:59:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50649Trish Gross Marathon,FLMy parents both served, three of my brothers served, my husband served, and now my son is in Iraq for the second time. I find the conduct of this so called officer an act of treason. Better to admit when you are a chicken than to blame the president or who ever. Truth is he is a coward!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50650Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:59:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50650Ron Lewis, Gig Harbor, WaI just can't keep quiet about this and have very strong feelings. If this character doesn't get the whole book thrown at him it't a slap in the face for those served our country and especially died for it. How can the military keep people disciplined otherwise? I made it through by submitting 24/7 for 4 years and got out after my obligation was complete. I would have spit on Johnson but he was still my Commander and Chief.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50651Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:59:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50651Ed Simonis, Carmichael, CA"...against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." may include the current commander-in-chief....http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50652Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:00:04 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50652azbennyGerman officers were tried at the Nuremberg trials for following the orders of their commander, Hitler!! Lt. Watada has a conscience------certainly not something the bush criminals have!!!!! He refused to take part in an ILLEGAL war! He is a HERO. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50653Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:00:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50653JoshThrough personal experience military recruiting is about as truthful as that car salesman that you talked to last week. Our government isn't much different with it's deception, lies, and corruption. To call this man a coward is a little far fetched. He didn't run to Canada, he didn't go AWOL, he stood up for what he believed in and he may pay a price for it. Let's not forget that's how America began. And also I do recall reading that he requested orders to go to Afghanistan(sp?) instead of Iraq. All he has objected to was the war in Iraq as have how many people in the U.S.?, military or not, there or not. Free speech is supposed to be an american privelage as well, but this privelage doesn't seem to be given to military personel either, even if he followed orders he'd be charged for voicing his opinion. One of the charges against this man. And let's say a military officer gives and order that is carried out...and it was a crime...who's going to get charged and go to jail,,,I seriously doubt it would be the officer. I say we have the wrong people on trial here. No one is above the law, right? Then how come Bush and the rest of his incompitent crew aren't facing charges. He obviously isn't protecting the consitition, he's violating it by writing his own rules to fit his agenda. We'll wake up sooner or later. Don't get me wrong here I love my country and I would sooner than later take up arms to protect it. But day after day our rights, rights to privacy, and privelages are all being stripped away. "My country is killing me softly" All you folks that are so brainwashed you can't open your eyes wide enough to see your hand are just about as bad as the religous extremists that are the root of our problem in Iraq and across the Middle East. Not everything is just Black and White.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50654Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:01:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50654Mike F. Boise, Id.I'm a former Marine, Vietnam combat vet. My son just finished a four year enlistment in the USMC, with 2 deployments to Iraq. I did not agree with Mr. Bush and the reasons we went to war, nor do I agree with the way it has, and is still being handled. I supported my son, and his choices. He, and I, both know that when you enlist...take that oath...you serve at the pleasure of the President. End of discusion. You have no voice, except tp say " eye eye, Sir " and do your job to the best of your ability. And, one of the most important jobs you have, is to be there for the Marines you serve with. Nothing else matters. Nothing. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and please vote these people out of office!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50655Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:02:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50655Rustyn Rose, Phoenix, AZ.The comments to this post of those who stand by Watada only serve to prove the point that we have become a nation of mindless driveling fools who don't deserve the gifts that our democracy has given us. We are no longer a SuperPower. We are merely a pompous, overly politically correct nation of whiney babies hiding behind our Superman image. Every person who enjoys the freedom of being American should have to serve a tour of duty to defend this country. Bush is an idiot, but we are the morons who elected him. Our collective MTV, Reality TV, American Idol, X-box dulled society has devolved so far that we elected a bobblehead idiot to man the greatest country in the world. This is a stupid war, driven by an inept presidential administration, but our armed services, who are all voluntary, have sworn loyalty to the nation, not to a specific cause. Watada knew what he was getting into when he enlisted. It's not like he joined at peacetime. Watada has no integrity and he is spitting in the faces of his fellow soldiers and Americans. Watada is a pathetic coward, just like the man he calls a criminal (Bush).http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50657Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:02:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50657Yankee Zephyr, Olympia WA.I find it very interesting that all you bleeding heart liberals who sent me to Vietnam via the draft in 1969 are now saying this war which is being fought by a volunteer army should make a hero out of a soldier who disobeys a lawful order for deployment. I also find it interesting that you bozos forget that the reason we are there is because Sadam Hussien failed to prove to the United Nations that he had destroyed his WMD. I do not like the way this conflict is going either but this LT. is no hero and to make him so would dishonor those heroes who have fallen in all previous conflicts and those who support him should be ashamed of them selfs to disgrace our armed forces who will lay down their lives so you have the freedoms you enjoy such, as free speech. "Cry Havoc and let loose the Dogs of War"http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50658Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:03:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50658David Vickery, 1SG Ret, USAI cannot believe all of the people defending the actions of this coward. Can you imagine the state of our armed forces if officers were allowed to pick and choose which missions they felt were worth dying for? The plain simple fact of this whole matter is that LT Watada is a coward and the men who would have had to serve under such a man are much better off without him. As to the justice he now faces it can be no other way. You cannot have an Army without dicipline.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50662Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:05:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50662Luis, Orlando, FL (US Army Retired)LT Watada is nothing more than a gutless coward and all of you who agree with his behavior should be ashamed of yourselves. It takes a special type of man and woman to be a soldier. A real soldier. A soldier does not question his/her orders. He/she executes and follows them. It is because of soldiers that follow orders and keep their oaths that a bunch of self-righteous fools like you enjoy the freedom that you enjoy and take so much for granted today. You call a coward a hero because deep inside you are cowards too.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50663Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:05:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50663Paul S, Gig Harbor WAThe only thing left in tact of our constitution since Bush took office is the Oath...and they want us to defend them. Now thats funny!!! Everyone involved in the Big Lie... should be arressted and put on trial for Treason! Nothing else will do. This whitehouse has stained America for generations to come and are a complete and total embarrassment on the world stage......http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50665Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:06:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50665Larry, Roanoke, VirginiaIf the "oath" being discussed here means that a soldier will give up his only life for the freedom of his country, that is one thing. If the "oath" means that a soldier will give up his ONLY life because of the fraud, deceit, or just plain stupidity of superior officers, including this President, then it is another thing. As far as I can tell, Lt. Watada is not charged with cowardice, only of disobeying this "oath". What about Bush's disobediance of his "oath" of office, in which he promised to take care of America, and the American people? Do I need to mention Katrina? I have the absolute greatest respect for the military, but I expect those military men and women to be brave and SMART, not to be automotons without the brains or will to do a job properly. We honor smart generals, we honor smart presidents, why do we persecute, and prosecute, smart soldiers?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50666Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:07:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50666marci,huntington,wvAgree or disagree with the war, a soldier has a committment to honor. I am not, never have been and never will be a Bush supporter, supporter of the war,or in favor if instigating any conflict, but conflict there will be and when you volunteer or are drafted to be in the military you take an oath and an oath must be upheld. There are circumstances when a soldier must do things he doesn't agree with in order to uphold that oath. Obviously there are exceptions to any rule (cold blooded murder) and there are channels to go through to protest such orders. If ther is no time for channels, one would hope that the truth of the situation would come out at the ensueing hearing when such an order is not obeyed. In this case, no one is asking our soldiers to kill inocent people and just disagreeing with policy is not a reason to disobey orders. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50667Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:07:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50667HDB, Kapolei HILT Watada has an obligation to fill...he swore an oath to serve. How would you like to see him as one of your local police officers "Officer Watada why didn't you respond to that home invasion", "I thought it might be dangerous so I only respond to traffic violations". Nobody has mentioned that this LT was a Platoon Leader of 40 Soldiers, He betrayed them as well. Send him to the Gallowshttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50668Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:08:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50668ASF Akron, OHHey folks, regardless of the cause, or details in the oath taken we need to realize that those troops over there are counting on each other-period. If your son or daughter was counting on support in the field which could not be provided because of a conflict in interest-let it be confirmed now. Doing so now- may have just saved one to several of our troops. If he cannot "protect" let's accept that and discharge him without punishment. End of story... http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50669Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:08:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50669Dave DavidsonMike your response is simpleminded,transparent and ignorant. Question the government,Hold our leaders accountable. Dissent is a duty and precious gift that the likes of you and your rightwing whackjob friends would dearly love to see abolished. The founders set up our republic to always do just that. Try reading the constitution sometime Have a nice dayhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50670Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:08:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50670FreeetibetContracts are for suckers. You only sign a contract, when the person demanding the contract has something to lose. Like DSL, cell phones, gym memberships,...and the military. I'd like to see an army commercial with a warning on it like that on a pack of cigarettes: WARNING: Joining the army could kill you.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50673Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:12:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50673Todd FranklinI retired from the military last year after 21 1/2 years. I did so because I was tired of being lied to and misled. At some point leadership must recognize that Military personnel are more saavy and sophisticated and intelligent. Our President was found out and now we don't even have the decency to place significant blame where it belongs. Only when 1 or a few stand in defiance of what was erroneously commited do some raise they're hackles and attack. No sir!! Not this time!! Direct your attack at those who bungled, not those of us that have learned and fought back. By the way, we put our allegiance in the people and the people have spoken to the representative that they elected. Or did you forget that because of word definition. Faith to God and the United States of America. Obey those appointed over us as they (in this case) are elected and supposed directed by the majority of the voting public of the United States of America. Sir, You Are Most Certainly Wrong.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50674Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:13:44 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50674raymond belangerI think all the people who hate war don't quite understand that's what the U.S. does, what do you think we have the most advanced military for? parades? I'm not about to be a soldier,[not my talent] but it IS a very honerable profession,but, the United States IS, and always has been very good at fighting, all my life we've been fighting wars, I'm 68 years old, so I just figure that's what we do. If you don't like that, well, you should go tosome country that doesn't do war, like New Zeland, or finland. The U.S. is a "prizefighter" we are already looking for our next fight. ray from L.A. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50676Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:14:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50676David, Clearwater, FLPresident Bush also took an oath to defend the Constitution. It's a pitiful shame that he and his people have waged this war so incompetently. Orders are supposed to be followed but how many times do our soldiers have to "jump off the bridge" before this country says, NO! We are the real commander-in-chief.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50678Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:15:02 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50678ALFRED J GENSLEJEWSKIi THINK HE DEESERVES T0O BE COURT MARTIALED.i SERVED 28 YRS MILITARY I TOOK MY CHANCES.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50679Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:15:18 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50679WP Cummings, MIlwaukee, WIStaff Sgt. CDH, Point noted. I too took the oath and remember the feelings when I uttered those same words. Its obvious to me that Lt. Watada made a poor decision to volunteer to serve our country. I think some people are missing the point: Lt. Watada VOLUNTEERED to serve OUR country. He signed a contract, took an Oath, all under his own power. He is now volunteering not to fulfill his contract. Therefore, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he will pay the consequences. Its a pretty cut and dried topic if you look at the facts and remove your opinions.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50680Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:16:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50680Johnathon FruhnI like how people say, "it's a volunteer army." Oh really? Well, then let me walk away, I volunteered to be here, and now I will voluntarily leave this place... oh wait, you can't do that right? I was in the service, and what you think it will be when you volunteer versus what it is are 2 different things. A true volunteer army would let you come and go as you pleased. Volunteer army lol.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50681Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:16:24 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50681Don SpearsI agree that it is the duty of the LT. to abide by his oath or face the consequences. I think it is courageous of him to stand up for his own principles and refuse to return to duty. It is a violation of his oath and he should expect to suffer the fury of the court. Nevertheless, he is not a coward by doing so, he is a hero and will be treated as such by many.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50682Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:17:19 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50682Johnathon FruhnPoliticians fighting their own wars, that will be the dayhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50683Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:19:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50683s. mills, Las VegasThe Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ. During the Iran-Contra hearings of 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, a decorated World War II veteran and hero, told Lt. Col. Oliver North that North was breaking his oath when he blindly followed the commands of Ronald Reagan. As Inouye stated, "The uniform code makes it abundantly clear that it must be the Lawful orders of a superior officer. In fact it says, 'Members of the military have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders.' This principle was considered so important that we-we, the government of the United States, proposed that it be internationally applied in the Nuremberg trials." Senator Inouye was referring to the Nuremberg trials in the post WW II era, when the U.S. tried Nazi war criminals and did not allow them to use the reason or excuse that they were only "following orders" as a defense for their war crimes which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent men, women, and children. "In 1953, the Department of Defense adopted the principles of the Nuremberg Code as official policy" of the United States. Over the past year there have been literally thousands of articles written about the impact of the war with Iraq. Many are based on politics and the wisdom of engaging in an international war against a country that has not attacked the U.S. and the legality of engaging in what Bush and Rumsfield call "preemptive war." World opinion at the highest levels, and among the general population, is that a U.S. first strike on Iraq would be wrong, both politically and morally. There is also considerable evidence that Bush's plans were fundamentally illegal, from both an international and domestic perspective. If the war is indeed illegal, members of the armed forces have a legal and moral obligation to resist illegal orders, according to their oath of induction. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50685Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:19:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50685PAUL SHEIMAN, DELRAY BEACH, FLWhen you are a member of the military your life is not your own. If everyone in the military followed their own conscience instead of the orders of their superiors then we would have an army of none. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50686Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:19:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50686AP, Topeka, KSContracts are made and signed to ensure individuals keep whatever promise they have made. A soldier took an oath to follow orders...let me point out he took the oath AFTER we were already at war. Why did he join an army that was fighting a war he thought was illegal. A spin on this-Imagine that a fire fighter stopped going into burning buildings because they changed their mind. Law enforcement would stop enforcing laws. Teachers quit teaching classes they didn't deem necessary. Maybe financial organizations should up the interest rates. Who cares that they promised you the rate…they changed their mind! Ultimately, if you have not served, are not serving, and have no direct connection to the military you should shut your damn mouth and worry about things you can affect. A child in your neighborhood is being abused right now, but you are worried about an officer that broke his oath and arguing about stuff you have no flipping clue about. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50687Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:21:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50687Chris, Libertyville, IllinoisI would have to agree with Lt. Col. Rick Francona and that the Lt. Watada knew what he was getting into signing up in 2003. It would maybe a different story if it were pre-2001 when he signed on! He signed on and now he should live out his obligation that he took Oath in! Even though this is my belief it does not mean I favor this conflict in Iraq!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50688Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:21:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50688Kurt Hausammann, Jr.He took the oath just as my son did with two differences; My son took the oath prior to the invasion of Iraq and he is serving his tour of duty in Iraq true to his oath. Allowing a soldier to pick and choose what orders he or she will follow is not an option. The Lt should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50689Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:22:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50689jane doe, palmdale, caMy thoughts are that he (the lt.) should be sent to jail. As a member of the military you give up your right to think for your self and become part of the bigger picture. Some of the things that you do in your militray life, you may not agree with but when you sign that contract and raise your hand there is no one there putting a gun to your head. If your not willing to do all that your country asks of you then don't join. Him refusing to do what he was order to do is concidered an act of treason and is punishible by death. I don't think that kind of person next to me in war or as my neighbor.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50690Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:22:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50690J Smith, New York, NYDarn, every kids knows that if you can't take orders, you don't join the military. And, as a vet, I can say that anyone who joins the military learns one way or another that you do not have the right to choose what you do, including where you serve. Rule # 1- if you can't follow orders, don't join. It's reality, it's the law, and it's not open to interpretation. I think people are getting confused by linking their blind hatred of Bush to this guy's personal actions. On another note, people might want to consider that the constant negativity and complaining about Iraq is making our enemies think we are weak. Wouldn't you if you were them? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50691Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:22:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50691Kurt Hausammann, Jr.He took the oath just as my son did with two differences; My son took the oath prior to the invasion of Iraq and he is serving his tour of duty in Iraq true to his oath. Allowing a soldier to pick and choose what orders he or she will follow is not an option. The Lt should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50693Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:24:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50693MikeBullsh*t! My sons, both of them, signed up for the military in the wake of 9-11. One was returned with his body wrecked. He was wounded because this White House, this Pentagon, instead of buying and using an already developed anti-RPG system, awarded a defense contract to some big corporate donors for an identical system that wont be ready for 10 years and will cost at least ten times as much to deploy. The other son is still there, on yet another tour of duty. They and we, the entire country, was told that we were invading Iraq because Saddam had nuclear weapons and he was going to either use them himself or was going to provide them to Al Qaida and kill us in our homes. Heck, the press, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC News, CBS News, everyone told us this was the case. It was all a lie. It was all invented rubbish. This country was subject to a propaganda campaign by Bush and Rove and the scumbags in this White House. The Republican Congress never questioned them, never did oversight, completely fell for whatever Mr. Bush wanted. Even now, now that we all now that Iraq is a failure, that we don't have any chance of even stabilizing that god foresaken place, even though we can see that we are creating a disaster by being there, our President and a bunch of lunatics in Congress, persist in throwing away more lives, causing more anguish, more heartache, more nightmares, and making the whole world less safe. Lt. Watada is a genuinely moral man that is apparently the only sane person in this debate. The military brass that is hearing his case aren't fit to clean his floor.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50695Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:25:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50695Jon W FT Bragg NCThis Gentlemen took this oath of Free will when he enlisted and when he attended school, we as tax Payers were paying for his education to become a commisioned Officer, he did not have a problem then why NOW. It states as some of you have written. I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, …I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…. I will obey the orders of the Officers above me. It seems to me that a small few have forgotten the facts so here they are. I along with 100% of Americans remember 9/11, the facts are, 3000+ Americans, liberals, democrats, republican’s were not given an option nor a vote on the war on Terror and there lives were forever changed by the acts of madmen. If we do not address the War on Terror it will address us as in the USA!!! Oh I forgot It already has on 5 Seperate times. We all need to remember that going to the movies,dinner or the beach is something other countries only dream of without being SHOT at. GOD BLESS THE USA.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50696Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:26:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50696Tim HebbNonsense!! A soldier's highest obligation is to his own conscience, as Lt. Watada's clearly is. He will almost certainly pay the price for it, as he also is clearly prepared to do. Though he will be punished for acting on his conscience, he is absolutely right to do so. There will be no innocent blood on his hands (either Iraqi or American), and his conscience will be clear. America needs more soldiers who cleave to the highest authority, and fewer who blindly follow the lead of corrupt and amoral leaders.