Does an active duty military officer have the right to refuse to deploy?

No and NO. It would be considered insubordination and maybe sedition. It might be said that you are encouraging disobediance which borders on mutiny. As a military officer you give up certain rights. One of those rights is the freedom to speak against your superiors
 
Sounds like somebody wanted a free education with no downsides, like dying.:barf: If I don't do my job I get fired. That is what he is doing; refusing to do his job. Or does he forget that he took an oath: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/faq/oaths.htm

Note the part about faithfully discharging the duties of his office.

He's been in the service for 3 years. Its not like he joined during peace time and suddenly a war poped up(not that it would be okay then). I hope he gets prosecuted to the full extent of the UCMJ.
 
I really have a problem with 1LT Watada. You dont get to pick and choose where you want to go or do, also you take an oath. There is nothing illegal about the conflict in Iraq or Afghanistan. If you are a concientious objector you should have stated that in your application for a commision. I think your commander should prosecute you to the full extent of the UMCJ. If you thought illegal acts were happening in Iraq, you should have packed up and gone over where you might have made a difference. While I disagree with the way the "War on Terrorism" is being conducted it is not an illegal war. You got legal orders to go.
 
steveno wrote:
he could become a guest at Leavenworth very soon
Click to expand...
And rightfully so, IMO. This young man apparently suffers from several serious misunderstandings about what being in the military, much less being an officer in the military, means.
 
His refusing to go to Iraq isn't going to get him anywhere but the brig. He can have his opinions about the war, but a LT can't refuse to go to a war that is considered legal by all senior officers. Also, what kind of example do you think this makes for all his troops?
If he has such a problem with it, he should resign his commission.
 
Back in the 60's officers could resign their commission if they claimed or were proven to be homos . Maybe he should suddenly show a great affection for his Captain . In all fairness to all that are and have served he should traded to Al-Quida for a prisoner to be named later .
 
I don't recall officers or enlisted folks being allowed to make the call on weather the full military action is legal or not and hence have the right to refuse orders. I understand orders can be refused that are illegal as defined in the military code, but that code does not include international politics.

Do I understand this correctly. This supposed illegal war has been going on for years and he has worked in support of the war, but out of theatre. Now that his butt is on the line, something he volunteered to do by enlisting, he starts crying the war is illegal and he doesn't want to go. Where was he when the war started? Why hasn't he been protesting the whole time? Simple. He hoped to skate by and when his number came up, he then decided things weren't to his liking.

The dude enlisted and went to basic training AFTER the illegal war was declared. He graduated college in 2003 meaning May. War was declared in March. He went to Basic in June. What moron joins an organization that is committing supposed illegal acts if he isn't a willing participant?
 
No. Period. At most, he has the right to offer to resign his commission. This can be refused. Someone who wears the uniform and refuses to deploy (a lawful order) has violated the UCMJ, and dishonored themselves. To do so for "political" reasons may be seen by some as "standing up for what you believe in", but to me, it implies cowardice.


I am also puzzled how the fighting in Iraq can be called an illegal war. Unpopular with some people, but in what way is it illegal?

I may be unaware of details, but I am under the impression that Congress approved the "War on Terror", shortly after 9/11. Perhaps they didn't realize that by approving a "war on terror", and not a war against a specific country, that they were handing the administration a blank check?
 
If you read the articles (several out there) about this he is not trying the whole conciencious objector thing (you shouldn't be in the military if you are one, I remeber them asking me these types of questions when I enlisted back in the 90's). He is tactful in that he is playing to the meida and the majority of the public who have changed their opinion on the war, in that he is saying that he believes this wasr (iraq) is illegal and immoral. He will be brought up on charges when he misses the movement of his unit when they deploy. Also it seems this kind of logic runs in his family; his father joined the peace corps and then went to graduate school to legally dodge the draft during NAM' (yes he has an uncle who was killed in Korea I think it was). This kid deserves to be put in the brig for a long time. You join the military and you sign a commitment and agree to the UCMJ which in the past has used the firing squad/ or hanging (as late as WWII) for such acts of cowardice. I have deployed to Afghanistan and then I came home only to delpoy to Iraq shortly there after. We I got back home I only had 6 months and I was on my way back to Iraq. I didn't want to go on any of the deployments, but I did, because I signed on the line and so did he. I know many guys who are still in and are looking at their 3rd rotation back to Iraq or their 2nd rotation to Afghanistan (2x Iraq, 2x Afghanistan) since 9-11 . This guy is a coward! Plain and simple. Hope they through the book at him. What makes him different than the other LT's or privates form his company that are deploying? They face the chance of death, he faces the chance of living in a cell for many years. Maybe if they actually put some one in front of the firing squad or hanging like they used to there wouldn't be all these whinny pukes joining and then causing this trouble. Too bad that the military probably wouldn't go that far anymore.
 
44 AMP said:
I may be unaware of details, but I am under the impression that Congress approved the "War on Terror", shortly after 9/11. Perhaps they didn't realize that by approving a "war on terror", and not a war against a specific country, that they were handing the administration a blank check?
Click to expand...

Actually, Congress passed a bill called the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002

I would also note that he joined after the Iraq War had already begun; there were no surprises there.
 
I'm not sure why he isn't in jail already. Not only has he disgraced his uniform. He has disgraced his family, (whether they see it that way or not), and he has set a supremely bad example for the men under his command that following orders, no matter how much you disagree with them, is no longer a requirement for military service. In the Navy, if you have a problem with an order given to you. You carry out that order, then take your complaint to the chain of command. Not run across the country like a coward, siting seperate incidents, no matter how heinous, that DO NOT reflect the majority of the Army, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces.:mad:
 
No member of our Armed Forces has the right to refuse a lawful order. This extends from the newest recruit to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. ------ Senior Chief USN/RET
 
awww poor baby.
He doesn't want to leave the comforts of home and go someplace where he may get hurt or (Gasp) Killed?
But he sure liked the perks of the uniform.
Get his ass deployed or Court Martialed.
One or the other and it may be too late for the first option.
He's going to love Levinworth.

AFS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top