Brandon Hughey
CForrester
P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">US soldier who fled to Canada</div> A soldier in the US Army fled to Canada after finding out that he was going to be sent to Iraq to fight in a war that he believes to be morally wrong. He's trying to get refugee status in Canada now. If he's forced to go back to US, he's going to be thrown in a military prison for desertion during wartime. (Or worse, killed. The punishment for desertion during a war is supposed to be death, but that hasn't been done since WWII.)
He's got a website: <a href='http://www.brandonhug' target='_blank'>http://www.brandonhug</a> hey.org (You have to remove the space to get to the website. Silly swear filter.) I'll take a few excerpts from the FAQ on that site before people start making comments like "Why join the army if you don't want to fight?"
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Why did you join the Army if you never wanted to fight?</b>
The Army was sold to me as a great financial decision. The prime targets for Army recruiters are high school and college aged kids. They are very good at what they do and know how to appeal to this audience. I was told that after my service I could attend college and the Army would pay for it. I was also offered a very attractive signing bonus for the job I had chosen.
At the time I was a naive 17 year old and assumed that, in the event that I would be called upon to go to war, it would only be for a good and just cause. Listening to the politicians on TV led me to believe that if I were sent to fight, it would only be 'to rid the world of terrorism.'
It wasn't until after I had joined the Army that I really began to learn about the war in Iraq. I could not think of a single justifiable cause for this war and much to my disappointment, I realized that my country was not acting in its self defence, and was the aggressor in this conflict. This is when I admitted to myself that signing up for the Army was a mistake.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Why do you object to the war in Iraq?</b>
It is my belief that this war was based solely on lies. The main reason the Bush administration gave for attacking Iraq was to get rid of their weapons of mass destruction. It was evident that there were no WMD's in Iraq when Dr. Hans Blix led a team of U.N. weapons inspectors into the country. They scoured the countryside of Iraq and could find no traces of chemical or biological weapons. The U.S. invaded anyway, without the approval of the U.N., and even though thousands of U.S. troops have occupied the country for a year nothing has been found.
The Bush administration had also said that Iraq was connected to terrorists. There was never any legitimate intelligence to support this, and even now, no Iraqi connection to terrorist organizations has been discovered. It is my belief that George Bush used the country's fear of terrorism to invade Iraq and help his own political agenda.
Also, the fact that the U.S. attacked Iraq without U.N. approval makes this war illegal under international law.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>What about honouring your commitment?</b>
I believe that, even if one signs a binding contract, he is not obligated to throw out all of his moral principles. Regardless of any contract signed, if a soldier is asked to carry out an order that he knows is illegal and immoral, it is not only his right but also his responsibility to resist.
According to the Nuremburg Tribunal, a soldier is OBLIGATED to refuse an order that is illegal and violates human rights. The Nazis were hung after WWII when they had stated that 'they were just following orders and were merely victims of the times.' Knowing full well that this occupation was a needless waste of human life with no justifiable cause, I could not say that I was just 'following orders' if I went along with it. The fact that I was ordered to participate in a criminal and immoral war makes my contract meaningless.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you think that it's okay for him to flee to Canada for the reasons he did? Why? Personally, I think he's 100% right and I completely support him.
Let's try to keep the flaming to a minimum and have a serious discussion, okay?
[EDIT] Er, I posted this in the wrong forum. And the swear filter censored his name. Could a moderator move this and fix the title, please?
He's got a website: <a href='http://www.brandonhug' target='_blank'>http://www.brandonhug</a> hey.org (You have to remove the space to get to the website. Silly swear filter.) I'll take a few excerpts from the FAQ on that site before people start making comments like "Why join the army if you don't want to fight?"
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Why did you join the Army if you never wanted to fight?</b>
The Army was sold to me as a great financial decision. The prime targets for Army recruiters are high school and college aged kids. They are very good at what they do and know how to appeal to this audience. I was told that after my service I could attend college and the Army would pay for it. I was also offered a very attractive signing bonus for the job I had chosen.
At the time I was a naive 17 year old and assumed that, in the event that I would be called upon to go to war, it would only be for a good and just cause. Listening to the politicians on TV led me to believe that if I were sent to fight, it would only be 'to rid the world of terrorism.'