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50702Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:32:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50702Michael Daniel, Drauct, MASir, I could not agree with you more. As a Specialist in the National Guard with a 14 month hitch under my belt, I too, stand firmly by the same oath that both you and Lt. Watada swore allegiance. Whenever anyone asks me why / how I serve, I explain that I took a solemn, formal oath and that I intend to serve my country as I swore to do so. It is not up to us, as soldiers, to define policy. We do not always have to agree with the orders or the policies we follow, but short of a blatantly illegal order, we must follow them. Though I empathize with Lt. Watada's apprehension and objection to the Iraq war, I agree that by refusing to go, he betrays the very soldier he swore to serve alongside.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50703Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:32:58 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50703Irwin DeutschI understand what Lt. Col. Francona is saying, but the principle was established at Nuremberg that one can't say 'I was just following orders!' In this country there's a tendency to ignore international law (or the 'will of the world'). Maybe in the short run we can succeed due to our might, but sooner or later we'll suffer. Unfortunately our cringing media will blindly follow our politicians off the cliff. Only us people can bring some sanity to this sorry state of affairs.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50707Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:34:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50707Don Stocker - intentional non-veteran of Vietnam era - Irvine, CAThe bottom line folks is that the guy did voluntarily join the service and take the oath. Therefore he should be held to it or suffer the consequences. In his decision, which I highly respect, he has indicated that he is willing to suffer the consequences rather than to lay down his life for Dubya's facade of a war. I support his decision 100% and here's why: All of you that say he should blindly follow orders, answer a question for me. How do you explain to the many Vietnam veterans that were brought back here and court martialed; the wrong they were doing by abiding to their oath and blindly following the orders given them?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50710Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:37:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50710Ray D., Hardin MTI can honestly say that I am no fan of the war or, for that matter, George W. Bush right now. But for Lt. Watada, it seems to me the bottom line is simple, he took an oath. He did this as a volunteer at a time when the U.S. military was already in Iraq. I took the same oath twenty something years ago and had to serve in some places I didn't particularly enjoy, but I had made a commitment and stood by that commitment. I couldn't just say, "Oh this wasn't what I wanted to do so I want to quit." The oath I took and the contract I signed were binding just like they are for Lt. Watada. If he disagreed with the war to the point he would refuse to go he should never have taken that oath or signed that contract!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50712Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:37:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50712Michael A. Jenkins, Springfield, MOI suppose we should just make men and women into robots now?? How is it that an oath overrides your God-given conscience? Yea, soldiers take an oath, but so did the president, vice-president, and the other architects of this war; should we put them in too, considering the warrantless wiretapping, CIA leaking scandal, and this war, which as we all know now was based on VERY flimsy evidence from the start? Or is it just for the little guys just to pay? The old saying goes, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander"; if you're going to try this person for obeying his conscience over an oath, then you should try our top officials in government as well, for starting a war under false pretenses and causing the suffering of THOUSANDS of people.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50715Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:39:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50715Bruce Freeman, Newberg, OregonAs a 100% S/C disabled Vietnam era veteran, I feel Watada is right. There may come a time for all who serve when it comes down to oath vs. right. I am not one of these "my-country-right-or-wrong" guys, or "my-president-right-or-wrong." If the war in Iraq is morally wrong, which I believe it is, case closed. Whether one is in the field in Mi Lai, VN, and given an order to kill indecriminately, or if one receives orders to go fight in an illegal/immoral war in Iraq, one has to consider themselves a citizen under the constitution first, rather than blindly following orders. The independence and initiative of the American soldier is what makes our armed serves superior to others that cannot move without the direct approval of a higher up. This has proven itself true in this and past wars. You cannot reward such independence, initiative, and moral judgement on the one hand, and punish a superb officer who makes a moral decision about the rightness of orders given on the other hand. Such illogic and rigidity just doesn't fly. We ask our troops to make such decisions every day in the streets in hostile territory. Think of the courage and anguish Watada went through before he made his decision to stand against an immoral war started by an immoral president and his cohorts. It is so easy just to go along and get by. DO NOT PUNISH WATADA FOR HALTING, MAKING A MORAL DECISION (A DECISION WHICH APPEARS CORRECT BASED ON ALL THE PREVAILING, OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE AND INTEL GATHERED THUS FAR) — THAT THE IRAQ INVASION AND CONTINUING OCCUPATION ARE MORALLY, ETHICALLY, AND CONSTITUTIONALLY CRIMINAL FROM EVERY PERSPECTIVE ONE WISHES TO VIEW IT. WATADA HAS JUMPED ON A MORAL AND LEGAL HAND GRENADE TO SAVE COUNTLESS OTHERS. We have a word for such superior judgement and courage. We call them HEROES.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50716Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:41:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50716John H.I was in the Army for 3 years, I took the oath too. It says you will obey all lawful orders. I submit that the war in Iraq is not lawful and never was. Being ordered to fight there would constitute an unlawful order.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50717Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:41:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50717James M, Tampa, FlaI am a former Navy Officer who took that oath. Lt Watada is wrong. It is not the role of a Military Officer to determine policies. That is left to the civilian goverment. Third world countries with military dictators are the results of the military setting policy. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50719Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:45:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50719mark medley Tallahassee FloridaLOTS OF People are waking up to the Neo-con policies of our supposed president. I would rather be a left winger any DAY than the hardned war-mongers that can only see violence as an answer to conflict. Why are we in IRAQ!! Come on people get real!! I support ANYONES decision to walk away from this lie infested war! And comparing other situations to Iraq is another neo-con JOKE! Killing does not bring freedom.period.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50720Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:46:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50720TD Williams, Killeen TexasThere are just to many folks that do not know what their government is all about. I am no Bush fan, never voted for him, and I consider myself to be a liberal, BUT this war is not illegal. While some of the intell used at the time may be suspect in correctness, Bush did not jump up and say OK boys and girls to Iraq you go. He put forward his case for war. Congress declared the war. The military is the hammer arm of the Congress, when all the words have run their course. At the time any Congressperson or citizen that did not agree with going to Afghan or Iraq was being painted as the traitor... look back into the media archives. Once war is declared by Congress as is their job according to the Constitution the end is up to the President. Seems folks do not want to hear Bush say he is the decisionmaker ... well to bad because it is true, can't help it if the truth hurts your feelings ... you can have only one calling the moves, all that is and will be good or bad with this war rests at his feet. Everyone was in favor of getting rid of Saddam, the problem lays with poor planning for after winning his removal. The citizens expected another 100 day war and the President appears to have been thinking in longer terms. No one is accustom to fighting an enemy that you can not ID even 10 feet away. But that is the new cowardly version we have today. Lt Watada is dead bang wrong. The order he disobeyed is one of missing movement. There is nothing illegal or immoral in a movement order, regardless of where it is going. Any person who signs up for the military has to know that the #1 job regardless of the position they hold is killing the enemy. I heard no mention of anyone twisting Watada's arm to sign on the dotted line. Lt Watada only sees the portion of the war that is assigned to his unit ... he does not see the bigger picture. The citizens of this country also do not see the bigger picture ... only what the media gives to them in little sound bites. No one knows the total intell that Congress looked at. We only know what the media cares to share. Who can tell me, for example, exactly how many schools have been rebuilt in Iraq and of those how many did we have to build again because of the enemy? You can not answer that because the media is not interested in the whole story and neither is Watada. All he is interested in is what is good for his comfort zone and safety. He needs to be in jail for his actions, and our fine men and women are better off without his cowardly presence. He is a disgrace to this country. Having spent 20 plus years in the military I can truely say I would not want him anywhere near me or my soldiers because his type of actions could cost someone their life. The anti-war protestors best be glad that the military is not full of Watadas because if it were they would not be protesting, they would be worrying about an IED was going off when they go to the store for food, or rode down the road, and they would have to listen to the sounds of bombs going off at night while they try to sleep. This country is free and doesn't have certain worries, at this time, about things coming to the shores of this country because some people are brave enough to declare war and fight the war to keep everyone free. It is really nice to be able to express an opinion without fear of anything except maybe the bother of thoughtless stupid replies. Enjoy America, you are free. OBTW, I do believe in the draft for every man and woman, no matter the race, religion, or color, many do not seem to know where their freedom comes from or it's value, if they did there would be less political correctness and stupid statements and more unity and true patriotism. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50721Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:46:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50721Joe, Marrero,LAI am an active duty Marine. I myself may volunteer to fill a space in Iraq and send someone home. Take their place. Capt Watada raises a very good point by his actions, and some here at this site have hit on it in their own way. Does an oath take priority over conscience? If one agrees to something, their honor is on the line and it is their honor that led them to that oath in the first place, but when one has learned something that runs counter to the honor they have in their hearts, then is it okay to follow that guide vice the oath? There have been many examples of men, throughout history, that have taken oaths, pledges, covenants, and then have found themselves changed, and must violate their oaths. The German Officer Corps during the lead up to and during WWII has many examples of men deciding that they could not follow orders and thier oaths in good conscience. God will judge our actions one day. At the pearly gates, when God asks if we did all we could according to our conscience, we cannot lean on the answer "no Sir, but I was following the oath. But in a way, Capt. Matada may in fact be following the oath. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50723Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:48:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50723JAH Washington D>C>He joined, he did not get drafted. He took the oath and did,nt refuse it. He put on the uniform of an officer. He gave orders to others and he expected them to be obeyed. He held the privlege and took the pay . I agree with Ssgt CDH. The very essence of a nations military is carried with the words in that oath he took. God help this nation when an oath especally a military one can be broken whenever a person disagrees with his superior.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50724Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:48:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50724Chris Jackmond, Sierra Vista, AZI don't know if this sentiment has been expressed already, but since he did join the military of his own free will, and the war was already in progress, he knew the obligation that he would be asked to fulfill. If he had a change of heart, he will have to suffer for his convictions, as by the law he has no defense. I say this, not as someone who agrees with the war (I do not), but as someone who believes in the rule of law in our society.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50725Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:48:53 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50725Dennis E. Dallas, TXDoes anyone argue that even with taking an oath a member of the armed services has the right or duty or obligation to refuse to carry out an illegal or unconstitutional order? It seems to me that if there is not this caveat, in the event Bush declared martial law and canceled the next elections and then ordered the military to back up his action, a soldier, no matter how much he disagreed with it would have no choice. The attitude that a soldier gives up the right to think and react when he takes the oath and joins the service can lead to a coup. I realize this is extreme but those that state this soldier cannot do what he is doing and raise the defense of his choosing are perhaps setting the stage for what those of us who believe Bush capable, could happen.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50727Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:49:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50727Mary Ellen, Columbus, OHThis guy is nothing but a "coward". Like another email stated, he swore to defend the United States and was well aware of the Iraq war. And, he VOLUNTEERED! He was not drafted. I feel sorry for him - he is a coward and has no integrity, honor and has let his fellow servicemen who did go to Iraq down. And, what kind of examples are Susan Sarandan and Sean Penn - a couple of has beens who only get publicity when they open their mouths and spew out hatred and discontent for the US. As far as I am concerned - they should go live somewhere else. I am sick of this hollywood people that live in a world all their own. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50732Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:50:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50732Richard Meza, Monterey Park, Ca. There is no oath taken that should hold a person longer than the first time you disagree with it. Based on the thaughts expressed that all orders should be followed you lose your argument. Orders to abuse, murder/kill, rape are given in all wars. Usually for revenge, or to force some not to tell what another of higher rank has done. In this case I feel he should be sent to Afganistan. Finally, I agree with him that we should not be in Iraq. And when everything comes out and people and the world sees what we have done there, I feel Americans will be totally ashamed. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50733Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:52:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50733Charles Setser, Jacksonville, FLI served with the Marines in two tours of 'Nam. I did not agree with the politics of why we were there, but I did go as ordered. Once there, and seeing the people that lived in cardboard and tin houses and the kids that were hungry and unclothed, I felt good about what I was attempting to do FOR THEM. If he is the man he claims to be by standing on his conscience, then let him be man enough to do the time for disobeying a "lawful order".http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50734Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:53:34 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50734Rick Livermore CaI agree one should honor their oath and should support the constitution. But I'm confused about a couple of things. It's not ok to refuse an order to deploy because you believe the war is immoral and unethical. But if your commanders tell you to humiliate or torture civilans from another country say like Iraq, then you are supposed to disobey that order because it is immoral and unethical. One should agree to put ones life at risk and die to defend the constitution but the guy in charge of upholding the constitution is figuratively ripping it up and throwing it away. I guess I just can't figure out the nuances of this new style of government in the US.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50735Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:55:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50735Jon, Los Angeles, CAWatada's act is selfish and completely without concern for all the other soldiers who face the same dilemma but chose to honor their oath. There have been PLENTY of soldiers who have begrudgingly deployed despite their personal views because they know that someone else will have to go in their place if they refuse. This is why Lt. Watada has no honor.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50736Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:55:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:507361LT Mike Calcagni, Providence, RII believe that the refusal of 1LT Watada to deploy to Iraq is a disgrace not only to himself and the uniform he wears as he faces court martial, but also a disgrace to the entire officer corps of all branches of service, whether Active, Reserve, or National Guard. LTC Francona is correct in saying that 1LT Watada joined an all volunteer service during time of conflict and should have been aware of what he was getting himself into prior to taking an oath. An oath that required him to defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies...and to obey the orders of the officers appointed above him and of the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States. This oath does not provide the luxury of picking and choosing what conflicts you would like to participate. His personal feelings are irrelevant. He took an oath and he should accept all that comes with this responsibility. Despite 1LT Watada being guilty of breaking his oath, he is also guilty of betrayal. Betrayal of the men and women he was appointed to lead, the soldiers to whom he owes the duty to lead into battle. Regardless of this junior officer's personal feelings about the conflict in Iraq, he owes so much more to the soldiers who place their lives in his hands and look to him for leadership. Officers lead from the front and lead by example and 1LT Watada has undermined and disrespected the soldiers in his unit and the cause for which they may or may not believe but for which they will ultimately fight for simply because of the oaths they have taken. The soldiers who served under 1LT Watada deserve so much better than what he has given them. I am also a first lieutenant; however, I serve in the National Guard. I am a citizen that just happens to be a soldier as well. I will be deploying to Iraq in the coming months. And despite my beliefs and opinions about the Conflict in Iraq, I intend to go to Iraq without hesitation, without reservations. Not only because of an oath that I took, but because my soldiers deserve the best possible leadership that I can provide them with. To do anything less, would be a breach of the duty that I owe to each and every soldier who is under my command. It is my intent to lead them from the front and to lead them by example....my opinions will be dealt with when I return home...my soldiers deserve that.... It is unfortunate that 1LT Watada does not feel the same.....http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50741Tue, 06 Feb 2007 21:59:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50741Shawn, Diamond bar, CaliforniaI was in the Marine Corps. But once little wracky Bush stole the presidentcy at 2000, I decided I had to leave my mighty lovely Corps. I don't want to obey orders from such idiot who himself escaped from Vietnam war and has no honor at all but work for the oil companies. Too shame to be an American to have such low-life to be the president for 8 years. I hate Bush!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50742Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:00:34 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50742cmac, seattle, waMost of you sure are bitchin' alot about an unjust war. Where were you when your boy Clinton sent our troops to Bosnia, I didn't hear you bitchin' then! Watada set this whole thing up with his left wing mother and he deserves to go jail!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50747Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:04:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50747MI'm a commissioned officer on active duty myself, and I oppose the war, as do many people I know (have from the start). I know a lot of people out there support Watada, but the fact is he signed up to do a job, presumably out of duty, and it is his job to follow those orders. They've been reviewed and found to be legal, he doesn't get to override that with his own judgement. Soldiers cannot vote with their feet, the entire military system would collapse if it did. It is unfortunate that the public doesn't get an accurate picture of the military's opinion on these matters because, the fact is, only those who support the policy are allowed to speak out on it, but that doesn't allow for him to not only disobey orders but to flaunt it in such a public manner. He should have served his tour, gotten out ASAP, and worked to change the system once out of the service. Until then, what he's doing is completely dishonorable and a threat that should be taken seriously. He should get the dishonorable discharge he's earned.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50748Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:04:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50748Nathan, Fort Wayne, INSeems to me that officers are required by military code to refuse orders that are illegal. That, by the way, is what he is claiming to do: refusing deployment b/c the war is illegal. If the war is illegal, then he's doing the right thing. I'm not sure how that makes him a coward, as I'm betting time served in Levenworth won't be much nicer than time served in Iraq. If anything, Iraq is probably the easy way out, unless of course you have a conscience. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50750Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:05:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50750Drew CurtisWhy are we so unnerved by cowards? In the context of this war in particular, don't we want cowardice (or common sense, or better judgement - depends on our point of view, I suppose) to be an option? Most people in the US were led into this war through a fervor for revenge in the wake of 9/11 and the lies of an administration bent on humiliating Saddam Hussein and securing the US military's position in the Middle East. Soldiers are not policymakers, but when a soldier, in good conscience and given time to reflect, decides that they are being ordered to make the ultimate sacrifice of killing or dying not only not in the service of "defending the Constitution," but actually as part of a crime against humanity, don't we want that person to take a stand? What purpose is served in punishing that person, besides trying to intimidate others into silence? I defy anyone to find a statement that shows Watada to be acting because of 'cold feet' rather than out of a sincere belief that he was being asked to commit a crime. The Pentagon has said that no action will be taken against the US airmen who blithely bombed British forces during the invasion of Iraq, as caught on tape released today. Watada faces years in prison. The message to soldiers is clear: killing is always preferable to thinking.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50752Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:06:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50752Chris Leaver, Wyoming, MIWould all of you who want to bash Bush, the war, etc please go somewhere else. Or at a minimum, stick to the topic! The subject here is one individual who has made a choice and now has to live with that choice. Having served during both Gulf conflicts, I feel this guy should spend some time pounding rocks at Levinworth. Hopefully it will help him clear his head and understand what it means to make "informed decisions."http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50756Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:08:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50756Henry J. Brice, Huntington Beach, Ca.History will decide the effects of Operation Iraqi Freedom on the GWOT, not the Lt.The Lt. agreed to an enlistment commitment.The Lt. now needs to answer for his decision.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50757Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:08:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50757Chuck SperanzellaThe only reason that freedom of speech exists is because many who have gone before Iraq and died before Iraq gave their lives to preserve this freedom. Everyone who uses this blog should remember that the only reason they have the ability to voice their opinions openly without retribution from their government is because those that went before obeyed their orders and honored their oath. It is hypocritical to enjoy the freedom and question the manner under which it is provided. Watada is a coward, plain and simple.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50758Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:09:02 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50758Manda Ponce, Fort Worth, TXA grown man VOLUNTARILY joins the military, takes an oath and then throws down his marbles and doesn't want to play anymore. Exactly what did he think he was going to do in the military? He is a coward and I'm thankful he's not in Iraq placing our brave servicemen and servicewomen in danger. And I'm equally thankful that our great nation was never depended on some of you guys to defend it because we would now be under the control of another nation. By the way, this is not about Bush, Cheney, or anyone else. Those people will have a judgement day and honestly believe they will burn in h**l for what they have done to this country and citizens. But that doesn't change the facts about this case.