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

Article 134 is the "catch all" of the group . It means that we think that what you DID was not right . Oh , and we can do that , 'cause we're the MOMMY!
 
Bending over and receiving your punishment

When a kid it is/was (in the old days) receiving your just rewards for failure to comply or screwing up. You generally received a few swats for your education. B.F. Skinner got an award for that one. Behavior Modification.:D

Now if he goes to Prison it is a whole different ballgame.;)

If he really thought about it, he would do what is right. Hey it might be right for him:D
Wasn't it in the Clinton administration that the "don't ask, don't tell' became vogue?

I believe action speaks louder than words, as always.;)

Last but not least, we are all here for a short time, dying for your country is a way to be around for a lot longer, name only. But hey we all got to go sometime. There are things worse then death, really.

HQ
 
Last edited:
Antipitas said:
pickpocket, I presume that you know what 6-6 & a kick means?

How easy would it be to find a decent job with bad paper following you? Here in Idaho, you might find a job with a BCD... But a UD or DD? No way.

Going through life with a felony would be bad enough, but bad paper is much worse.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we're on the same page. I have a real problem with this kind of guy, though. I was there for the initial invasion, and then I got out, served with a local Reserve unit, and then fell off contract. Two months later that Reserve unit got activated - I walked over to the recruiting office and re-signed a NEW contract that would allow me to go with the guys that I trained. I willingly left a wife and three kids so that my OTHER family would not go into harms way without me.

This isn't about right, wrong, or whether or not we like little Iraqi kids. This isn't about Bush, Republicans, or Liberals. This is about making sure that the kids we've trained and that we're responsible for have good NCO's and Officers behind them when they're tooling down Highway 10 trolling for IED's.
This is about our commitment to the people we've trained. This is about our committment to the troops that we SWORE to be responsible for.

For us, war is not about political views, not about religious beliefs, not about public opinion or even national policy. For us, war is about bringing home the guy to your left and right. This guy was obviously on sick-call the day they issued honor and committment.

That's why my vote is for the .45 caliber court martial.
 
The only grounds for his actions is that he first would have to declair himself a Consious Objector, and at this point in time considering the circumtsances that won't fly.
 
I guess then that the only difference between us, pickpocket, is that you wish to give the gift that lasts for a moment, where I would give the gift that keeps on giving.

Say he gets a UD or DD, last I heard (or read), he is forbidden to own a firearm. May not mean a thing to him, but... He will never be allowed to hold a job that requires any kind of security clearance. Still may not mean anything to him, now... But in the future? Any employer that does a background check on him (and many do nowdays), will find his discharge info. Would YOU hire someone who the military discharged as Undesirable or Dishonorable? Bad Conduct could mean any number of things, but the other two?

I won't hire someone who can't follow instructions and/or thinks he is above the law. That's generally what a BCD or UD mean. The DD? Heck, he can't even vote with that one. Let's not forget the stigma of being Dishonorable.

Besides all of this, we can't execute him. His actions were not performed in theater. Personally, I'm fine with 10yrs in Leavenworth and a DD. Though, he will probably get 6-6 and a BCD or UD out of it.
 
I guess then that the only difference between us, pickpocket, is that you wish to give the gift that lasts for a moment, where I would give the gift that keeps on giving.
Click to expand...

Hey - I'm a simple kind of guy :)
 
To quote one of the 20th century's preeminent philosophers, "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it." No one - officer or enlisted - has a right to refuse a dangerous posting.
 
Antipitas, most likely he'll get 6 months, bust to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and an LHD. He'll probably lose any post-service bennies as well, like VA and GI Bill stuffs.
 
UCMJ can be very rough

Especially in time of conflict, like we are at the moment.

Sometimes things just don't go the way you thought. Guy's toast. Unless he comes up with a better mousetrap.

HQ:cool:
 
Does an active duty military officer have the right to refuse to deploy?
Click to expand...
Assuming no unlawful order (i.e., unconstitutional) was issued, no. Not under any circumstances. Period.

"Go to Iraq and kill the enemy" is not an unlawful order, whether Lt. Watada likes the war or not.

This situation is akin to a woman who really does not like sex choosing prostitution as a career, or an athiest entering the priesthood.
 
You can do a Save-Target-As and download it.

Don't bother. It's 49 minutes of Jane Fonda and company whining about Vietnam.

As far as it relates to the topic, I'm all for EX-GI's having freedom of speech and complaining about anything they didn't like in the military. I'm not for active duty personnel protesting about a war being illegal when it has been approved by Congress.
 
Govt. Property

Service members forego thier rights to defend yours. War is played by a seperate set of rules. Everyone has thier own reasons for joining. In the end you gotta give to get. Get an education, travel the world, EARN U.S. citizenship, whatever, theres a price.... USMC 91-95
 
As stated over and over, with pleasing consistency, no, he has no right to refuse to go. And no, he has no right to make public statements condemning the war. In fact, that is outright prohibited. Don't like it? Don't join the Army.

I see two possibilities here. One, he's a coward who joined for what he could get out of it and doesn't like what it costs. Two, he joined with this in mind all along to set himself up for political bona fides (I know, pretty conspiracyish idn't it?). Those are about the only reasons I can come up with. The whole 'I object to the Iraq War" doesn't wash. He joined after it started as far as I know. Would need more details on when he contracted before his commission date to be sure.

Personally, I'm for the coward description myself. I've seen it before when the realization strikes home that "gosh, this really IS a dangerous job! A guy could get KILLED doing this!"

Shooting him ain't gonna happen, though it is an applicable penalty under the UCMJ. I'd like to see a DD or at least a BCD anyway. That might happen.

I'm about to be medically retired just shy of 20 after an IED over there. The biggest regret I have was not finishing the tour with my guys. I'm awful low on sympathy for guys like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top