It wasn't until after I had joined the Army that I really began to learn about the war in Iraq. I could not think of a single justifiable cause for this war and much to my disappointment, I realized that my country was not acting in its self defence, and was the aggressor in this conflict. This is when I admitted to myself that signing up for the Army was a mistake.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Why do you object to the war in Iraq?</b>
It is my belief that this war was based solely on lies. The main reason the Bush administration gave for attacking Iraq was to get rid of their weapons of mass destruction. It was evident that there were no WMD's in Iraq when Dr. Hans Blix led a team of U.N. weapons inspectors into the country. They scoured the countryside of Iraq and could find no traces of chemical or biological weapons. The U.S. invaded anyway, without the approval of the U.N., and even though thousands of U.S. troops have occupied the country for a year nothing has been found.
The Bush administration had also said that Iraq was connected to terrorists. There was never any legitimate intelligence to support this, and even now, no Iraqi connection to terrorist organizations has been discovered. It is my belief that George Bush used the country's fear of terrorism to invade Iraq and help his own political agenda.
Also, the fact that the U.S. attacked Iraq without U.N. approval makes this war illegal under international law.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>What about honouring your commitment?</b>
I believe that, even if one signs a binding contract, he is not obligated to throw out all of his moral principles. Regardless of any contract signed, if a soldier is asked to carry out an order that he knows is illegal and immoral, it is not only his right but also his responsibility to resist.
According to the Nuremburg Tribunal, a soldier is OBLIGATED to refuse an order that is illegal and violates human rights. The Nazis were hung after WWII when they had stated that 'they were just following orders and were merely victims of the times.' Knowing full well that this occupation was a needless waste of human life with no justifiable cause, I could not say that I was just 'following orders' if I went along with it. The fact that I was ordered to participate in a criminal and immoral war makes my contract meaningless.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you think that it's okay for him to flee to Canada for the reasons he did? Why? Personally, I think he's 100% right and I completely support him.
Let's try to keep the flaming to a minimum and have a serious discussion, okay?
[EDIT] Er, I posted this in the wrong forum. And the swear filter censored his name. Could a moderator move this and fix the title, please?
Comments
See above
And gg posting it in the right forum.
I shall list my reasons and that is really all I can say.
1) He signed up voluntarily was not forced in anyway, shape or form. Considering this even with one being only 17 that is not an excuse. (edited in) I was much like anyone who has lived in the US and been through HS attempted to be recurited. I even was able to take there ASVAB/P? test which tells you what jobs you would do well at while in the military. Even the non-combat ones. The recruiters here tried very hard to get a lot of people to join and I would say they had a sucess rate of about 30% which is more then I expected. Many of those people were friends of mine and are in Iraq right now, we just (south dakota) shipped some fresh troops over there. With him being 17, and I was the same aged when asked, I said no for I would pay my own way into college that was my choice. He opted for the easier way (in money wise, college is DAMN expensive) and now he is complaining.
2) The military will pay for his education when he completes however long he signed up for. That is a fact, and considering most college graduates have 10,000 to 50,000 or more if going for docorate/masters in debt, I think it is a fair trade.
3) If he doesn't think the war is just/moral and what not, he can file a compliant with his superiors, granted it will do nothing, and would not damage his "file" that the military keeps other then a small comment noting his objections.
4) The military does what it is told to do. It is a very well thought out machine and works very efficently, thus why soldiers when they are done are always welcome to the workforce, because they have the heightened disiclpine and awaress of what is around them.
5) IT IS YOUR DUTY. As previously stated if you do not want to join, you do not have to. Since there is no draft(at the moment) one does not have to worry about being FORCED to do something you do not want to when it comes to military matters.
Those are simply my views on why it is not approiate for him to have fled to canada. I will probably have many people going on and on about (SUYF etc) so feel free to do so.
Even though I do not agree with the "war" though I wouldn't call it that since we have not offically declared war. I still think the military is doing all that it can do make sure our boys and girls are doing a wonderful job over there. So, all the more power to those choosing to fight for our country and uphold the faith that I have in our military.