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50769Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:15:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50769Vernon DelRayFrom the idiot poster above: "where would we be today if the "Greatest Generation" had all felt like Penn and Sarandon?" Hey buddy, where would we be if we allowed the Nazi war criminals to successfully use the "I was just following orders" defense? Watada's argument is that our nation is committing war crimes. So far, a few low ranking soldiers without access to competent representation have been scapegoated, I suspect Watada feared that above all else. At least that's his argument. Maybe he just didn't have the belly for it. No one knows but him, not me, not one of you either. I agree that if we allow our enlisted men and women to determine what is worth fighting for we would have a reduced capacity for defense. We would also have a reduced capacity to embark on an illegal war (Iraq doesn't qualify per US law, but it does qualify per international law. I know, "big deal" says the Ugly American). You may well re-think your position if President McChimp takes us into what will be an illegal war with Iran if he decides to (he is the decider after all). There will be no blank check from Congress for that one, and not one ally will join that folly. Hope and pray he does not make that action his last legacy, or we will be doomed to fighting Islamic backlash for generations (if we aren't already).http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50771Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:16:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50771John Hamilton, Houston, TexasIf you're in the US Military you are Duty bound to follow the orders of your Superiors. It would be utter kaos if that http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50773Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:16:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50773Gimme a breakI agree that this is an illegal war and Bush has trampled on the Constitution and is as much of a war criminal as Sadam Hussein. However, what posessed this guy to enlist after we invaded Iraq? I can't believe he didn't know about the invasion, it was on TV and in all the papers. I believe I even saw a story or two about it on the internet. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50775Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:18:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50775David SeaquistThe Nuremburg trials after WWII established limits on the requirement to follow orders, whether in Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, or Crimes Against Humanity, saying "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him." (Wikipedia, Nuremberg Principles) Thus, refusing to carry out orders has limits, which can be can be determined in a court of law - which seems to be Lt. Watada's choice. Let's wait to see if the court agrees with his choice.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50776Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:19:18 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50776Adam Ft. Bragg, NC"Dear Hard Balls it is one thing to do your duty it is another to be a part of an illegal war. I think Mr. Watada is very aware of that. It takes courge to do what Mr. Watada is doing. He has shown that he is not afraid to fight just not willing to be a part of something that in itself is reprihensible. It scares me to think that you think the way you do. What you are saying is that if Bush decided to march on one of our own cities you would do it just because he thinks he is the "decider". At some point a soldier has to realize that his morals and common sense guide his descions as a soldier, as a man and as a human being. To give your life away to every Mad Man who calls himself king well.. I guess you have your own ideas on that. Personnaly the only man I will ever follow blindly is not George bush, aka the decider. " This guy sums it up, in my opinion. Basically you moronic degenerates are saying, if Bush said to take New York City with force, we'd be obliged to do so because we took an oath to obey the orders of the officers appointed over us. But there is a catch to that, a soldier does not have to follow orders if they are Illegal or immoral, this case being "Illegal". Those who say its not are obviously blind and should open your eyes and stop being such a sheep. I have been deployed to Iraq 2 times and Afghanistan one time, for you critics out there. Oh, and for you arrogant idiots trying so hard to get your point across and talk **** about one of our soldiers, its traitor, not trader. If you're not educated enough to even spell out your argument correctly, don't bother. BTW Anyone that wants to have an intelligent conversation about this situation, or even about Iraq/Iran you can reach me at idieforamerica@yahoo.com I'll be happy to set all of you fools straight one at a time. BTW: Ignorant and retarded emails will be deleted and not thought twice of.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50778Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:20:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50778mrs pI am a US Navy vet and my husband is currently serving as commissioned officer in the US Air Force. Regardless of what anyone thinks about President Bush and his administration, this young LT. voluntarily made the decision to join the US Army. He took the same oath that my husband took and is obligated to honor that oath as well. I am sure that he has enjoyed the benefits of the military (free healthcare, dental, along with countless others). In this case it seems that the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree as his father, Robert, refused to fight in the Vietnam War. That being said he will be tried by a JURY OF HIS PEERS, which he will face during his court martial.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50779Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:22:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50779O.C. Spokane, WAWOW, I at a complete loss of words. Did IQ’s suddenly drop from the liberal end, can any of you left-wing, Cindy Sheehan blind followers stop for one second and think. If it weren’t for the military and the actions of people who followed those orders we would either be living in a communist state or a German/Japanese state. The world has always been at war over the things we human beings perceive as valuable, be it land, diamonds, gold, religion, and for the last 50 years - oil. Read your history, in WWII we put the embargo on the Japanese that forced them into the imperialistic state they became. We allowed Nazi German to depress themselves to the point where socialism and the Nazi party had power. The century from the end of the Napoleonic wars until WWII we practiced isolationism and only interfered in world problems when they affected US. At this point 9/11 and Global Terrorism is not longer isolated to religious or geographic boundaries. The world has been, and always will be about wealth and nation building. We support our economy with industry. When our auto industry fails completely, the unemployment rate and dependence on social programs will destroy our economy. Which in turn will put us right where we were during the depression, and German and Japan were in 1940. Your complaints about Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are ridiculous. At this point they have been doing what has been done for 1000 years. It will never change. Just trying to find a Politian who minimizes the behind the scenes deals are a good goal. We can’t complete with a world that is blood thirsty and corrupt with a holier than thou attitude. I have sworn an oath and upheld it for over 20 years. Agree with everything our country has done, absolutely not. Do I have the self-respect, honor and determination to not blindly take an oath, or quit just because I feel like it. ABSOLUTELY NOT. As it has been stated here several times, he enlisted AFTER the war started. It’s not that he didn’t know what he was getting into. He didn’t FEEL like going. That is the problem with this generation, and I am saddened by the previous generation and those of you who would condone his actions. Unless your parents were stoned hippies living in a commune in Oregon, you should be ashamed. They are just lines from a movie, but just like Jack Nicolson’s character said in a movie….. ”We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said, "Thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post.” http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50780Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:22:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50780Dan, Richmond, Va.Too much faulty logic here and too much support for a man who forced another to go to war in his place. "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." To follow and order, it must be lawful. He was ordered to move into a country that we are at war with - really since 1991. He was not ordered to commit a war crime, he was not ordered to violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Illegal war? How so? Congress authorized the President's actions. Iraq had violated terms of surrender of 1992 & 16 UN resolutions. Iraq shot at our aircraft policing the UN sanctioned no fly zone. Show me where in the US constitution or UCMJ that a corrupt UN beaurocrat can superceed the US legislative and excutive branches and pronounce a US military action illegal. Disagree with the war if you will but this guy is a disgrace to his uniform and his country. He failed to follow a lawful order and another must risk his life to carry it out. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50781Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:22:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50781TG, Palmdale, CALt. Watada violated his oath by refusing to obey and order. If he had the strength of his convictions, he would plead guilty and take his punishment. He does not have that strentgh of conviction, so he will be tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice by a group of his peers - officers who took the same oath and understand its meaning and gravity. Wonder what they will decide??http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50784Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:23:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50784Bill Hamilton, Morgans Point Resort, TxNo reason for him to get any pity. He is a coward who failed to meet his duty as an officer in the military. As a former soldier and vietnam vet I know how difficult an unpopular war can be but even the draftees understood what desertion and cowardice was. This man deserves a dishonorable discharge and 20 years at hard labor in prison.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50785Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:23:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50785Liz, Chicago, ILRemember innocent until proven guilty? Until there are actual charges brought up in the courts that the war is in fact, illegal Lt. Watada has broken the law an his oath by disobeying orders. It does not matter whether or not a service member disagrees with the cause of the war he or she swore an oath and signed a legal contract. Lt Watada broke that contract at least he is man enough to stand up for his beliefs though and has said he is willing to pay the price. If the war is ever declared illegal then Lt Watada will be a hero. And everyone should get the facts straight on President Bush, Vice Pres Cheney and Clinton. None of them were drafted...they were eligible for the draft yes, but none were officially drafted. Thus they are not cowards for not serving...In President Bush's case at least he served some time which is more than most of the Americans who elected him twice, knowing he wanted war, wanting it themselves (but were too cowardly to go) and now are complaining that it is not like a microwave meal...finished in 5 minutes. The fact is we are there now and we are morally obligated to try to help rebuild a country that has been destroyed. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50787Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:24:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50787Vernon DelRayI would like to answer this one: "Any other time in world history, he would be killed for treason and made into an example for others." At no other time in our nation's history have we STARTED a pre-emptive war. You sir are comparing apples with oranges. I know what the oath says, Bush swore an oath to defend the Constitution as well, and violated several thousand innocent American's Constitutionally guaranteed rights when he: A} Suspended habeas corpus B} Authorized illegal wiretaps in violation of FISA C} Violated signed international treaties (Kyoto and Geneva) This man is unfit for duty as a kennel cleaner, much less Commander in Chief of the greatest nation on Earth!! I believe that he should be tried as a war criminal.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50790Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:26:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50790Steven HassanIn the case of Mr. Watada, here is perhaps a more appropriate excerpt from that same oath: "...and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me..." There is no part of that oath that allows us to uphold it only when we feel like it. Staff Sgt. CDH, USMC, Hampton Staff Sgt, I agree with you to a point. Each of us has our duty to follow the orders of those appointed over us. These orders we follow hoever must be lawful orders. I believe the LT is making a case that OEF is an illegal war, hence all orders derived from OEF are illegal orders. If it is proven OEF is in fact illegal, he duty bound to inform the COC of such, in order to ensure no member of the military comits an illegal act. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50791Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:27:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50791I see through the lies!!to Mr. Kennesaw in Georgia, I am a liberal and I love this country, it's Constitution and it's laws. That's why it angers me so to see a President drunk on power abuse it illegally. So you can polish my coinpurse, and don't EVER assume you know what is in another man's heart and mind just because you disagree with him on a single issue.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50792Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:28:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50792Kent Cooper, Corpus Christi, TXI don't agree with the war, but he knew what he was getting into when he joined. If you don't want to follow orders, don't join the military. We cannot let every soldier decide for himself which battles are "justified" and which are not.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50795Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:30:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50795Scott Winn, Baltimore, MDYou folks who equate disobeying lawful orders with lawful protest are way off the mark. The UCMJ protects people who disobey unlawful orders. There is, however, no provision for "I have had second thoughts and would rather not serve in combat now that I think about it". The oath enables the uniformed services to maintain good order and discipline in the face of terrible situations. Any sane person is afraid of going to war; the vast majority suck it up do the job they VOLUNTEERED for. Guys like Watada are abnormal - and thankfully so. He deserves the appropriate punishment for the crime he has committed. He violated a sacred oath which no soldier, sailor, airman, or marine takes lightly. I took it six times during my 26-year enlisted and commissioned career, and each time I was humbled by those simple words. BTW - Rick Francona is one fine officer, and as he served as Gen Schwarzkopf's interpreter in Desert Shield/Storm, you can bet he had boots on the ground. As a fellow PWG member (he'll know what that means) I know personally he has been there and done that, many times over, as have quite a number of us. Students of history may remember several presidents in our nation's past who sent soldiers off to war who had not themselves served in uniform. It is not a prerequisite - if it were, Lincoln and Roosevelt would have been out of luck, as would have a few other former residents of the White House. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50796Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:30:58 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50796Sal AkbaniAll of you, raise your hands: 1.Who think George Bush and Dick Cheney have told nothing but the truth. 2. That this war was not for stealing oil? 3. That this war was not for big profiteers? 4. That this war has not made people like Rick Francona richer? 5. That the death of 3000 young men from this country and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi was for nothing but love for democracy and freedom? Now check your IQ. A score of 10 does not mean you are perfect.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50799Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:32:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50799R Burde Leavenworth, KSLt. Watada , by not deploying with his unit, with the men that he trained and lead in training put their lives at risk for his own personnal safety. Long before deployment orders came down he could have resigned or applied release from the Army, but he waited. The men that were under hos command are now in IRAQ with a new officer who does not know them, and will spend much of their tour learning about their abilities and skills as a team. The Lt has let his team down like a quarterback who quits in the Super Bowl because he is afraid of getting sacked. Wrap it up any way that he wants he is a quiter and a coward. Hde cares only about his own skin.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50801Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:32:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50801Dog, San Antonio, TexasMy heart knows that the battle for Irag is congruent to the war on terror, or else Alqaida in Iraq would still be concentrating on terror in America. I don't care to lose our young service folk for their sake, although it would appear the Kurds like it. The Shiites, like our liberals, don't express much appreciation for the opportunity they've been afforded thus far. So, what the heck, pull them out. Pull them out of Afghanistan also, we are fighting Alqaida there also. Far as I know, no Afghans asked us to liberate them. Even more so, pull our folks out of Bosnia. Let the Serbs do their thing. The Serbs didn't attack us. What does our constitution have to do with Bosnian Muslims. Oh, and who cares if N. Korean sets up office in Seoul. Korea, Vietnam, what do we care. I'm sure there are a few other places, we have "no business in." Bring them all home. We world war three starts up in the Mideast and Europe, I will advise my sons and any others that they have no obligation to fight for anything they don't agree with.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50803Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:33:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50803Thomas Buskirk,Wichita KsThe bottom line is Lt.Watada is an offier in the US.Military.He knew what he was getting into and must man up or pay the price.We are soldiers not policy makers,ours is to go when called, not to debate right or wrong.A soldier must not fall into the trap of politics.It is not part of our job.Ours is to follow the orders given to us.As a soldier who served in Iraq and saw what is happening there it would be far worst to leave the people.The press needs to tell the whole story now just the part that inflames the American people to be willing to just walk away from a people who truely need are help to grasp freedom and hold on to it.Freedom does come at a price.One I would pay!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50807Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:34:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50807Andrew B. Smith, Houston, TexasLt. Col. Rick Francona: I respect what you are saying and agree with your conclusion, however I agree with many on this board that your reliance upon the oath seems a bit superficial. In addition, I think it a poor argument for you to use the fact that he signed up after the war started. You are basically acknowledging that, at some level, people have some choice over what war they go to (by volunteering during a certain war). The best argument that you can proffer is very simple: if you sign up to be a soldier in the US Armed Forces, you sign up for ANY war orders from ANY president. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50811Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:36:19 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50811S.M. Watts Port Orange FloridaWe have become a nation of whiners and complainers. We object to any authority and accept no discipline. We demand everything and owe allegiance to no one. Our word doesn't mean anything and we can renege on everything. Oaths mean nothing to a generation that won't serve their country and God Bless America is a forgotten song. We are the X generationhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50813Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:37:24 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50813pro, Phoenix, AZBeloved citizens! I left Indian armed forces with a lucrative carrer as I felt that Indo-Pak conflict over Kashmir turned in Hindu Muslim conflict. As an army offcer,I also have a obligation not to blindly follow the order, when I am convinced that the order is wrong. I have an responsibility to the soldiers under my command to protect them and knowingly not to put them into life and death situation. It takes guts to stand up to the superiors. I congratulate him for standing up to Three Asses of evil; Bush, Cheny, Rumsfeld ( all civilians and avoided any military pbligation)who took the country to war on false pretence and continued to distort the realities on the ground till Nov. 7, 06. As patriotic American we should hold these asses and other generals to impeachment and court marshail. It would be good for us in the future administrations that they are accountable beyond ballot box. General S was reired for disagreeing on troop levels. Gen Collin Powel, Sec of state was sidelined by Cheny. May God be with all our soldiers and they return home safely.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50820Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:41:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50820Josef Balzer Askeaton IrelandOne of the judges at the Nuremberg trials stated that the worst warcrime of all is an act of agression against a sovereign nation- because in it, it contains *all* other warcrimes already. President Bush chose to throw the very Geneva convention overboard which previous administrations chose to ratify: These conventions are a commitment to mankind. By ratifying them, they *automatically* bind the ratifying nation to implementing them. That makes president Bush a warcriminal. And it means that the oath of allegiance is automatically of secondary importance the moment the orders given will violate international law: Anyone following these orders becomes a warcriminal. Bush has done his level best to avoid standing trial for his actions, by means of abominations like the "Service members protection act".(And i assume that this fine piece of legislation was thought up with the fact that the president of the US is also the Commander-in-chief of the US-armed forces) Sir Hartley Shawcross QC was one of the judges at Nuremberg, and the following quote is attributed to him: "Since when has the civilised world acceptet the principle that the temporary immunity of the criminal not only deprives the law of its binding force- but *legalises the crime*?"http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50822Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:42:18 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50822Jim, ChicagoLt. Col. Francona should know better than others that per the standard chain of command, leaders are supposed to lead by example and be accountable for misgivings committed by subordinates under their command. However, with the current adminstration, and the leadership of the military operation in Iraq, we have seen the opposite of this - an aversion to accountability and true leadership, if you will. Thus, I only see this as a subordinate acting in concert with the total lack of regard for the Constitution shown by the Commander-in-Chief, and the lack of demonstrated leadership among ALL the brass in Iraq. PFCs should NOT be the only people going down for atrocities like Abu Graib and the rape and murder of that Iraqi girl and her family...but that's exactly the total lack of leadership that the military is showing us they are employing under the current CiC. Why do you expect better adherence to oaths from rank-and-file soldiers (I know he's a C.O., but he's peanuts compared to the strata of leaders over him) than you do the Commander-in-Chief himself? Did he too not take an oath to protect the Constitution? Same with the members of Congress - each time they propose a law that can be brought under a constitutional challenge, they are subverting this oath. Are you just ANOTHER example of the "at least" generation who has no expectations of their leaders, while at the same time thinking that regular folks should be held to a higher standard? No wonder then, our nation, and its military, is in the state that its in.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50823Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:43:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50823Nick Swart, Bartlesville OklahomaWhats an illegal war? Whats a legal war? Plain and simple he didn't want to go. He is an officer in the military that made the choice to stay home and leave his soldiers. One thing in the military you never want to do is let your fellow soldiers down. He is in a leaders position and should have known better. People are comparing this with WWII. Why? How? Did the German soldiers miss movement? Is that why they went to jail? I think it was all the other things they were doing. Lets not compare the two. Would we even hear about this if it was an enlisted person? I've stepped up done my share of illegal and legal wars. How many that are leaving comments can say the same. If you can't why not skip leaving a comment. If you haven't been in the military you have no idea. You don't miss movement on account of an illegal war. That is not an illegal order that you can choose to obey or not. What about the rest in the brigade? Why was he the only one? Scared. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50829Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:47:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50829Eric, Houston, TXSigning the oath does NOT obligate you to blindly follow every order. For instance, you do not have to (indeed, are not allowed to) follow an illegal order. If the war is illegal, which is not an established fact but is certainly up for debate, than an order to go to war IS illegal. I WANT my soldiers having consciences. Especially if we are going to ask them to die for our SUVs.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50830Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:48:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50830Mike Wood, Wilkes Barre, PAAs an Officer in the Marine Corps currently serving as an Officer Recruiter, I see Lt Watada's actions from a much different perspective than most of those listed above. All service members have opinions, some of which are in contrast to our Administration's. Regardless, the Oath of Office is intended to bond us all in unity...to support and defend our Constitution. One can argue that our Administration has bent, if not broke, the Constitution. That does not give an Officer the right to refuse orders. As you see in Congress right now, this war is not just about our Administration. Our Representatives and our Senators are all a part of this issue, from the beginning of the conflict on through today. Our political system is designed to have several layers of checks and balances, and this includes during the recruitment process. Candidates are asked if they are a conscientious objector and they are explained the importance of the Oath of Office. That this issue would surface now, after Lt Watada has been on active duty for almost 4 years, is unusual. Most importantly though, Lt Watada is letting down every service member through his actions. When an Officer breaks the rules and shows weakness, that perpetuates through the ranks, thus affecting the effectiveness of his unit. In turn, that affects us all.