1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

AWOL Soldier to turn himself in.

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by indiansnetwork, Sep 26, 2006.

  1. indiansnetwork

    indiansnetwork Active Member

    Now Debate it.
  2. Turning himself in was the correct thing to do.
  3. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Agreed. You can argue the philosophy all you want, but the bottom line is that when you signed up for your stint, you knew that going to war was a possibility. Whether or not you believe it is the right cause is inconsequential. You might not like it, but no one forced you to join the armed forces either.
  4. Agreed.
  5. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    I have zero problem with this guy getting jail time, even though I agree with his reasoning behind the decision.
  6. Can we have a loud and noisy trial, though?
  7. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    What would be the point of that, Fenian? Seriously.
  8. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Maybe to point out that what's going on isn't all building schools and handing out candy to kids.

    Seriously, though, even if the guy disagrees completely with the war after serving, he still should put in his time as a medic. You aren't shooting anyone.

    However, if he would rather go to jail, that's his choice.
  9. ThomsonONE

    ThomsonONE Member

    It's time for the US to admit that the military has been used to achieve too many diverse goals, and to split it up. Form one branch that is the traditional Army & Marines - they are used to go out and kill the enemy. Period. Form another branch that is used for occupations, nation building, peacekeeping etc.

    People that enlist in the killers would know what they are getting into, and would have no recourse to get out if they don't like it. Anyone else that doesn't want to be in the killers can enlist in the peacekeepers. This would allow anyone that wants to serve to do so, while taking in to consideration their morals.
  10. three_bags_full

    three_bags_full Well-Known Member

    Wrong. Your both.

    And TO, that's probably not financially or otherwise feasible.

    The Army is now transforming into what it calls "units of action" that allow most units to be deployed with its own support elements, i.e., engineers, medics, artillery, infantry, aviation, finance, etc. That way everyone can deploy at once, with less confusion, than the Army pulling units from across the globe.

    Just because a few guys are claiming (just before it's time for Uncle Sam to collect on all those G.I. Bill payments, mind you) conscientious objector status is no reason to drastically reorganize what you do.
  11. Yeah, the Army's in great fucking shape. Just ask all the former generals who testified on Tuesday.
    And a-a, I want a trial because I want this case explored publicly and at length, and answers demanded from the civilian nitwitsd who organized and launched this clusterfuck. At least we might get some interesting discovery out of the deal.
  12. ThomsonONE

    ThomsonONE Member

    I think it's pretty obvious that how the armed forces are organized now isn't working too well. I don't see what is wrong with thinking about ways to make things more effective and efficient.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page