(edited at same time as #1 was)
For those that are going to compare Iraq vs Vietnam or even Korea. Don't bother you really can't compare the two. We do not have nearly as many soldiers in the field nor even a 1/4 of the deaths and there is no draft to boot. The "war" in Iraq is not a good thing other then freeing a people that really do not know any better, and probably will see history repeat as that area is incredibly unstable.
(edit #2)
I noticed that the site seems to only post letters that support him and are majority out of the US. If I am wrong feel free to correct me on the from outside the US part. I do not think that represents the US very well in what it conveys. :-)
(Yes.. one of my longer posts) :-)
He chose to sign his name on the dotted line. Pretending that the US government pulled some sort of bait-and-switch is a bit far fetched.
He chose to defy his superiors and, in turn, break the law.
Now he believes that he doesn't have to face the consequences for his choices. His actions are dishonorable at best. If he truly believed in his convictions he would have refused his orders and immediately faced imprisonment. He should have stood up in a court, presented his stance, and taken whatever punishment/discipline was bestowed upon him.
Get a rope, I say.
Its despicable to me.
And I dont think justifying terrorists in Iraq is hardly human violation. People who chop american heads off, I have no sympathy for them.
He seems too.
I hope he is brought to justice.
He uses lame scapegoats dating back to WW2 to justify that he is emotionally not ready for war.
hes 18, and running.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Canada has an extradition treaty with the USA, and its law says that political asylum can only be granted to those who could be executed or persecuted if returned to their home countries. Since Iraq is not a declared war, Hinzman and Hu*** cannot be executed and, if returned to the U.S., they would most likely face five years in prison - hardly a persecution for a crime as serious as desertion.
Bill O'Reilly
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even at 17, people have a grip on reality. If one joins the military, I'd think that person would realize that they may have to fight. I certainly did when I joined the Army. I don't know about him, but when I went through MEPS there was no "free ride" box. I knew that I was going to get a lot of benefits like health and dental, education, room and board. In return, I knew that I'd be expected <i>to do my damn job.</i>
When asked if he took the Army's money and ran:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No. Actually, I was paid very little in terms of the hours I worked. It was very common at my unit to work from 9:00 A.M. to 9:00-10:00 P.M. Very rarely did we ever get to go home before 6:00 and I was averaging what would have been the equivalent of 10-15 hours a week of overtime in the civilian world. In the military you don't get paid a dime of overtime, so I was working many hours for free. I also never received my signing bonus that I had been promised in my contract. I was told that I needed to fill out some paperwork to receive it, but anytime I asked about it, my superiors always did their best to push it aside.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Army pays salaries, not by the hour. As a PFC, you pull down about $16,000 yearly. However, that doesn't take into account all of the stuff you get for free or at a greatly reduced price. If you factor in things like health insurance and the large amounts of money you get for college while in the army, let alone the cheap insurance you can get from the VA, you come out ahead in the long run. The sign-on bonus stuff I don't know about. I do know that you get part when you finish basic and the rest one year after you finish basic. Considering he was 17 when he joined and is 18 now, he might not have been in for the required amount of time. When the DoD tried to stiff me on some severance pay, I wrote a letter to my Senator and had the check within two weeks.
I'm not sympathetic for his cause. He volunteered for a fighting force then ran when they asked him to fight. He wasn't drafted or forced to join and his morality certainly didn't prevent him from joining the military or <i>taking a job as an armor crewman.</i> I'm just glad he wasn't in my unit.
--> Bull, what we have seen of pictures in the ahsa gruain prison could be classified as a human violations <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I am in agreement with the others in this thread who say that he should not have run. He signed on the dotted line, and I expect a contract to be legally binding. It is his duty to finish what he started. Naivete does not excuse this; next time perhaps he will think twice before signing up with the army, if it's really so antithetical to him.
If your primary goal is to earn money for college or job training and not to serve your country in whatever capacity you are requested to, then you're really rolling the dice. Sometimes you win; sometimes you lose. But if you lose, you'd better be prepared to write that check.
(edit, forgot to say this) If not, you should expect to be punished according to the terms of your enlistment.