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50834Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:49:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50834Lyman Hall, Waverly, Tenn.Here is the Enlistment Oath. Before you go running off at the mouth, read it. This is what he swore an oath to. If he had any reservations, then he shouldn't have sworn the oath. Its as simple as that! Bottom line, he swore, he violated. What he's getting, he knew would follow actions. Read it and weep. "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50841Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:56:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50841kevin cisneros, oklahoma city, oklahomaHe did the right thing ..... which includes serving some time for disruption. I'm surprised at the people that call him a coward -- have anyone of them ever stood alone, against convention? I doubt it. And his defenders -- hey, guys, you play you pay. Kevin Cisneros, Oklahoma Cityhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50842Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:57:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50842Daniel, Bellingham, WashingtonThis is slightly unrelated, but I'm curious: How is the currently occupation illegal/immoral and why is it confused with the initial invasion? Although the reasons for the invasion are suspect, the presence of the United States in Iraq as peacekeepers (which is the role they have assumed, however unintential) follows a logic dissimilar from the search for WMD. So is it immoral and illegal for the US to secure and stabilize a country from a greater civil war and the prospect of overt regional military action (that being Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, and Syria)? This really needs to be clarified before empty titles like "immoral" and "illegal" crown the administration and military.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50845Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:59:55 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50845proud american, waThis is all very interesting to me. Do you realize that most of these comments are very selfish, to each and every one of you who support Watada's actions, it almost makes me embarrest for my COUNTRY, and you wonder why the world hates us. Of course a soldier's duty is to question obvious rogue orders (with courage) but you may not disregard an order, in the field that could mean your life, no 2nd guessing is acceptable or people die. Personaly I wish I could be a part of this "American History" DEFENDING THOSE WHO CAN NOT DEFEND THEMSLEVES! Sound a little familiar? Sound a little "constitutional" enough for you. How about the hypothetical situation of our land being invaded, would it be ok for servicemen to quit then too, leave it up to me and you to defend ourselves, that would make you what? a hypocrit! if you sign up, do your job, be what we all USE to be Brave American Soldiers! and when they come home, show respect not shame, because most of these comments are shameful. :( http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50846Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:00:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50846boni- oceanside, california bush is not qualified to be platoon leader - he and cheney dodged vietnam- how can u follow them?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50848Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:01:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50848Jerry Bisson No doubt about it,,, this has me thinking with 2 different mindsets. I believe this is an ILLEGAL war, and in that mindset, I believe the Lt. is right and has an obligation to express his dissent in that respect, but also, I served in the armed forces from 66-70 and took that oath too, and in doing so, there was no doubt that I would do my duty, whatever that might entail. However having said that, I also believe that the Commander in Chief has led us astray with the reasons for going to war. I believe it was a knee jerk reaction to 911.. "Somebody is gonna pay for this." and Saddam happened to be a good scapegoat if enough reasons (though they were later proven to be false) could be found for taking him out. Like I said,,, I'm of 2 minds about this, and am glad I am not the person that would sit as a juror at his trial.. I apologize if anyone is offended by my views, but, as I said at the beginning I think this war is, and has been, totally illegal from the beginning.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50852Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:04:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50852James Hankins, Haines City, FLFor all those who believe they understand all the moral implications of taking an oath of allegiance to the Constitution and of obeying all orders of their superiors, please take note that there are presently four U.S. soldier on trial for murder in Iraq for doing precisely that. An order from a superior to "kill all males of military age" during a particular combat operation was followed to the letter. Clearly, soldiers, even in the heat of combat, are required to make moral decisions as to whether an order is lawful. I fail to see how this requirement is any different from making an informed moral decision as to whether one will or will not participate in what one deems to be an immoral and illegal war. As this example clearly illustrates, the notion that those serving in the military don't get to make decisions on issues of life and death is preposterous. To the contrary, if they want to stay out of prison, it is absolutely incumbent upon them to make those decisions, often under the most challenging of circumstances. As a former Marine who served in Vietnam, I often reflect back on the young men I knew and served with who have lain beneath the ground all these many years, as I have enjoyed the bounties of life through my youth, through midlife, and now into my latter years. Self-appointed wise men, hideously misguided, sent them to their deaths, all 58,000 of the, for a reasons that now escape us. I wish we had all had the wisdom and courage of Lt. Watada to tell the old men--these fools and charlatans--that if they want war, they can go fight it themselves. The youth died for the twisted paranoia of old men under orders from the minions of professional death merchants. With the exception of those who have no prospects of being thrown into the violence--and the professionals who have a taste for the power and destruction--anyone who's tasted war will see it only as a last resort, as a last-ditch defense of family, homeland and way of life--not as a geo-political tool of expediency. It's too bad there aren't more Lt. Watadas who have the fortitude to make the distinction and to stand up for their beliefs.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50854Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:04:58 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50854Adam, Houston TXHow on God's earth could MSNBC let the comment about having Bush in the crosshairs go? That is a federal violent felony crime to even talk that way. So it's OK to suggest assassination of our President as the best course of action, but it's not OK to "attack the comments of others." Hmmmm. Just another confirmation that the Loony Left is as Loony as ever.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50855Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:05:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50855born_7-4Let’s remember that in a democracy we don't expect blind Nazi like obedience from our citizen solders, that’s part of what that Great War was about. Talk about missing the fine print - note the last clause of the oath. “…according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice”. The code defines illegal orders and Bush has issued several (torture, renditions…). It defines the procedure to follow if you believe you have been issued an illegal order and this solder has followed those. This young man is bravely standing up for what he believes, which is more than what a number of republican senators (who ought to be shoe salesman) could do yesturday. There are your cowards. They can avoid the debate in the senate but not in the courts, justice is another one of those ideals we fight wars over.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50856Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:05:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50856Mel, Tampa, Florida To those of you quoting the oath we in the military swore keep somehow missing the last part, "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal. To those of you who call Lt. Watada a coward. He tried to go to Afghanistan, where the real terrorist planned and launched their attacked on us, but was refused. Where is Osama Bin Laden since he was allowed to escape from Tora Bora anyway? Oh that's right, if they would have caught him, there wouldn't have been an excuse to dupe us into attacking Iraq. Where were Bush and Cheney when their Commander and Chief called on them to fight in Vietnam? Exactly. And they now have the nerve to send our soldiers to fight and die for lies, personal vendettas, political and financial gain. Google Paul O'Neill, Bush's first Secretary of the Treasure. A courageous American who was one of the first to tell the truth about this Administration's plan to ouster Hussein long before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. How any one can still not see that this Administration lied to get us into this war is beyond me. They should all be impeached so that all future Presidents will know that they are not above the law. They should be on trial, not Lt. Watada. He is the real hero, the real American who has the balls to risk everything to do what he knows is right. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50859Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:07:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50859Jonathan, Fort WorthI am in the military and just returned from my second tour in Iraq. Here is what I think of this Lt.: As we have seen with the Abu Ghraib prison f-up, those who follow illegal orders are responsible for their own actions. There is some evidence (notice I did not say proof [just when did Pres. Bush know that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire yellowcake from Niger?]) that lies were perpetrated to get us into this war, and if this evidence someday proves to be true then this war is illegal. If this Lt. truly believes this evidence to be true, then he is absolutely right to refuse the illegal order. This said, Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states that it is illegal for him to negatively criticize those above him (all of the military commanders and the civilian leadership), and for this he should be willing to pay the price. Yes, he signed up after 9/11, but a lot has come to light about our motivation for going to war, so that shouldn't be an argument as to why he should go. Once you sign up you can't just resign and go your merry way, you are stuck for the length of your contract. I joined in March of 2002 and felt as though the war was justified, based on the "evidence" presented to the public, but I have since changed my mind. While that didn't prevent me from going over, twice, that was only because I don't feel that the Lt.'s beliefs will ever be proven true. Only time will tell if his beliefs will set him free, but I respect that he is standing up for his convictions.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50860Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:07:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50860j dIf I voluntarily bought something from a store (government) that turned out to be junk,broken or spoiled, I would want my money (life) back, and rightfully so. Americans are fighting for our freedom. Why does Lt. W have to fight his own government for the freedom he is rightfully entitled to.It is no crime to change one's heart or mind. Perhaps the only way out of this illegal, immoral war is to pray that more GIs are killed so we will finally realize that enough is enough already. Thank goodness the Lt realizes this.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50861Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:08:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50861Ken, CaliforniaWar is for the stupid. No concept and no dirt is worth a single humans' life.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50864Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:10:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50864JohnI am tired of the bleeding hearts. I know to many people that have serviced this nation with distinction and honor to have it soiled by cowards. When the bombings start on this soil, who will be screaming that we have not done enough to protect. But we have to stop listening to phone calls, can't check bank and phone records, can't, can't can't. For me...protect this country!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50867Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:14:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50867Chris in ChicagoThere is a fundemental difference in this conflict than all others before it: We were lied to by the administration giving these orders. The administration itself broke the very laws it was to serve by deposing a leader of a sovereign state without evidence, by ridding us of Habeus Corpus, by breaking the Foreign/Domestic Wiretapping laws that were set up after Watergate (which not surprisingly Cheney and Rumsfeld were ALSO involved in.) They also violated international law via Guantanamo, kidnapped complete innocents and tortured them (Canadian Citizen taken halfway across the world and boxed for 10 months) as well as incredibly suspicious election results in two presidential elections. Watada is a patriot, in principle, for standing for the values our leaders are dismissing. When compared to the VietNam war, we will see the casualties rise this year exponentially- as we already have/as Nam had in the 4th year. Also upon year 4 of Nam, there were over 500,000 desertions that we don't talk about. If this was a just war, with a singular and viable reason for entry, with a specific and solid exit strategy, then yes, Watada should be held accountable. But in this case, it is and has been the Administration that should be held for gross negligence, the squandering of our international image, our funds, our lives, and the futures of our coming genreations who will be forced to rebuild our fiscal and moral bankrupcy. It is incredibly easy to point fingers and judge others from your armchairs, but having the courage to stand for your convictions yourself is completely different. If you are gung ho on this war, get a gun,helmet, and a plane ticket. Calling this man a coward is sheer idiocy. Anyone who stands for their country's innate convictions as described by the constitution is a hero. Not to degrade the soldiers who are there, for they too are heros. If you ask any of them though, I bet you'd hear that they want to end this now too.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50873Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:17:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50873Jay, Birmingham ALThe sad thing about this argument is that we're setting up our servicemen to be mindless automatons. They are not and should not be blind followers, yet this oath is becoming all-powerful that it erases race, creed, nationality, political party, morals, and we dare-say even God. If any or all of the former come in the way of a command given by your commanding officer then cursed be your god, you must obey your military oath. This is not a good selling point for getting new recruits, no matter how much college money you throw at them! Even the bible says "children obey your parents... In the Lord"!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50874Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:17:51 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50874Jerry Bisson By the way, I am a tribal member living on a reservation, and in 1910, Congress opened the reservation for homesteading and the tribe lost half of their lands. It was,, and still is, illegal as hell in many eyes here, but Congress makes the laws, so it CANNOT be illegal by definition... However, think of this. If Congress passed a law to take your home, or place of worship, or your car, IT WOULD NOT BE ILLEGAL though it would be morally wrong and a corrupt act. You would have no recourse and there is nothing you could do to stop it because IT ISN'T illegal..http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50875Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:19:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50875Derek StrongI'd be all for continuing to 'liberate' Iraq and sending intelligent people to their deaths if Mr. Watada didn't have such obvious support of the facts - specifically; Mr. Bush's obvious manipulation of intelligence for personal reasons. And Halliburtons. This is no ordinary war - it is a profitable and personal vengeance being carried out by our brave soldiers in uniform... http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50879Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:25:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50879AB orlando, flAlot you you sound like your talking about a military coup, by thinking we should go after Our elected president. There has never been a military coup in our country, if we let this happen, we would be no better than all the other 3rd world countries. The military teaches loyalty, honor and duty. But those who have never serve, active or guard would have no idea when I'm talking about. He volunteered, no one made him. The military is not a corporation, it is not run like one. I wish people would stop trying to compare Vietnam to Iraq. Vietnam wanted to unit there country under communism. The terrorist in Iraq, there ultimate goal is to destroy our country. Sean Penn and the likes, would probably like to help them.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50880Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:26:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50880Tutukane, Dayton, OHThis individual is just following in his fathers footsteps, except his father joined the peace corps rather then be drafted during Vietnam. So, I would say Watada knew what he was getting into when he enlisted, expecially after hostilities started. Then again maybe he joined so he could have a "stage" to protest the gulf war. So it's a good thing he didn't go, cause he might have ended up as a casualty from "friendly fire". 25 years ago, if you missed your shipment, you were charged with desertion. Desertion is still on the books of the UCMJ, and last time I read it, desertion carried a penalty of death. So, he's getting off light, with 2 counts of conduct unbecoming an officer. In the old days, we'd just have a blanket party with him as the guest of honor. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50881Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:27:44 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50881Dan Minichiello, Maui, HawaiiI don't see how any oath of military service can be of more importance than the legality and morality of your actions while performing that service. Abstaining from Conscientious Objector status when joining does not preclude any serviceman/woman from having a conscience and acting accordingly, no matter the circumstance or order. Doing so does not proclaim you a coward or traitor; it simply displays you as a competent, intelligent human being. Perhaps the guards at Abu Graib or in any similarly terrible situation would have been better served had they shown the fortitude of Lt. Watada.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50883Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:28:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50883Ed Potomac, MarylandIt is interesting the armed services are the only employers I can think of that make quitting your job a criminal offense. Isn't war the worst humanity has to offer? What is war really justified killing, dropping bombs from 20 thousand feet into neighborhoods? War really should be the very last choice and in defense only. The real patriots are those who give their time/money to help humanity. It's the dad who volunteers to coach his Childs soccer team or the church who feeds the homeless or the company that creates a scholarship fund for the less fortunate. It's all the volunteers that do so because they care. There is nothing just or honorable about this war! It is clearly not defensive. It was clearly started based on lies from our leaders. We have killed hundreds of thousands of human beings to bring them our way of life because we think it is better than their way. There is no easy way out of this war now, to leave means total civil war and a lot more death, to stay means a very small chance over many years we can strengthen their government and hope it is more just than their previous one. Soldiers should have the right to quit their jobs. This would force our leaders to pick their wars much more carefully. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50884Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:28:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50884Randolph, SingaporeIf a lunatic superior wants you to kill and harm your innocent children, brothers or neighbours without a valid reason, must you abide in such an order against your convictions or honour? As a firm believer of discipline I support the soldiers call to defend his country a duty but when the basis of that call is made a mockery or when the constitution which is the basis of democracy is contradicted evidently by blatant abuses and violations on the same what moral grounds is there justification to 'defend' it? On the contrary, if there is any meaning in that constituition or legitimacy at all to defend the constitution then Bush, Cherney, Blair and all those who abetted or wilfully supported the illegal scam war and destruction against a friendly nation are the ones who should face trial for crimes against humanity and war criminality. If no justice is done for those who died in vain then does it matter anymore what the American constituition is all about? That soldier's enlistment before or after the Iraq's war started and his oath is no longer valid or relevant. The contention should be for the American constitution to be placed under scrutiny for its failure to stop a leader of unsound mind and his gangs from causing so much damage to the country and the rest of the world and having rendered it impotent or made a subject of global ridicule. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50887Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:30:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50887Hal Thresher, Houston, TXEveryone seems to have their opinion. The defense for missing the movement was Illegal war/ orders. The Military Judge has decided this is not a defense. So the LT will be convicted and sentenced. The question is will he be able to appeal the Military Judges ruling to the Supreme Court? If so then I admire the LT's stand. As a citizen he has the right to question the rule of law. He also seems ready to accept the consequences of raising the question. I only wish our Representatives and Senators had the same courage. At least the Senators have decided it is not their job to debate the War. So much for the Democratic process and open government. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50898Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:41:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50898Adolph Smith Hamlet, NCI have served in the military both as an enlisted person and an officer. I took an oath both times. As an officer, I served two combat tours in Iraq with 1st Marine Division as a Chaplain. I have served with the fine men and women of our armed forces and they deserve nothing but the best. Leadership such as this young LT is sad. We serve in a volunteer military and he knew exactly what he was getting into. He should be punished to the full extent of the law. Our young warriors deserves nothing less.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50901Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:46:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50901J SchneiderLt. Watada is courageously doing his duty as a moral man and a patriot - they are really the same. No one may morally obey illegal/evil orders - God trumps the politicians (liars, cowards) every time. That is what Christ's warning to follow the law of God before the law of men to save your soul requires of each of us, under ALL circumstances. That's what Nurenberg was about - you cannot hand over your conscience to others - you are in charge of you 24/7. Are there actually Americans out there who would have it any other way? Love that argument about a volunteer army - if it is such, then of course you can leave. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50903Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:47:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50903Ed, New York, NYPeople let's focus. First, quit ranting about Bush, Cheney, et al. Are they role models that we should be holdng ourselves up to? They won the elections (and please no whining, I don't hear whining about the possibility of how Kennedy "stole" the election from Nixon), they're entitled to run things as they see fit as much as far as they can. Welcome to democracy. Yes, the war is a huge mistake, led by (I'm being generous here) overzealous idealogues who don't have the sense to get out of the rain, and who like to cherry-pick their intelligence. But let's look at things from a simple, personal level. Lt. Watada volunteered to enlist in a wartime army. He knew that going in, and he should know that that means that he is required to obey orders. He was willing to accept that at the time. He thought that was an important, honorable thing to. He took the oath. No one is asking him to do anything illegal or immoral now, just get on the plane. If he should be given a clearly illegal order in Iraq, that's another story. In my opinion, Lt. Wtada is doing the same kind of myopic cherry-picking that lots of people are accusing BCR of. He's ignoring inconvenient facts like his oath, his duty, his honor, his fellow soldiers. If not him, then who? I don't know if the man is a man of high principles (rightly or not) or a coward. In any case, he knows the potential downside in front of him and chooses to accept it. Let's face it: just being right is not enough. Being right can lead to pain and suffering. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50905Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:49:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50905Tim Shenk - US Army (retired) He too the oath - took the pay - took the responsibility to lead men (that did go to Iraq even if they didn't want to). The bigger disgrace is to do what he has done. I can say this being an Infantry war veteran myself and not wanting to go to a conflict I didn't support - but I did anyway because I said that I would when I signed up. His is not to question why - but to do or die. There is some truth and some honor in that when you are a soldier. What good is our army when desertion by the leade4rship becomes permissible?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50906Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:49:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50906Marvin Woody, Port Orchard,WASome, who keep spouting that Watada is justified due to the Nuremburg trials, seem ill informed. One must recall the actual crimes for which many were punished. It wasn’t for simply overrunning (deploying to?) Poland, France or Belgium. It was for their subsequent war crimes. Genocide for one example. All military officers have a sworn duty to obey lawful orders. Lt. Watada was never given an unlawful order. But he individually and singly chose to miss a movement. He certainly doesn’t deserve accolades! He is a worm. I believe he should do some stockade time and then be frog-marched out the front gate! With the permanent rank of civilian, not subject to or capable of US military service! http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50907Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:49:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50907Jim, San Diego, CA"... I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." The conflict stems from the current President of the United States also being an enemy of the Constitution of the United States, which I believe he is.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50909Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:51:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50909Joshua Whitson, Birmingham, Alabama-that's right HOME SWEET HOME ALABAMA *SIGHS* A few things I see mising from the majority of these comments, on both sides mind you, is common sense, patience, and attempts at solutions that are well-thought out. I am 22, conservative-minded, and a supporter of our historical AND present postion in the world. I do not understand the comments made by some of the folks here: "...would a soldier attack a group of anti-war protesters...?" The absurdity of this thought saddens me. First, that is a CIVIL matter and the police and/or national guard of a STATE if it applies would be called to deal with it, not FEDERAL troops. Second, "Dubya" may have moments where even I wonder what his reasoning is, but he WON'T order an attack on his fellow Americans. Remember he himself took an oath to serve us. I admit the nature of my thinking is on the naive side, but I WANT to see us succeed in Iraq. I don't care about the story of us getting in there. Yes it is not what I would have liked to see, intelligence failures and everything else, being the reason. Having said that, I have two brothers who are enlisted in the National Guard . I do fear that they may be killed in action or lose their lives as a result of their choices, but they signed on to support the APPLICATION of the constitution, not the IDEAL of the constitution. People are as individul as sand grains on a beach, which means the applications of their thoughts, hopes, and dreams are just as varied, maybe more so. I am proud to see Bush taking a bad situation and trying to make it something better. I'm not talking about the cliche mess of "make lemonade if you get a lemon thrown at you." Bush wants to see us succeed, and I know ALL the people who write to this forum want to see us succeed too. But that takes sacrifice, which Lt. Watada agreed to do and especially so by signing on as a lieutenant. An officer and the FIRST officer in the chain of people who get to decide when soldiers might die. But like so many boys pretending to be men, he didn't let his actions match his words. Did he have justification? I don't know. That's for the tribunal to decide. I do not know him personally so I DO NOT CARE. That is insensitive to say, but it's also something people have forgotten. In the age of what I personally call "Information Overload" we see the results of EVERYONE"S actions. What makes it worse, is that everyone's OPINIONS are just as important as the circumstances and evidence behind what happend. From what I remember the only people who matter are in a courtroom or tribunal chamber, i.e. jury, lawyers(if any), the judge or tribunal head, and the bailiffs that maintain order of proceedings for the trial. That is what American Justice is. I love our passion as Americans, but our UNBRIDLED passion is more fruitless than trying to tell a left-minded AND right-minded person of the need for compromise. Please just leave this discussion of right and wrong in any form at the door so that this man, Lt. Watada, can speak for himself and, if he is successful, exonerate himself of wrongdoing. No one is at fault here for HIS choice but himself, as it should be. Blaming Bush for a GROWN MAN'S choice is infantile. But then again I suppose everyone needs their own scapegoat since most folks I meet are incapable of figuring out how to learn from their own mistakes. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50913Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:57:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50913MLT, Annapolis, Md.I take great humor in the posts referring to us in the military as following our orders "blindly" and "without conscience." Actually, that's not true... I take great offense to it. But at the end of the day, more than anything else, it's a sad, sad statement that you are so completely out of touch with today's average military men and women to think for one second that we follow "blindly" and "without conscience." Please do yourself a favor... contact your local VFW or American Legion and ask how you can adopt a Soldier or Marine. Get to know them... find out about the birthdays they miss, how lonely they are, how they'd give anything in the world just to be back home with their mom & dad. As you can read from these posts, we in uniform actually CAN think, and actually DO have opinions, but there is one simple concept that you just cannot seem to grasp. WE MADE A PROMISE.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50915Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:58:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50915dad of three aervicemenjason, lets hope that anytime u need a solider he will obey his orders to protect uhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50916Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:58:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50916Dog Breath, Somewhere, CASo if he refused an order to torture prisoners, would that be different? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50917Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:00:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50917Larry Babin, Vicenza, ItalyI'm a soldier (reservist) who has served my time in Iraq, seen men killed and wounded, screaming for their mothers, with limbs blown off and torsos (yes, even with IBA) resembling so much bloody hamburger. For what? A shameful, unjust war that never had to begin and seems never to end. Watanabe broke the law, but adhered to his conscience. May the law treat him mercifully.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50919Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:02:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50919James Wasington D.C.Against all eneimes he must fight. We are infact fighting against Al-qedea in Iraq who do you think are blowing up both sides in Iraq its Al-qedea but Al-qedea would rather have you think that it sectarian violence because Iran Gov. is Al-quedea People havent seen the truth this whole time. Iran and syria have been stoking sectarian violence in Iraq since Sadam had been cought. Think back 1983 when Iran was resposible for killing 220 US Marines and when more then half of the 911 hijackers went to Iran before the 9-11 attacks now they get a chance to kill more US soldiers and they are gearing up for nuke warfare or should i say suicide nuke warfare Iran is infact Al-qeda and until the the Dems open their eyes that have been blinded by hate for Bush we are in deep fudge stop Iran now or else. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50920Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:06:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50920Ed MoreauWhat's all the hoopla about? He volunteered to be in the Army and follow orders. He's a big boy and should have know what he was getting into. Hang the bastard.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50924Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:10:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50924Peter J. Petrunich, Chicago, IllinoisI think that it is strange that the many of the same people that say that an Army Lieutenant should have known what he was committing himself to in 2003 and now want to send him to jail are the same people that want to excuse George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condalesa Rice and Co. for knowingly and intentionally getting us into this war. Let me remind you that this gang of liars also took an oath to “… support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, …and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same….” Lt. Watada should go to jail for conduct unbecoming an officer? What about GENERAL Powell when he stood about before the UN with his Hollywood propts and lied to the world? Where the hecht is your sense of proportional responsibility?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50927Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:13:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50927a recent war widowlet me say this we have a president who picks and choices what he wants to hear about the situation in Iraq. He has told the Congress, the American people, the 911 commission and his own hand picked war commision and told us all to go to hell. So why is anybody suprised that someone who see how utterly stupid this war is about revolts? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50937Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:27:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50937JD2OK! You all blind sheep that will follow orders blindly. If your President orders you to kill your immediate family will you? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50938Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:27:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50938Eric, Pinehurst NCLots of people with no military experience throwing stones. The bull is always larger when it's you standing in the ring. That said, he should have sucked it up and deployed. A better case could be made for the guys at Gitmo saying their duties are not cosistent with UCMJ. Makes you wonder if the only effective check on the "imperial presidency" is having mandatory service, ensuring everyone has a dog in the fight.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50940Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:29:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50940T Sayles, San Diego, CAYour statement about the oath is correct, but i also think there is a mention of the uniform code of military justice. I believe there is a statment about lawful orders. Now, if your supperior told you to shoot an unarmed child - would you? This is really what should be argued. As for those calling this man a coward. You should look in the mirror and ask yourselves is Iraq better now, then before we arrived. I think that can be argued. I'm not sure if Watada was afraid and is using his argument as an excuse or if he truly believes what he says. That's for the court martial to decide. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50942Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:32:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50942Don Sebo, Phoenix, ArizonaMy son is a marine and is leaving for Iraq next week. I don't want to see him serve in that insane place but he has a duty, as I did 30 years ago in Viet Nam, to serve where he is needed. If you ask anyone in the military why they are serving in that country, most will probably tell you the "why" doesn't matter. They are following orders. The moral compass of this country has been severely bent for some time but our military has always followed the time honored principle that members of the military don't have the luxury of fighting only those wars that feel right to them. This young officer has a distorted view of his responsibilities both morally and ethically. He is not a leader and has no business serving in combat with our troops.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50953Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:50:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50953Ken N, Manassas, VATo put this in terms those without military service will understand, which is the vast majority of you, the LT is guilty of breach of contract, plain and simple. Part of the oath is acknowledgement that he enters the oath without mental reservation or under coercion, so he clearly believed he understood what he was getting himself involved in. That is the issue at hand, not the legality or illegality of the war in Iraq. If those in Congress who howl so loudly now against the war had paid attention in 2002-3 and not handed off another Gulf of Tonkin-like resolution that was open to interpretation and instead issued a clear statement, say a declaration of war, this issue wouldn't exist. Instead, the legislative branch willingly ceded their portion of the system of checks and balances to the executive branch, with predictable results. This same body now refuses to take responsibility by passing binding legislation to "correct" their error, so they can continue to expect results that are not to their collective liking.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50956Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:55:47 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50956wayne quincy massHe volunteered to go into the service,and should be punished for failing to obey orders.I know all the left wing radicals are lining up to defend him but perhaps they should read this entire article,he joined up after we were in Iraq and has no legal ground to stand on as an objector.Clearly he has no understanding of what honorable is and should be court matrialed and dis honorably discharged after he serves time for his cowardice.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50964Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:08:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50964Penny Loafer Newtown, North Carolina I agree with Lt Watada and I would agree with every United States Military person that decided that he/she had had enough of this illegal war and walked right out to find a way back to the United States and home. I would cheer them and defend their rights to do this. It hits me that George Bush and Cheney should be in Iraq fighting, but then neither one has the baws to walk down a street in that country. I doubt they have the baws for much else too and would more than likely faint if someone booed them.. if they didnt have the White House to hide in.Robbins n.c.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#50990Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:16:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:50990Terry, Westminster, MDWOW, I am amazed!! Does anyone that thinks that Lt. Ehren Watada is right by deciding when and where he will be a soldire, please let me know how you would feel about, let say the Super Bowl stopping because one team thought it didn't want to play any more! Or that you didn't feel like driving any more so you just stopped in the middle of the highway. I could go on and on, but Lt. Watada made a choice. He is an adult and as adults we are allowed to make choices. He made his, and then decided, OOPS, I didn't really mean it, I don't want to do that. If that was how our Army, Navy, Police, Courts, National Guard, Coast Guard, Fire Department, etc... reacted, heaven help us all!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51012Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:21:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51012MykeHELLOOOOOOOO....WE HAVE A WAR WAGED BY A "COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF" WHO WAS NOT TRULY VOTED INTO OFFICE THIS TERM, BUT SECURED THERE BY POLITICAL "GANGMANSHIP," SUPPORTED THE FLEEING OF THE BIN LADEN FAMILY FROM THIS COUNTRY AFTER 9-11, AND LIED ABOUT THE NECESSITY TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ. BY THE WAY, WHAT HAPPENS IF/WHEN KOREA ACTUALLY PUSHES FORWARD WITH IT'S THREATS????? HMMMMMM....http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51023Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:24:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51023Lafayette Ward, Los Angeles, CaliforniaThe oath of an officer is very clear. However, the enemy in this situations is not. You must remember that Lt. Ehren Watada was given an executive order. This was not a declared war by the congress. Therefore, he has every right to disobey an illegal order by the President of the United States of America. Who himself is an enemy of the people of Iraq as well as the United States.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51041Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:30:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51041ed ebbecke2) The oath of service of the soldiers of the Armed forces shall be: "I swear by God this scared oath: I will render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler, the Führer of the German nation and people, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and will be ready as a brave solider to risk my life at my time for this oath.' Just substitute George's name and USA for Germany and you'll get my point http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51054Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:35:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51054Bill Tenan, Washington DCThis isn’t about wars past or present or opinions about those wars. It’s about duty incurred by all who serve in the all volunteer armed forces of the United States of America and loyalty to same. Watada’s blatant lack of loyalty and failure to fulfill his duty under voluntary contractual obligation is a violation of federal law under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), i.e., United States Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47, and must be punished as prescribed therein to preserve, protect and defend the integrity of our Constitution and rule of law. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51057Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:36:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51057Rick A.If your leaders asked you in the course of battle to kill unarmed children, would you have carried out the order? "Against all enemies" is a pretty broad statement. Just a thought...http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51086Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:45:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51086CLThis guy will be our next president. As I recall every president has done something wrong in their past!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51138Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:01:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51138SPC. WOODY California,Germany, IraqI personally think he is a coward and does not deserve to wear the uniform, he knew full well that our country was at war, whether legal or not in everyones opinion, and another thing, unless you are in the military, or armed forces, you dont deserve to pass judgement on someone who is in that uniform, whether they earned it or not, and yes I am one of those who wear it, I am proud to wear it, I am married, I have not seen my wife in 12 months, yeah its a part of it but there are so many others in my situation, so I believe that you critics who live on everyone elses drama and passes judgement, and lives in america, but wont put a thought to protecting it, you need to move to another country, woodyhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51142Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:02:04 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51142Sandra Weiland, Coalition Angels, NRW GermanyIn Germany people call Lt.Watada a hero because he refused to go to Iraq. They say that the war is illegal. Everybody says that the war is illegal. What makes it legal and what makes a war illegal? The UN? Give me a break... I'm German myself and I am into the Troop Support. One of the less German that supports American Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't care if the war is legal or illegal there are Soldiers out there that need moral support because people like Lt.Watada drags the moral down. He has chosen to become an Officer AFTER the war has started. He knew exactly of what he was doing. It's not that you should follow blindly the rules but if either you know of what you are doing or you simply don't join the military in the first place! In these times people shouldn't join the military just because of the benefits, in these time people shouldn't join the military if they do not want to face a deployment either in Afghanistan or Iraq. Is the war right? Is it wrong? I guess it depends on the point of view... Hussein was a criminal, he was a dictator... are the people better off him? I believe so, but that is because I also see many good things happening over there. I am in contact with many many US Soldiers and as a German I see a lot more than anyone gets from the News. I can see both sites, and there are ALWAYS two sites on a medal. Should Lt.Watada be punished? I really do not know... As German I won't ever forget that you have freed my country. I had the possibility to grow up in freedom and I believe that every single person has the right of freedom. Yet there is something going wrong and for the sake of the United States of America I truly hope that all of you will find the Freedom we have experienced, brought by your sacrifice. I love the States from the bottom of my heart, and you have some fine men and women overseas serving your country, please don't let them go down, don't backstab them. Their experience overseas are so very different from what is reported in the News. As for Lt.Watada... I do not call him a coward, at least he made his decision and has the balls to face the consequences. I do not respect him for refusing to serve, I respect him for having the balls to face the consequences. Sincerly http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51174Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:10:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51174Dave SurlsIf it was up to me Watada would be executed for desertion AND treason. Hopefully, the military will throw the book at him. There isn't anything the least bit illegal about our military operations in Iraq, but even if there was, it wouldn't be up to some halfwit, leftist, junior officer to make the decision. He refused a lawful order, and has made public statements that provide aid and comfort to our enemies. Whatever the military court does to him, it won't be anymore than he deserves. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51179Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:11:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51179Sandra Weiland, Coalition Angels, NRW GermanyIn Germany people call Lt.Watada a hero because he refused to go to Iraq. They say that the war is illegal. Everybody says that the war is illegal. What makes it legal and what makes a war illegal? The UN? Give me a break... I'm German myself and I am into the Troop Support. One of the less German that supports American Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't care if the war is legal or illegal there are Soldiers out there that need moral support because people like Lt.Watada drags the moral down. He has chosen to become an Officer AFTER the war has started. He knew exactly of what he was doing. It's not that you should follow blindly the rules but if either you know of what you are doing or you simply don't join the military in the first place! In these times people shouldn't join the military just because of the benefits, in these time people shouldn't join the military if they do not want to face a deployment either in Afghanistan or Iraq. Is the war right? Is it wrong? I guess it depends on the point of view... Hussein was a criminal, he was a dictator... are the people better off him? I believe so, but that is because I also see many good things happening over there. I am in contact with many many US Soldiers and as a German I see a lot more than anyone gets from the News. I can see both sites, and there are ALWAYS two sites on a medal. Should Lt.Watada be punished? I really do not know... As German I won't ever forget that you have freed my country. I had the possibility to grow up in freedom and I believe that every single person has the right of freedom. Yet there is something going wrong and for the sake of the United States of America I truly hope that all of you will find the Freedom we have experienced, brought by your sacrifice. I love the States from the bottom of my heart, and you have some fine men and women overseas serving your country, please don't let them go down, don't backstab them. Their experience overseas are so very different from what is reported in the News. As for Lt.Watada... I do not call him a coward, at least he made his decision and has the balls to face the consequences. I do not respect him for refusing to serve, I respect him for having the balls to face the consequences. Sincerly http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51188Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:13:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51188Charles Miller, Boston MassachusettsI say, If "W" goes (so called Commander and Chief) - then he is obligated to be right behind "W"!!!! A true leader, LEADS - Washington D.C. Is there intellegent life in our capital? bla bla bla bla bla --- http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51213Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:23:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51213MRS. TJC Proud Military Wife, Maiden Rock, WIFirst of all I would like to say, " Have you forgotten? Second, Watada knew what he was doing...he had a good teacher, his Daddy did the same damn thing years ago. It is a family scam and if they don't like the Army, don't volunteer, if they don't like what the USA has given them, get the hell out! This man stole the benefits, Free Medical for him and his dependants, education, housing. and good pay for as long as he could get away with it and then he tucked tail as his unit, his brothers in arms, deployed WITHOUT THIS TRAINED OFFICER IN A LEADERSHIP POSITION!!! Now he is crying illegal war? It doesn't matter! Legal or illegal we elect officials to make this horrid decision for us. Then The strong and usually unselfish people who have VOLUNTARILY taken that oath , just go. When and where they are told, leaving us behind in our warm dry comfy beds to utilize the freedom they are dying to keep safe for us, to bitch about what they do. So sleep tight, You've got SOLDIERS on the wall. Third, As far as Watada....I say hang the traitor. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51253Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:45:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51253j d The argument that by occupying a foreign country, collaterally damaging millions of ordinary families and condoning our military's criminal killing fields all in the name of keeping the enemy of our shores, and done at the expense of turning our beloved nation into its current fascist regime, is ludicrious and short sighted. Who needs foreign enemies when what we are doing with our wasteful efforts there is setting America up for an internal fall here as we cut back on supporting the social programs that make our country intelligent, safe, compassionate, respected and respectful for all its people. Salutes to Lt Watada who sees this administrations illegal folly. Thank goodness he has the freedom to to be the hero he is, in spite of the done deal kangaroo court martialing against him.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51256Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:47:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51256mariaThank you Lt. Watada! You are a true patriot. Bless you, -mariahttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51278Wed, 07 Feb 2007 03:08:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51278Concerned Retired SoldierI think most dont realize the single largest fact here..which is he asked to resign and should have been allowed to. But due to STOP LOSS and other convienient made up rules, he like so many other service men & women are prevented from leaving the service even though their time is up. My question is why? Any officer can resign his commision at any time and many wrong doers are made to do just that. I can not abide any decision that forces someone who has already served to be stuck just because of some "decree". Let the ones who have served and no longer want to stay go home. This is the true OUTRAGE here. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51281Wed, 07 Feb 2007 03:13:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51281JIM MC MarylandWhy don't more stand up like this. Blind obedience is what created WW2 Germany. Those with conscience that stood up too late became the enemy. We need to challenge and question those in authority. Too many have private interests behind the larger picture and that accountability needs to be justified. They need that mirror of feedback. Without it... absolute power corrupts absolutely. Sending him to Afghanistan would be the right solution here. This soldier is right for standing on his convictions in this situation. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51415Wed, 07 Feb 2007 07:19:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51415Robert Bourdon, Sheridan, WyomingHow many of you are divorced? Did you take an oath? Is one oath more important than another? Sometimes it takes courage to take a stand. Lt. Watada is clearly a courageous man. I am sure he is well aware of the consequences of his decision. There is no doubt that he broke his oath and that he will be punished. That is the downside of taking a moral stand. How many of you blindly waving the flag and calling him a coward would have the guts to do the same thing if you had to put it all on the line? Whether or not you agree with him is not the point. If he manages to help galvanize public opinion against the war, he will prove to be a hero. If The current administration prevails and proves him wrong, he will be seen as a villain and a coward. Truth seems to be available to us only in hindsight. Hopefully it will come sooner for this young man.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51418Wed, 07 Feb 2007 07:28:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51418ken- mnif bush can start, and congress rubber-stamp, any war they feel like; the troops have a duty to act according to individual conscience. there is no other barrier to the wholesale slaughter of human beings by the new executive branch tyranny than the courage of individual conscience now. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51425Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:07:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51425Joseph C. , Salinas, CAI see no conflict in the precious "oath" and what Watada has done. Where is the conflict? It says quite clearly, he has sworn to PROTECT the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. This "oath" can't condemn him because he is standing up for our Constitution. George Bush has betrayed the trust of our soldiers as the president of the United States, and in doing so, he forfeits his authority. What is he doing still walking freely, yapping out orders as if he were president? He needs to be arrested and tried for the war criminal that he is. What is integrity? It is "knowing what is right, and doing it no matter what." I, for one, support Watada's move. First and foremost, this man is standing up for what he believes in. Against all odds. I think he knows that the eyes of hate and disgrace or on him. He knows that he'll go to jail. He knows that many people aren't happy with his decision, but even so, he faces this with courage. If this is not integrity, I don't know what is. My only comment is... what a shame. This man is truly standing up for what he believes in, and instead of respecting that, our military will court-martial him and use him as an example to those that question. He was an "exemplary soldier," and now he's the example of what happens for standing up. Defiant soldiers who refuse orders and stand up for what is right; that is what me need more of in our military. If what Mr. Watada has done violates so-called "military protocol" or "military law," then maybe there is a problem with these so-called laws and they should be changed. What kind of military forces its soldiers to quell their common sense and integrity and follow orders no-matter what they are?" I'll tell you what kind. The militaries of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. If our soldiers have to follow orders, no matter what they are, then this means that one day, I could be shot to death by the very people who are supposed to be serving my country, and protecting me, and I cannot support them. Hear me say it; I don't support our troops. Had soldiers stood up to Hitler and his regime, maybe 6,000,000 Jews wouldn't have been slaughtered; had soldiers "in his majesty's service" refused to bomb Pearl Harbor, perhaps their country wouldn't have suffered the A-bombs... Despite the current situation, how many soldiers in our military still have their common sense integrity intact? How many have been forced to quell it "for the mission and for the morale of other soldiers," even though the mission may be corrupt, and this would be reason for the morale of our soldiers to be low? Furthermore, can someone tell me how our invasion of Iraq, the slaughtering of innocent people, and the execution of their president has made me, the every-day American, more "free?" How is attacking a sovereign country without a reason whatsoever besides mere speculation of "threat," "defending our constitution?" (BTW, DID we ever find those nasty weapons of mass destruction?) If Mr. Watada can prove irrefutably that this war is un-constitutional, and that our president has betrayed the trust of soldiers who have sworn an "oath" by launching us into an illegal war he should have never started, then he is keeping his "oath," and keeping it well. Personally, I'd question the validity of an "oath" that wouldn't permit me to question my orders and do what's right. Truly, a military that operates openly and honestly, not through lies and deception, wouldn't need such an oath; I believe in our soldiers, and their ability to choose what's right. The last time citizens of a country and soldiers of a military had to respond to ONE MAN was under a MONARCHY. BUSH IS NOT KING. My condolances, honor and respect to Watada.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51426Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:19:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51426Joseph C., Salinas, CA"If you ask anyone in the military why they are serving in that country, most will probably tell you the "why" doesn't matter." I think that's a very sad state of affairs. I'm sure if you asked the soldiers that were stuffing Jews into burning ovens, they'd say the same thing...http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51427Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:23:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51427Joseph C., Salinas, CADefine Coward. I define it as someone who keeps his mouth shut, and complacently does what he is told out of fear. He is afraid of displeasing others, because his self-esteem relies on making others happy. Mr. Watada a coward is not, for it takes courage to stand up for what you believe in, even though people are ready to flush you down the toilet. How many of our troops in the military are cowards? I guess it all depends on your definition of a "coward" now, doesn't it. Who's the coward? Who's the blind sheep? Who's the one that is not standing down?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51429Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:30:55 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51429Joseph C., Salinas, CA"Some, who keep spouting that Watada is justified due to the Nuremburg trials, seem ill informed. One must recall the actual crimes for which many were punished. It wasn’t for simply overrunning (deploying to?) Poland, France or Belgium. It was for their subsequent war crimes. Genocide for one example." Uh, yeah? Please tell me how the current war in Iraq isn't just that.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51431Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:47:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51431Joseph C., Salinas, CAIs a war soley justified merely because troops have died in it? Whining about protesters "forgetting what our troops have died for" only makes you sound like brainless kamikazes of Imperial Japan. Soldiers die in war. It's a fact that comes with the territory. Many people cry, "oh our fallen troops, our fallen troops, what would they say..." Did you ever stop and think that soldiers die in both sides of a war? That our troops may have been sent to die in VAIN? I'm sure there are freshers out of boot-camp ready to respond: "no. we will win, goddamnit." We will win, just like in Vietnam... won't we fellas... http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51432Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:53:16 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51432Joseph C., Salinas, CA"No doubt about it,,, this has me thinking with 2 different mindsets." I believe Orwell called this phenomena "doublethink."http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51433Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:58:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51433Joseph C., Salinas, CA"How about the hypothetical situation of our land being invaded, would it be ok for servicemen to quit then too, leave it up to me and you to defend ourselves, that would make you what?" Would that this "hypothetical" situation actually happened, it would be different now, wouldn't it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's our militiary who invaded. No one had invaded the US. Where were the Iraquis swimming across the Atlantic? Where were all their warships? WHEN WERE WE UNDER ATTACK??? This war was waged under mere speculation that Iraq COULD be a threat, and to date, there has been no proof that that was ever the case. Is that how a democratic nation operates? Just attack any country that gives us dirty looks? A person that attacked everyone who gave him dirty looks would surely be put in a mental institution.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51434Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:06:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51434Joseph C., Salinas, CA"My heart knows that the battle for Irag is congruent to the war on terror, or else Alqaida in Iraq would still be concentrating on terror in America. I don't care to lose our young service folk for their sake, although it would appear the Kurds like it. The Shiites, like our liberals, don't express much appreciation for the opportunity they've been afforded thus far. So, what the heck, pull them out. Pull them out of Afghanistan also, we are fighting Alqaida there also. Far as I know, no Afghans asked us to liberate them. Even more so, pull our folks out of Bosnia. Let the Serbs do their thing. The Serbs didn't attack us. What does our constitution have to do with Bosnian Muslims. Oh, and who cares if N. Korean sets up office in Seoul. Korea, Vietnam, what do we care. I'm sure there are a few other places, we have "no business in." Bring them all home. We world war three starts up in the Mideast and Europe, I will advise my sons and any others that they have no obligation to fight for anything they don't agree with." EXACTLY!!! Well said Dog! Someone's finally beginning to think straight!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51436Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:09:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51436HDealAmercians are as divided on this non-issue as we are on the elected leaders who WE VOTED in office, and yet we Amercians sit by and let our country fall to pieces around us. Last time I checked, the USA is still a self-governing nation. Anybody remember "for the people and by the people. As a 25 year DAV and retired Navy Chief Petty officer, there is only one right thing to do here. The Army Officer is guilty of all charges against him. There is no debate. He violated his oath of appointment just as GW Bush has. I agree with the Officer in principle that the invasion of Iraq was unjust. This still bears no weight on his refusal to uphold his oath. He is guilty, period. Now what Amercia chooses to do about GW Bush is unfortunately anothe matter entirely. Why doesn't the Amercian people hold him accountable for his actions. To me it is the typical moo-cow menatlity of Amercians that sit by and do nothing as our country, its reputation, it's values, and the precious blood of our men and women of the military are wasted, familes torn asunder and ripped apart for the still repeated lies and deciet of our own US Govt. That is is the crime that should be put on trial and those leaders held accountable for. HDeal BMCS(SW/AW) USA Navy (ret:1978-2003) http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51448Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:16:34 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51448Daniel Roman, Orlando, FloridaConcerning Lt. Watada. WE do express various opinions. One of our Freedoms! Is Lt. Watada right or wrong? Who Decides? The Military? G.W.Bush is Commander-in-Chief. Pres. Bush, V.P. Cheney, took oaths as Lt. Watada did. They swore to protect America, the Constitution, every Citizen (including U.S. Servicemen & Women), according to the U.S. Constitution. Wake up America. The time to stop playing Political Chess is NOW! Impeach them both and stop feeding the fire. Lt. Watada didn't refuse to serve, he chose to be Honest! Who casts the 1st stone? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51449Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:17:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51449Atif, Karachi, SindhIn 1986 a US nuclear submarine gone out of contact with pentagon, given the deep cold war with soviet union at that time the captain of the submarine ordered to fire nuclear missile to soviet union assuming that due to a massive invasion by soviets the communication had broken down. At that time the captain of US nuclear submarines have one part of code and his second-in-command the other part of code to fire the nuclear missile (that is unlike today it was not US president who has the code). The second-in-command of the submarine refused to obey his captain's order saying that unless we very clear that its not device failure we can't fire a nuke. Captain said he is mutining and would be court marshalled. The second-in-command said ok thats better than starting a nuclear war. Later it was found that communication with pentagon failed due to device failure and there was no nuclear war going out. If the second-in-command would have "followed the constitution" and not used his conscience Mr Rick Francona might not probably be alive discussing all this. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51450Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:20:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51450Daniel Roman, Orlando, FloridaConcerning Lt. Watada. WE do express various opinions. One of our Freedoms! Is Lt. Watada right or wrong? Who Decides? The Military? G.W.Bush is Commander-in-Chief. Pres. Bush, V.P. Cheney, took oaths as Lt. Watada did. They swore to protect America, the Constitution, every Citizen (including U.S. Servicemen & Women), according to the U.S. Constitution. Wake up America. The time to stop playing Political Chess is NOW! Impeach them both and stop feeding the fire. Lt. Watada didn't refuse to serve, he chose to be Honest! Who casts the 1st stone? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51454Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:56:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51454Robert Boyd, San Jose, CAAll of these messages were interesting and compelling. I was unable to devote the time it would take to read them all, but I hope to be able to do so in the next few days. Those who expressed their views in reasonable, non-hysterical language restored the waning hope that this great nation might yet have a future. No matter which side you chose to support, I ask each of you to admit that every one of us has the right to express our individual opinions and views. This issue is not some superficial question for the Middle School Debate Club to kick around like a football going flat – there are profound moral and philosophical implications surrounding Lt. Watada’s increasingly notorious legal challenge. Some contributors to this thread have arbitrarily dismissed the notion that factors other than the young Lieutenant’s free will should be given some consideration. They argue that the Lt., of his own fully informed free will, deliberately took an oath, the words of which posed no mystery or implied no hidden agenda. And that of his own free will, he violated the oath to which he freely and voluntarily swore his sacred honor. End of argument. He swore to unquestioningly obey all orders given to him by his superior officers; therefore, by disobeying any lawful order, he is ipso facto guilty of the crime with which he has been charged – let’s move on to other matters. Those contributors rely on a simplicity, which is irresponsibly naïve. Their arguments have been discredited by those who pose the rhetorical question: if the Lt. Is given an order to open fire on unarmed women and children, does the oath he swore impel him to follow those orders unquestioningly? We cannot voluntarily ignore the findings and decisions handed down by the world court at Nuremberg in the years just following WWII. It has been established that a man may not escape the responsibility of his own actions by claiming that he was just following the orders of his superior officers. In today’s modern world, he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. I suggest that any soldier who fails or refuses to follow orders runs the risk of immediate execution; on the other hand, if those order run contrary to the Geneva Convention, he runs the risk of being condemned by a post-war tribunal. This is why I suggest that everyone owes it to himself, to his country, and to his God to give serious, unbiased consideration to the paradox posed by the junction of these two diametrically opposed ethics. The soldier who refuses to follows orders, which he knows to be illegal or inhuman, might not live to justify his refusal before a world court. On the other hand, if he obeys the orders given to him during his course of military duty (and those orders are in direct contravention of the rules of his God or his conscience) he accepts full and complete responsibility for his actions. It is my considered opinion that no individual should be exposed to such vagaries. The apostle, Saint Peter, had sworn several times that he would not deny Jesus; but he was suddenly put to the test when Jesus was being taken into custody. Witnesses claimed that Peter was “one of them” (the “trouble makers” backing up Jesus). But within a few hours, he had denied any knowledge of or association with his Messiah on at least three different occasions. Does anyone believe that Jesus would reproach Peter for saving his own skin? You see, doing the right thing at the right time might pose a threat to a man’s safety and well-being. When a mere mortal finds himself between a rock and a hard place, it is to be expected that he will do whatever is necessary to survive. Even so, these arguments are not convincing enough to some of you. When a man gives his word as his oath, we expect him to honor that oath. So, once again, we cast aside all weak defenses and take the hard stand that a man must uphold his word of honor. Then I expand the argument to include those who knowingly swear an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Men oh high rank and elevated station should be held more culpable than others when and if they break their vows. All elected officials swear to the oath, cited above in part, and do swear solemnly to honor that oath, then they add the invocation: “So help me, God.” These men of high rank should be held to answer for any violation of that sacred oath. How can we presume to make Lt. Watada fulfill his oath or surrender his life or liberty when he fails to do so, without imposing the same stringent enforcement of their oaths upon men of greater responsibility? When the President of the United States swears to preserve our Constitution, then deliberately goes out of his way to dismantle it, we as a people surrender our rights when we fail to take steps to emasculate his attempts, all the while cowering in the corner, afraid to do what is necessary to prevent the suspension of our rights. Many of the arguments against Lt. Watada invoke the concept that he knew what he was letting himself in for. The war with Iraq had already begun, they insist, therefore Lt. Watada could not reasonably expect to avoid service in the Mid-East. And I rebut with a renewed insistence that those of higher rank have a greater responsibility to preserve the American Heritage. The President petitioned Congress for authorization to declare war against Iraq, and the Congress might barely excuse their unquestioning fulfillment of the President’s request by claiming ignorance of the facts. It is a well-documented fact that the Administration deliberately lied to and misled the Congress in order to coerce that body into granting the authorization to declare war. However, there can be no excuse for flocking to the Halls of Congress in order to vote for what were obviously deliberately enacted legislation, which began the suspension of the Bill of Rights. Let the contributors to this message board convince me that anyone of even average intelligence could have somehow misconstrued the nature of the PATRIOT Act which the Administration was doing its best to rush through the Senate. The transparent nature and purpose of the PATRIOT Act was unmistakable. A vote for its enactment was a flagrant forswearing of the oath of office. And these “Honorable” men in Congress tried to convince us that they were taking the necessary steps to “preserve, protect, and defend” etc! I, for one, was outraged! I found it incredible that my elected representatives had gathered as a group to rob me of my rights – those rights for which our founding fathers had pledged their lives, liberties, and sacred honors. To this day, I do not understand how the American people allowed our Congress to get away with that! I ranted and raved to anyone who would listen, but Americans have become apathetic – they are sheep, all too willing to be led to the slaughter. Very slowly, over a protracted period of time, editors and columnists began to expose the truth behind the PATRIOT Act. But before we put Lt. Watada on trial for violating his sworn oath of allegiance, we need to call to account those in high places. The Republican Congress eagerly impeached President Bill Clinton for a minor sexual indiscretion, but no one has risen to the challenge of impeaching the many members of the Clinton Administration who foreswore their solemn oaths to preserve and protect our sacred Constitution! (I’ve heard it said that if the President of the United States can’t manage to score a little “on the side”, he’s not much of a President!) But I am astonished that not one man in the Senate rose in defense of our treasured Bill of Rights. Each of us must stand back and take a fresh look at the situation with a purely objective frame of mind. We must be honest with ourselves and not wallow in a senseless porridge of partisanship. We need to look at what we have written, at what we have said about the opposition party (whichever it might be) and ask ourselves if we truly believe our baseless accusations that the other party hates this country or that they are the cause of all our ills. Anyone who can, with a straight face, remove the guilt of the lies and deceits perpetrated on the American people by the Bush Administration, is not being honest with himself. Anyone who can excuse Al Gore for not putting up a fight to be given the electoral votes that rightfully belonged to him, and which would have put him in the White House, has no concept of history or government. It still infuriates me that he felt he had no obligation to challenge the outcome of the 2000 election. What gives him the right to invalidate my vote and those of half a million others? Anyone who can find reason to excuse the inaction of the Democratic Party is equally foolish. When the House prepared a challenge to the Electoral College results, they could not find one single Senator to endorse it. Time after time, a cavalier Vice President turned away Representatives who sought to have their challenge reach the floor of the Senate because it bore no Senator’s signature. Not one! Diane Feinstein said nothing; Edward Kennedy sat silently; Joe Lieberman was nowhere to be seen. I assumed that they attributed their silences to the desire to not make any waves. Allow the smooth transition of parties and Administrations at the seat of Government. But what happened to my vote? What happened to the man legitimately elected by the people? Government churned its wheels and cogs at its usual, noisy pace. I was slowly coming to the conclusion that what they said about Political Action groups was true – if a man needed his government for something, he needed first of all to build a hefty war chest with which to entice lawmakers to sit up and take interest. Those with the deepest pockets could expect the most from their government. Four years passed while I followed the machinations of our governmental process. I have reached the conclusion that we, the people, must take it upon ourselves to get rid of all the lazy, deceitful, self-serving “servants of the people”. A tough challenge, to be sure; but then I realized that it had been done before, once back in 1776. The only standing between the government and the patriotic, brave, charitable American people is the ballot box. So I ask you to reconsider how you feel about a man’s responsibilities under his government. Are you content to let power-grabbers bankrupt this great nation? Do you have strong feelings about the administration of justice? Or are you willing to let Lt. Watada serve as the poster child to detract attention from those who love the country only because it is such a rich resource for billionaires? http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51458Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:17:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51458Robert Falco, East Bernard, TexasAs a retired Army NCO I have many times had concerns about things I was ordered to do. I raised those concerns with the appropriate authorities and performed my duty. The LT. here joined the service after the war had begun. Where were his convictions then. Could it be that he wanted the ROTC money to pay his school bills? As soldiers we have an obligation to obey lawful orders, nothing in his orders deploying him to Iraq are unlawful. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51467Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:30:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51467Robert Anderson, Spokane Valley, Washington stateAfter WWII was over the alies hung men whose excuse was I was only following orders. We did not accept this as an excuse and killed them anyway. The war is Iraq is being directed by men who will never have to face that kind of judgement. The men and women in Iraq might if captured. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51471Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:34:16 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51471Juan G. Olivares, Baltimore, MDLt. Watada should be taken to Arlington Cementary and made to read the name of every service member who gave the ultimate sacrifice for there country. How many of them didn't believe in what they were doing it wasn't there war but they still did there duty. Why, because they had a responsibility even though many were not Volunteers they still were men and women of integrity. Lt. Watada is nothing but a coward and a liar, he volunteered during a time of war and swore an oath which meant nothing to him. Let's see which big firm hires him because I will be one person that will never do any business with them.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51482Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:50:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51482Todd, Austin, TXI firmly believe that we should have never invaded Iraq, that we have badly mismanaged Afghanistan and the real war on terror, and that certain actions of this administration have been so grossly underhanded, illegal, and injust that they call for impeachment... Unfortunately, I also firmly believe that a soldier in a volunteer military who violates his or her oath and refuses to deploy deserves to face the consequences. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51487Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:57:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51487H Ehlers, Peoria, AZWhat this man is doing is defending not only himself and the troops currently placed in harms way by stupid draft/war dodging politicians, but the oath of the military service and the UCMJ. As a Nam vet who survived 2 tours (one during the 68 Tet offensive and the second mid 70 to mid 71) and one who chose at times to disobey what I considered not only unlawful, but ill advised orders of inexperienced green 2nd lieutenants and ended up saving lives in the process. He has the right as I did, to refuse what he feels in his heart, to be unlawful orders. The bottom line to all this, is this war was cooked up by Bush, Chaney, Rice, and Rove, without forethought to the lives it would take. These people and their kin should be the ones wearing what they call body armor and walking the streets of all Iraq cities and feel what it is like to be shot at or what it sounds like when rockets and motors start raining down on them.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51495Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:09:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51495Nitza, Philadelphia, PAI have read the comments of everyone on this Blog. And I'm so embarrassed and dissapointed at all the negative feed back. There is a percentage of Americans who have become nothing more than COWARDS! I am a Woman and I wish that I could serve this country and go to War, defend it against ALL ENEMIES! Those opposing to go to war, all they want to do is turn a blind eye to everything that goes on around the world. They've become selfish and greedy. Wanting to live the American dream but not fight to preserve it. They don't even fight here at home for a better living by coming together to fight against proverty, drug addiction, corruption in corporate america and politics. Do not teach their children and the youth of this generation to respect and honor themselves and their country. When a person joins the Armed Forces of the USA, you have to honor your counrty, yourself and family. An Oath is an Oath, it is not a broken promise. If you break an Oath you put the lives of every American in danger of terrorism and you disgrace us all. Anti-War groups and people are cowards and do not deserve to be called Americans! We must all fight against All Enemies for a better American live and for the future of our children. Many young men join the Armed forces only to get money for education, to make money. Not to serve and defend America of All Enemies. They are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem. Denial and ignorance is going to get your loved ones killed. How so easily we've forgoten 9/11. America will never be safe again, unless we all stand united to fight to preserve what our founding fathers gave up their lives for. George W Bush may not be perfect, but he is our President and we owe him respect. Why should he apologize to the American people, for lying. Hey, those who are clean of Sin can cast the first stone. Hipocritical Cowards!!! What a disgrace! http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51508Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:18:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51508John Ceresnak Cornwall,NYAs far as having George W. Bush in the crosshairs, we had him there during the last election, but not enough people pulled the trigger to do the job. If for whatever reason, our congress cannot muster the necessaries to impeach him, then we ALL have to live with that. To say that a volunteer soldier has the right to individually decide what his duty is, just as effectively justifies the actions of a domestic terrorist like Timothy McVeigh, who used his military training to kill government employees of agencies he did not like (who did not fit in with HIS ideas of what is CONSTITUTIONAL) , or the military death squads of Argentina, Columbia, and other Dictatorships that wear constitutions as figleaves over their instruments of oppression. Save the inflammatory rhetoric and leave it to his lawyers to get him his best possible outcome. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51509Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:18:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51509Nitza, Philadelphia, PAI say to all the Left Winged radicals, you all deserve to be court martialed and Hung for being traitors of the USA and the American live. Hipocrates and traitors!!!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51510Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:20:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51510Wayne SmithSome of you are just plain stupid. George W Bush started the Iraq war after Saddam Hussein was non-compliant with United Nations (read the world) resolutions aimed at preventing Iraq from acquiring Nuclear weapons capability. Such capability was previously destroyed by Israel in air attacks before it went online. Any fool who thought Saddam was not still trying to build the capability again can only look at Iran now. Both countries, mortal enemies, have been actively persuing nuclear capabilities. The fact that PRESIDENT Bush ultimately ended Iraq's persuit by unseating Saddam in accordance with a United Nations Resolution is lawfull, just, and necessary. Iran and North Korea should be next, but the UN has lost its teeth and resolve, and the consequences will be severe. I honor our soldiers of today and before who stood when sent, sacrificed self interest and opinion in the interest of an idea of 'United We Stand.' The cost of our impotence in south-east asia can be measured in the death of MILLIONS of that region's citizens. LT. Watada signed a contract and is responsible to it, and surrendered the right to his opinion in doing so. The integrity of our armies is wholly dependent on this principle. Cowards need not apply.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51522Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:34:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51522Dave Knight, MTTo all of you who believe George Bush is the "real terrorist", thank god you are too crazy to be in charge of the country. The people we are fighting would cut your head off, they would cut your wife's head off, and your children. They blow up their own citizens, our troops, and even themselves in acts of terrorism. We did not cause this problem, the terrorist have been doing this for thousands of years, and yes even when the beloved Bill Clinton was in office, who by the way, was one of the biggest proponents of getting rid of Saddam. Study a little history, study a little present, and maybe you will clear your liberal minds of the fog that will lead you to destroy our country.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51528Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:38:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51528Traka, Lafayette, LARobert E. Lee was a United States Military officer at the time of the outbreak of the American Civil War in 1861. He was asked by Lincoln to command Union forces, but refused. He resigned his commission as a union officer and fought for the Confederacy. The point I'm trying to make is that Lee followed his conscience. He refused to fight against his native Virginians and took up arms to defend them, in spite of what the U. S. military wanted him to do. I think it takes great courage to stand up for your convictions. People become Sheeple when they don't think for themselves. I think President Bush violates the constitution when he spys on American citizens without warrants. I think the Patriot Act should be viewed as the Unpatriot Act. President Bush violates the Constitution whenever a person is detained without a writ of habeas corpus. Remember, habeas corpus was destroyed by this president and his Republican sheeple.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51530Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:44:11 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51530BornFreeSo If You Kill half a million innocent Iraqis, sacrifice 3000 of our soldiers, spend more than half a trillion dollars, of tax payers money and in the process enrich your cronies, you are still a patriot. But if you peacefully protest an illegal and immoral war and and do not want to kill innocent people and committ war crimes you are an enemy and a criminal and will have to serve four years in a jail. It is a shame that these spinners in lapdog media can do hair hair splitting but do not have the guts to say the truth.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51543Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:00:55 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51543nicholas Pediaditakis MDThe war 1. was not authorized by UN (The previous secretary general said so himself).. Started with President lying (Thus breaking the oath of office ) 3. It is destroying meaninglessly a country that did not do anything to us 4.It is doing harm to our country (proliferating enemies.Oficer Wadada is defending the constitution with his refusal. Illegal orders should be disobeyed otherwise venal or incompetent leaders will use the troops for criminal activity -Remember Eichman? They may muzlle him - a kangaroo court) but the facts are facts. I will inform my 17 year old grandson about the farcical trial.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51551Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:08:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51551Ollie Garth, Waco, TexasWhen I was in the military there was such a thing as having the right to legitimately not follow an unlawful order. This is a matter which came up frequently during the Mai-Lai massacre. We need perspective, to determine our future. Let this add to the perspective. Hannah Arendt wrote of the war crimes trial of Adolf Eichman, of which she witnessed in person. She wrote of his defense of his efforts in exterminating Jews, that, instead of appearing an evil character he instead appeared quite ordinary. He claimed that he was just doing his job. She coined the phrase 'the banality of evil' to describe it. Hold that thought. Now consider the social experiments of Stanley Milgram, wherein he tests how far people will go in the pursuit of their job, whether they will choose duty over the value of human life. Look it up, it's very interesting (and no people were ever harmed, BTW). The point that I'm trying to illustrate is this-- that we are, or should be, individually responsible for what we do, even if that is under orders. I HATE to come to this conclusion, because it might mean that my country could be in the wrong for things it is doing and did in the past. And I realize there are many conclusions to consider in the decision to go to war, and how far to take it. Perhaps (*-COUGH-*) this is precisely when and why we should subject the leadership of our country (whichever government that may be) to the closest scrutiny possible, and hold them accountable.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51556Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:12:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51556Bill Kilgore, Townsend, MALt. Watada probably did violate his oath – and the bedrock of military organizations – by refusing to obey a superior. Such a violation should not and cannot be taken lightly. He made a commitment and then went against it, albeit for the best of reasons. He needs to pay a price for his decision. However, we can and should acknowledge and honor Lt. Watada’s sacrifice, just as much as we honor the sacrifice of everyone who chooses to fight in Iraq. He knew what his decision could cost him, and still he made it. Would that our Senators were so committed. Every Senator should have such courage, to allow and encourage any debate on Iraq. Every Senator should have such courage, to go on record to withdraw funding for the war. Every Senator should recognize that this would not be a vote against our troops, but a vote against a dishonest and immoral ware into which our troops have been thrown. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51559Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:14:19 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51559Andrea, Phoenix, AZWell, I don't agree that our soldiers are over there "defending our constitution"...but that's a whole different arugment....if this guy inlisted AFTER the invasion of Iraq, then he knew what he was in for and he can't change his tune now. He should have never signed up. There are other ways to stand up for your country if you feel so inclined. When you join the military - your freedom of choice is gone...you do what you're told, everyone knows that...it's not like it's a social club.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51561Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:15:16 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51561Daniel Roman, Orlando, FloridaConcerning Lt. Watada. WE do express various opinions. One of our Freedoms! Is Lt. Watada right or wrong? Who Decides? The Military? G.W.Bush is Commander-in-Chief. Pres. Bush, V.P. Cheney, took oaths as Lt. Watada did. They swore to protect America, the Constitution, every Citizen (including U.S. Servicemen & Women), according to the U.S. Constitution. Wake up America. The time to stop playing Political Chess is NOW! Impeach them both and stop feeding the fire. Lt. Watada didn't refuse to serve, he chose to be Honest! Who casts the 1st stone? Questionable assumptions based on unfounded facts lead the "Decider" to invade a foreign country illegally so why would Lt. Watada follow in a wrong direction? Just because an incompetent "Decider" said so? Ego isn't an option. Bush and Cheney would do well to face Reality! Solutions for Peace! Never include War! God Bless You! http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51577Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:24:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51577mvf, columbia, moSo, why should someone get 8 years in prison for breaking a VOLUNTARY contractual obligation in the first place, especially if that obligation asks them to operate outside of their own moral sensibilities? And for those of you decrying his lack of Patriotism, you might want to consider that our nation was literally founded upon dissent against the overextension of power by the British government. I suggest that what most of these people calling Mr. Watada a coward consider to be Patriotism is actually Nationalism. And that's a scary thing. "It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority." -Benjamin Franklin "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Theodore Roosevelthttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51584Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:29:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51584Randal, Pensacola, FLConstitution and Conscience. Both related to a determined desire to live and act in a manner of respect, responsibility and active participation with social order. Wrong actions by a member of the armed forces are punishable by law. Wrong orders are UNLAWFUL and also punishable by law. Those of you who claim a MILITARY superiority of justice are asking for martial law, which would supercede Constitutional Law. I suggest you go back and read your UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), and shame on you for supporting ANY form of Loss of our constitutional rights. You need to retire your uniforms and become lobbyists (legal liars), determined to place us at the whim of UN like martial law. Judge NOT lest You be judged by that with which you judge.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51603Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:47:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51603GIJaneYes if they had let him resign the war wouldn't be on trial-the judge won't allow the actual order to be included in his defense for the simple reason this war will not stand legal muster in any courtroom. Lt. Watada is doing the right thing-the German courts finding in June 2005 said they believed their "own material participation in Iraq is probably illegal by Geneva and their own constitution". If Bush thinks the rule of law is no good, why not just stand up and declare himself King? He took this country into a war based on knowingly false premise-that is a crime by our own American standards. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51604Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:47:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51604Michael Y, Sacramento, CaliforniaI was in Iraq. I was an officer that gave over 6 years of my life and several of my friends for this country. I've killed others to protect our country and my fellow Marines. None of that by the way matters to this argument. Everyone has the right to think what ever they want of this War in Iraq. Whether you are for it - against it - tired of it - you are free to make a decision about your level of support or lack therof and act accordingly. This Lt Watada, however, is not free to do the same. You sign a contract with the United States of America when you enter into Military Service. A verbal one and a written one. It says you will not only Protect and Serve the Constitution of the United States, but will obey all orders of the President and Officers appointed above you. You serve the priciples of the Constitution and the people of the United States. You also serve your fellow servicemen. You lead those under you and watch out for them equally, as well as accomplish what ever mission you are given. It is not up to you to determine which orders you obey. Or which mission you complete. Or which servicemen you lead and watch out for. Or which citizens you serve. Or which President you obey. Or which interpretation of the Constitution you support. He failed in his duty. He deserted his men. He refused orders that were lawfully given. He does not have the option to do that under the terms of service that he had already agreed to. He should be found guilty, punished severly, and given a dishonorable discharge to show that our military system runs the same way, no matter what political party is in charge of the country. For all of those who are offering support of Lt Watadas actions, I want you to consider very carefully what you are saying. You are essentially saying that you do not want complete civilian control over the military. You would like each General, each officer, and each soldier or Marine to decide what they think about any given order and then choose to obey it, or not obey it. This would result in entire units refusing to accomplish missions. Battalions of soldiers refusing to obey the orders of their superiors or the President. Not just this one- but future ones. Generals would control their Divisions the way they see fit. Perhaps even deciding where they go, who they fight, and what political ideology they and their men will defend...or attack. If you look beyond the Iraq War and further into the door of possibilities that Lt Wahado opened up - you should see that his decision should result in the only course of action that will ensure the stability of our nations military and the safety of our nation. He should be made an example of. To the fullest extend of the military justice system.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51607Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:49:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51607Eric, York, Pa If what he said is actually what he believes in his heart of hearts, he had no other option than to do what he did. I am sure he understands fully the consequences of his actions and is willing to accept them. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51625Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:59:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51625JP, SIerra Vista, AZI am not going to debate or justify whether this war is legal or illegal. The point is he did take an oath, which he has refused to honor, but more importantly he trained with his unit, and his unit trained with him, his unit knew him, how he would respond in a given situation in combat, now this unit is going to war with another they are not familar with which could and most likely cause casualties, he is not only a coward for not obeying his oath and orders but he has put his troops in harms way. JP, retired US Armyhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51628Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:01:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51628Paul Roe Philadelphia, PAIf an order is determined by a member of the military to be illegal, it is his or her duty to decline to obey that order. LT Watada is jeopardizing his personal liberty in service to this concept. This requirement is a check against mindless, blind response to actions that are immoral. Had there been more thoughtfulness demonstrated in cases like the infamous "Mei Lai Massacre", hopefully, they wouldn't have happened. That said, LT Watada probably should have more thoughtfully parsed out his position, and how he chose to express it. Unless he missed his unit's movement because he was in stir, he should have stayed in front of his troopers to daily demonstrate the example, and continuously make and challenge the decisions about what constituted support of the illegal order he declined. Just ceasing obedience isn't an action. That said, I wish him luck. Thanks for your time. Paul (Former Naval Officer)http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51631Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:02:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51631St. Nick, LAI love the people on hear speaking of "lies" and we'd be so much better off without this war, blah blah blah. Look its simple, two things were accomplished in Iraq. One, and you left wing people are correct, was to aquire a closer hold on oil in the middle east. Now before you all start complaining about that listen to this late breaking news. ALL countries are about Money. Its a buisiness plain and simple. Complain all you want about it. If I were President and saw a psychopathic leader in Saddam, and an opportunity to bring in more money for my country, i'd take it in a heartbeat. Were things done wrong sure, but whether you like it or not Saddam had to be removed, and Bush had the balls to do it. As far as the Lt is concerned he took an oath, and if he isn't properly sentenced, then there is no point in anyone ever taking an oath for the military again.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51632Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:03:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51632John Jones 1SG, RetiredI see a constant theme that President Bush lied to us to go to war. I seem to remember Iraq violating numerous UN resolutions they agreed to in 1991 that threatened the region. From what I saw during my tour there I believe they possessed WMD or the capability for them. If you don't think you can't hide this stuff ask anyone who lost a ring at the beach. Iraq is one big beach! This person knowlingly agreed to his commission as an officer and the committment that came with it. Now his next duty assignment should be the prison at Fort Leavonworth.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51637Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:05:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51637Dan, San Francisco, CAThe difference between a soldier and a civilian is that a soldier puts himself behind all else. The duty of a soldier is not to kill, but to protect his country and the innocent. Self sacrifice is the duty of a soldier and this "man" has chosen to put his feelings above that duty. I only wish the penalty was more intense and deserving of a traitor. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51645Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:16:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51645Lori WisconsinHere was my whole enlistment oath from almost two decades ago. I have been completely out of the military for over a decade: In a regular component of the Armed Forces, I "state your name', do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military justice. So help me God. I don't know if officers take the same oath. but, enlistees, I thought, had a duty NOT to follow unlawful orders. I don't know how this will go for Ehren Watada, but I admire his courage.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51651Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:20:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51651SFC H-C new york new yorkpeople are failing to realize what this court martial is really about..it's not weather our commander and chief is right or wrong in this war.it's not weather or not the war was legal or moral.it's about a man who joined the military during a time of war, who decided he won't go to iraq but he will go to afghanistan we as soldiers do not get to pick and chose where we will or won't fight we are given orders some you agree with some you don't you are trained to be disciplined physically and mentally tough which means that you are ready and willing to deploy engage and destroy the enemies of the united states foreign and domestic that's our warriors ethos, without discipline there is chaos, i don't understand how this man can dishonor the uniform and be called a brave man it is nothing more than cowardness like i said many friends have died in Iraq and Afganishtan what makes one more just than the other we don't have choices we go where we are needed be it Iraq, Afghanistan, bosnia,kosivo,macedonia and so on so forth. what would happen if every military person just up and decided that they are not going where we are needed? we are dealing with critical times and situations, Mr. Watada is a disgrace to all those who have come before him to all our men and women who paid the ultimate sacrifice doing what they were sworn to do.i'm sure most did not agree with this war but guess what our boots had to be on the ground and we were there.so buck up take your punishment like a man get court martial go to jail and never disgrace the uniform again, pay back all the money the army invested in you and have a nice day. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51652Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:21:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51652GaryAdam, being in "the crosshairs" is a metaphorical expression not to be taken literally. Shhesh!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51656Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:22:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51656Joe S., Davis, CAJust to clear something up here - the commissioning oath that Army officers take does not include any "...follow the orders..." statement. The enlistment oath that solider take does. I'm not sure about the commissioning oath for officers in the other services.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51661Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:26:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51661Chris Boston, MAThe fact of the matter is that the American Military is all a Volunteer force and this kid signed up after a war was already on. He joined an organization whose sole purpose is to kill people and break things and YES maybe even die if the fates allow. To join such a group and then not want to take part when the job calls on you is just plain stupid. Whatever anyone’s little opinion on the war in Iraq may be, If you don't want to fight ANY war that your country may call upon you to fight, it's simple, do not join the military. This was not a draftee, this is a man who signed up of his own accord, swore an oath and then decided he simply did not 'approve' and wants off the hook. Make him repay any signing bonus, give him a dishonorable discharge and remove any benefits he may have been entitled to as an officer. This is really not about what anyone’s little opinion is regarding the War in Iraq, this is more about honoring ones commitments or being smart enough to know what commitments you would not be willing to honor before making them. I'll bet there was some monetary incentive he took advantage of. If so make him repay it and let him go, as long as he does not benefit monetarily from his time in the service and any proceeds from the inevitable book deal goes to the US military I do not see Jail time as necessary. No doubt his actions were dishonorable but, these days Honor is not priced in most of America anyway.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51663Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:27:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51663TJC Maiden Rock, WIWayne Isailovich, EXCUSE ME SIR, What gives you the right? You do not have the authority to speak for all Honorable Americans! You do not have the authority to speak for me. I am an Honorable American and my views and opinions differ greatly from your statements. So Stick to the thread! We are talking about a troop who missed movement, who refused to deploy with his unit and left his brothers in arms to do a job he wouldn't. I support out troops AND what they are doing AND where they are doing it! Regardless! A proud Military spouse! http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51664Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:28:04 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51664T A Paul, WPB Fl If all soldiers were to suddenly decide that they did not agree with war and go home, where would that leave the citizens of this nation. This man joined the Army and then decided he was too much a coward to go to war, thats all. From a lot of these comments I can see there is a large number of cowards in this country who have the right to say dumb things because of soldiers and marines who have served in the past. Most of us who served in SE ASIA did not agree either, but we went. There were those in WW2 that did not agree but they went. Let this man stay home but let him stay behind bars where he will be safe.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51666Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:30:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51666Tom, retired ArmyWatada DID fulfill his CONTRACT and asked to resign, but the military BROKE THEIR CONTRACT "stop gap crap" and FORCED him to continue to serve even AFTER his CONTRACT was fulfilled because they need more bodies to throw at the civil war ensuing in this mad hoese Bush created! Mabe if the military would HONOR IT'S CONTRACT with him he would not be in the position to have to say NO I WON"T GO AGAIN! All of those who say hang him will relive those words when you stand before your creator to justify them! And mabe he will be no more forgiving or understanding than you warmongers are!!!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51674Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:35:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51674Jason K. VirginiaFrom the day this War started I wanted to be in Iraq. Prior Marine and now serving in the navy. I watched many people voice their opinion of this War. Some vets and some movie stars, what a disgrace. I beg the navy to send me back, I want to return but it hasn't happened. Isn't being part of the military about War, if not then we would be like the U.N, useless. When I signed my enlistment contract I knew what would be needed of me. This officer needs a swift kick to realize that he joined the military, not some summer fun camp. I bet I will see this clown with Cindy Sheehan protesting the War. And the President, my Commander in Chief, lets see half of you people do better. Lets blame the Iraqi gov't for once instead of the U.S. I wish the best for Iraq but someone over there needs to make it happen besides the U.S doing it. Would be nice if we can concentrate on rebuilding instead of IED's. Semper Fi.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51683Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:44:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51683Scott Albion, NYG. I. means Government Issue ! I thank every man and woman that has served honorably for allowing us the right to openly exchange our views. Has enyone thought that (WE) are following Bin Laden's plan ? We argue amonst ourselves. Where is it witten,"divide and conquer",Demo crats and Republicans. Al quaida assassins could be living next door. What's his name could be one, for all I know. Do you think we should stay home, while "He" takes over the riches of the world to finance his hatred of Americans ? How safe would you be in your home ? If every soldier said "NO", the war would be here, not there..http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51686Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:46:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51686SGT X, IraqTo those of you that support Lt. Watada, this man is a coward and has no moral compass. What happened to the day when our word was our bond? When did we as a nation think that the best thing to do was allow evil people to commit horrible acts to justify their sick natures? Having taken that oath myself and obeyed the orders of officers appointed over me even if I did not agree with the orders I stood by my word to do what I was told and hold true to my word. The fact that I disagreed with it did not undermine my duty to fulfill those orders. Also if you are given an illegal order you do have the right to refuse that order but you had better have justification to do so. Saying O this war is illegal is not justification!!!! It sickens me to know that people I have defended in the past are nothing more than cowards, IE you bleeding heart sicka-fents that think it is better for terrorist to do as they will to our populace than to go out find and destroy them is truly disgusting. Maybe you would find solace in living in one of the countries that hate our way of life. Till you have been to a place like that and faced those people and looked them in the eye, you should place your faith in soldiers that will do that for you, Not stand behind the American garbage Lt watada. May your justice be swift and merciless.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51691Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:50:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51691M. GreeneWhen are we all going to pounce on and demand answers to the fact that the administration and Pentagon are throwing our service people to the dogs by refusing to use a VERY dependable piece of equipment already in the field so Raytheon gets to bilk us all out of mega-money to develope the very same system,WHICH WILL NOT BE READY FOR ANOTHER *TEN YEARS*!!!!http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51707Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:59:47 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51707R. Olson, Dallas, TexasLt. Watada has had is fifteen minutes of fame or infamy, depending on your view. One no one has explained is his willingness to go to Afghanistan instead of Iraq. The American anti war movement has never challenged the legality of the Afghanistan mission. Please don’t give me UN approval or any other political reasoning. Police action, peacekeeping or war. They’re all the same but with different names. Watada looked at the odds of being injured or killed. There are about 400 KIAs reported in Afghanistan versus 3000 in Iraq. His decision was not based on his beliefs that the order to Iraq was illegal but the odds of survival are better in one place. That’s the coward’s way out. He joined ROTC in college, had his education paid for by the Army and agreed to six years of service. Now he wants to weasel out because it’s time to put up or shut up. He has no honor what so ever. What did he think? Being an Army officer means a nice uniform that looks good at dances and having the authority to order others around to do the menial jobs. Being an officer means training men and leading them into what situation your unit is placed into. I certainly didn’t like the fact that I had to send young men (including draftees) into harm’s way but we were there and we performed the way we were trained.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51720Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:05:50 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51720Kris Graham, Houston, TXYou, sir, are an idiot of the first order. Lt. Watada did what was morally correct in refusing to deploy with his unit to Iraq. The so called war in Iraq was legally and morally wrong. Bush, Cheney and the rest of this corrupt administration deliberately lied to the American people and Congress and violated the U.S. Constitution! They are war criminals and treasonous fiends. You must have a double digit IQ if you don't understand why Lt. Watada did what he did. I wish we had more men and women in the U.S. military with the moral convictions of Lt. Watada. He has more patriotism in his little finger than you could ever hope to have.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51734Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:14:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51734Jeff RAs far as the right of every American to voice their opinion is a right. Defending ones country is a duty that one must not take lightly when volunteering to defend it. As for the LT. he is supposedly a college educated person and was commisioned to lead others because of this education. It is hard for me to believe that he did not understand the oath of his enlistment. The american public from their tax dollars have ensured him an education and a chance to watch over their sons and daughters in the military. He does have the right to change his mind, but if he does he was fully aware of the price. Now let me ask those of you who disagree with my assessment, whould you want some cop on the stree that has take an oath to protect you from harm just setting their doing nothing if someone was trying to take your life or those of your love ones. Of course not, you would be taking all types of legal action againgst that department trying to set an example so it would not happen to others. Now as for the so called War in Iraq just about every American on the face of the planet was for combating terror across the water to keep it from our shores but were not really thinking that it would be a long hard road. As for our leaders in congress that voted to take action against these terrorist you need to stick behind your decision and not change your mind because it does not suite you political party now. Just like running for President (Hillary Clinton) she made a statement that she had voted for going into Iraq but if she had been President she does not think that she would have invaded Iraq. I would think that it should not matter if you are a Senator or President, a public servants office is not one of convenince you are there to make decisions that benifit the United States as a whole and you are suppose to have a high degree of integrity and moral courage to do the right thing. Now I do not agree with everything our elected officials do, nor did I vote for George Bush the President but I will say one thing for him and that is he has not run from any decission he has made and that shows integrity. I believe that persons serving in our Government for the Citizens of the US should be held to a higher standard. If they break the Law then they should be held accountable and removed from Government Office and should be prosecuted as a Federal Conviction Just Like the Military is. I know this was long but I truly hope that I did not offend anyone and if I did I at least hope that I made you think about what is happening in our Government today and start holding our elected officials accountable for their decissions. Retired SFC US Armyhttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51739Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:18:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51739Marcy, Harrisburg, Pa.He was scared, plain and simple. He's trying to cover up his fear by making it seem like he's courageous and his actions are justifiable. Your country needed you and you took a step back when everyone else stepped forward. There's no honor in that. You think everyone agreed" with vietnam? Its not about the president. Its about the guy next to you. Thats who you let down. If you wanted to be in charge of the military and have control over what actions they took you should have went political and run for president. I'm sure you would find great support in Hilary Clinton, John Carrey, Cindy Sheehan. H*ll maybe you should go talk to Hugo Chavez, find out his sympathies,lol.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51750Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:27:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51750Charles Dietzel, Farmington, MIhave we lost sight of the fact that Saddam Hussein no longer has the ability to gas, shoot, burn, torture or decaptitate Iraqi citizens who lived in abject terror of him, his sons and their minions? do we let every one who objects to a war decide if they will go or not? how about the 300,000 bodies found in mass graves? how about those babies suffocated by poison gas? it is true that this war has not gone well since we defeated his regime but do you recall the Iraqi people's reaction to the successful overthrow?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51751Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:27:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51751Pat MacAuley Newbury Park, Ca.Watada is a coward.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51762Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:35:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51762Kory, OhioIf you want to serve on the basis of a just war theory, do not volunteer, as this man did, when you do not believe the nations current war(s) are not just. Comparisons made here to call America fascist are just plain outrageous claims, and comparing America to the Nazi Regime shows a complete disregard for those truly harmed by the Nazi Regime. 6 Million Jews might have something to say in disagreement with you, but unfortunately, Hitler killed them in cold blood. Have we, in cold blood, for purely political reasons, brought down a righteous and understanding government? No. We have, after repeated ignorance of the one international authority this world has, brought down a dictator and a despot who, in cold blood, has invaded countries like Kuwait for their money, and tested mustard gas on his own people. We made the assumption that we had a Just War, and based on the reasoning that we had at the time(WMD were a sure), it was a Just War. So don't idly throw around the term "Nazi" and "Fascism," because I can thank God I was born in a nation without those things being the norm: And I think we have a responsibility to secure that for the rest of the world. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51765Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:37:17 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51765JB I guess Home sweet Home in Alabama is much too young to have remembered FEDERAL troops opening fire on anti-war protesters at Kent State University and killing a number of people... Look up your history then tell me that it can't happen....http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51773Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:39:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51773Ronald Syphard Madison, Wi.I was in the military 50 years ago ans still remember the 1st code of conduct that all military personel are to memorize. it says "I am an American fighting man, I serve in the forces which guard my country and our way of life and I am prepared to give my life in their defense". That pretty much says it all. Any young man or woman who is willing to join the armed forces should seriously take that into consideration before signing on the dotted line. I am a disabled veteran and have no regrets for being in the military.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51774Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:39:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51774CRT,Middletown NJ I have no problem, in fact am impressed with, people who will stand up for what they believe in no matter the consequences. If this war is illegal as many believe then he is an example of the best of us. To follow blindly isn't what we should or do expect from our military . We/the military expected the soldiers at Abu garab to NOT obey the order to "soften them up". We expected German soldiers to NOT obey the orders to gas people in the camps. I admit this gives the soldiers an awful dilemma but to say that one cannot or even at times should not disobey orders isn't factual is it? He is standing up for what he believes, is ready to do so openly and accept the consequences. Sounds very brave to me. Good luck and god bless you http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51791Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:47:51 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51791James Smith, San Jose, CA Charles Miller is right, if "W" (or his kids)is over there fighting, then Bush is morally correct in his stand. But he/they are not, so lets cheer Lt. Watada for making a stand against this horrible invasion. He should be allowed to resign his commission.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#51794Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:48:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:51794ernest siverlingi'm a disabled veitnam vet been there done that , i belive it's about time someone sprouted a pair and stood up for what they belived the nazi's in ww2 all claimed to be just folloing orders as a defense at thier war crimes trials aren't we so lucky to be living in the united states of amnisiea?http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52339Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:08:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52339Darren M, North Marin, CaliforniaWow. I'm continually amazed at how many of you ignore the single most important FACT of this case: The "illegal" (insert your personal opinion about the legality of it) war was in full swing BEFORE Mr. Watada voluntarily pledged his allegiance to the military. As such, if Mr. Watada's personal "convictions" put him in opposition to the war and/or the presidency, he decided his convictions were not important enough, strong enough, or valid enough to prevent him from enlisting. He decided to enlist ANYWAY. Therefore, because he voluntarily set aside his personal convictions about the war in Iraq in order to enlist in the military, he *cannot* call upon them now as a reason for disobeying his orders as a soldier. Disclaimer: I'm a 30-something moderate who is tired of dems and reps both young and old who use such situations to bash the presidency or political party of their choosing. Our nation will continue to be split down the middle until people grow up and learn to have open and honest public dialogue about our country, it's administration and the policies made by the representatives which have been elected.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52340Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:08:55 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52340gkamburoffSgt. X and others who think Watada should be courtmartialed must read about post-WWII Nuremburg, where these questions were settled. Following orders is no excuse for individual actions. It is up to US, each one of us, to resist crimes against our fellow man. Watada's bravery in challenging this illegal killing and occupation contrasts highly with some of the hateful comments from those safely at home, many who never wore a uniform. Having volunteered for the War in 1967, I was dismayed then to see what our troops are now seeing in Iraq, that is all a terrible mistake - a murderous policy run by draft-dodging "patriots". During that time, I realized we were Good Guys doing Bad Things. That's pretty hard to reconcile, and I still haven't. What do you think is going to happen in following years when our abused troops figure out they were used and abused for the political gain of a few political extremists? Make sure you support and fund your local Vet Center.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52346Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:14:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52346mehjr,lancaster, ca.For those of you that think that you are above being responsible for your actions, the President and the congess sent our troops to "war", they are responsible. If and when you voluteer for military service, you agree to follow your orders or you are not accepted as a volunteer. If you change your mind and cannot get out easily, then you should be expected to pay the price for your incorrect decision. No-one made a person volunteer, that was the volunteers decision and hopefully the Military is still strong enough to make the volunteers responsible for their decision.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52352Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:21:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52352Brett, Dallas, TexasI served six years in the USAF and understand the oath quite well. Watada's absolutely right. The war itself is based on lies and b.s., so it's illegal as far as we're concerned. Instead of arguing back and forth on this blog, why aren't we fighting to end this God-awful mess? Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and the rest of the (neocon) Hitler Youth are cowards, traitors, war criminals and crooks. Hanging's too good for all of them. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52361Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:40:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52361jim cookeville tennesseeI don't think soldiers have a "right" or "obligation" to disobey orders. A soldier certainly can choose to disobey what he believes to be an illegal order, but he would most certainly face a court martial for doing so. The court would then make the determination, based on the evidence presented, whether or not the order was illegal and whether the soldier was justified in choosing to disobey that order. I would think if a soldier refused an order to shoot unarmed non-combatant civilians, he would be exonerated at court martial. In Lt. Watada's case, his counsel should be prepared to present hard evidence that an order to deploy is an illegal order. However, the court will make that decision.http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52363Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:42:58 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52363Steve, Lansing, MIReading some of the pro-war comments here has got me upset to where I can hardly think straight. So I am going to vent. What is wrong with you people. Do you really believe that we are in Iraq to protect America, or that anybody there is a threat to America, or that Iraq was somehow behind 9/11? (Well, they're Arabs, aren't they? And the hijackers were Arabs. So I guess for some people that proves it.) Anybody who actually thinks these things should go back to school for a refresher course in how to read and then look at the facts. But I don't think most of the pro-war side actually believes the lies. I think they pretend to believe because they are just purely evil-hearted mean-spirited people, and they want the excuse of a "just war" to vicariously express their meanness. I think these are good 'ol boys who can't stand the thought of not having an enemy and get bored when they're not out kicking a**, or at least watching it on TV sports. So for people like this, it's fun to have somebody to get mad at. Almost like a need, or addiction. Got to have that adrenalin fix. Maybe it's the other team in a football game, or maybe it's whoever the Vice-President and his sidekick Bush have now named the enemy of the day. They don't care who or why. They just want to have somebody to be against. They don't have the commie reds to kick around any more, so now it's those Mooslim Ayrabs. All I can say is why don't you all go out in a field somewhere and play paintball, and stop destroying a great nation with your senseless wars. And stop being so arrogant about being for America while you support all the things that are dragging her down. Have a nice day, -Stevehttp://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52368Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:46:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52368BrandonThis guy is doing what he feels is right. He is not a coward, just a man. Like all of us here with these opinions. We have no idea what we would do if in that situation. Most of the ones calling him a coward are likley cowards themselves. However, combat is part of the business. No matter the reasons for it you MUST deploy. If not for the cause then for the sake of the men who you will be commanding as an officer. If anyone can make a difference it would be an officer. He has a responsibility to his men. Bring them home. At least as many of them as possible. Now he sowed the seeds of dought in the minds of any and everyone whom he would have been leading into battle. I actually agree with him as a conciencious objector. However, duty calls...http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52369Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:47:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52369Roger G. US Army RangerAs a former enlisted soldier, the one thing I still remember even after 20 some years was the oath I took upon enlisting. For those that have never "served" this country, please read it carefully. Maybe then you'll realize why this so called Lieutenant is such a disgrace to all of us that did serve honorably and proudly. The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows: "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962). "I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.) http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52373Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:50:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52373Emmett Kelly, Gorham, MaineSubsequent to WW2 more than a few of Germany's elite officer corp were led to the gallows and had their neck sizes adjusted after using that same defense-----namely that they were following the orders of superiors in a time of war. In fact, when asked by a prosecutor if any german military officers had refused the orders of "the furher" when they should have known the orders were illegal, Goring responded "not above ground". Also during that war Gen Curtis Lemay is said to have commented to another officer that "if we lose this war you and I will probably be tried for war crimes and executed". Those of you who know your history will also know that Lemay loved to drop bombs-----lots of bombs. He and "Bomber Harris" of Great Briton probably killed more civilians than any two officers on any side in any country in that war. Sic fecit gloriam. One's conscience should not need to become a casualty in serving one's country. And yes, I did my time in the military. http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/06/50258.aspx#52383Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:02:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:52383G. Aguilar, San Diego CAI am an American serving in this war. I have spent 14.5 years of my life in service to national policy and defense of the Constitution (very few of you can claim the same - and to those service personel who disent with me I offer my respect for your opinon because you have first hand knowledge of that which you speak.) Most of you have no clue what you are talking about and are spouting the liberal adgenda without thought of what you are really saying. Here is the long and short... individual soilders do not get the "right" to determine the legality of national policy. Military discipline does not hinge on an individual servicemans's political thoughts. He took an oath... his word. He was commissioned after the start of the war and should have carefully considered the "cost and implications" of his oath. If he had reservations then he should have refused to take the oath and not served. As an American citizen he can always act upon his conscious, HOWEVER, if doing so violates his previous promise (his word or oath) to fellow servicemen and women then he is guilty and should be punished according to the US Code of military Justice. That is the key point here. His feelings on the war ARE IRRELEVANT. For those of you who feel that a solem oath can be disregarded when the consequences of said statement are uncomfortable or personnaly inconvienient I offer this thought on personal integrity...a man is only as good as his word and if you cannot be counted on when the heat is on then you are worthless and part of the decay of the social fabric that is destroying this country. God save this country from it's situational values / ethics. At least Bush is doing what he thinks is right and not waffeling because its the unpopular thing to do. WAKE UP AMERICA THIS IS A WAR OF CIVILIZATIONS and WESTERN CIVILIZATION IS UNDER SEIGE!!