However, those of you who would villify this ignorant kid would do best to remember the following about our commander in chief (from msnbc):
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->On the other hand, he didn't want to go to Vietnam. Draft deferments for graduate school were ending that spring of 1968. The Texas Air National Guard offered another way. "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada," Bush explained to The Dallas Morning News back in 1990. "So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes."
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This, of course, came at the cost of close to one million dollars of taxpayer money, with no intention of employing that training overseas. Additionally, the evidence of him fullfilling his obligations is thin at best.
I'm not trying to turn this into a partisan battle-- Clinton was certainly no better, and Hell, I certainly would have done everything in my power to avoid that war. Just to put some perspective on this-- if you're going to hang one, you might as well hang the other.
There's no way around that. As long as soldier knows the war is illegal(like Iraq/Afghanistan invasions are) he is obligated to refuse, according to Nurnberg trials.
I mean on legal grounds, he's untouchable!
The UN hasn't sanctioned the invasion on Iraq, therefore it is illegal under international law.
Since it's not technically a war and the military will try to appease both sides of the fence, he won't be executed. That much is certain. However, that doesn't change the fact that he up and ran from duty. The Uniform Code of Military Justice does not look kindly upon that and he's bound to get little sympathy from peers. A court-martial is far less friendly to defendants than a civilian court would be.
The UN hasn't sanctioned the invasion on Iraq, therefore it is illegal under international law. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.inq7.net/opi/2003/sep/29/opi_commentary1-1.htm' target='_blank'>yeah, right</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Consider the facts. Since 1945 there have been over 60 major wars and deadly armed conflicts involving almost all UN members, including the permanent five. How many of these wars would be considered "legally and morally justified" because multilateralism was upheld and the United Nations reached consensus to wage those wars? Of the 60, only two were "legal and moral" in the insane sense that no veto was cast by a permanent member of the UN Security Council. They are the Korean War of the 1950s (the Resolution was passed while the Russian delegate was in the CR!); and the Persian Gulf War of 1990<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Maximum punishment.
(1) Completed or attempted desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years.
(2) Other cases of completed or attempted desertion.
(a) Terminated by apprehension. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 3 years.
(b) Terminated otherwise. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years.
<b>(3) In time of war. Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's that simple, have him returned and punished. He knew damn well what he was doing, he wanted a free ride off the system and when the time came to fight for his country he ran away. I doubt he ever had any intent to serve the military unless Russian paratroopers came crashing through his bedroom window. He disgusts me.
I'm having some trouble finding the law that equates joining the National Guard during war time to military desertion.
Maybe we should cut this kid some slack. After all, it's not like he perjured himself in front of a Federal Grand Jury.
The situation isn't precisely analagous, but allow me:
1) Based on Bush's own statement, he seemed to cheerfully admit that he joined the Air National Guard in order to avoid serving in the Viet Nam war-- a luxury that I pray you'll concede was not available to most, if not all of those who fled to Canada to save <i>their</i> butts.
2) He specifically requested <b>not</b> to volunteer for overseas duty. To borrow a line from Reasa:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I doubt he ever had any intent to serve the military unless Russian paratroopers came crashing through his bedroom window. He disgusts me.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Apparently, he was only interested in training to protect us against the highly skilled and nefarious Mexican air force.
As I said-- and you may correct me if you can find the exact firgure, but most estimates I've seen put the cost to train one pilot-- time, equipment, fuel, housing, instruction, etc. at roughly one million dollars. <i>Taxpayer</i> money.
Now, bringing this back on task-- as I said, this stupid kid should be subject to whatever punishment contingency his enlistment details described.
<i>However</i>, when we start demonizing him for abusing military resources/taxpayer funds, I pointed out that there is some similarity between the two situations. Both 'volunteered' (or Bush was 'commisioned', correct? I can't recall what the term is for officers. Feel free to correct). Either way, both were voluntary assignments. Neither seemed to have any interest in actually <i>fighting</i>, but that didn't prevent them from accepting salary/training at the taxpayer's expense.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Maybe we should cut this kid some slack. After all, it's not like he perjured himself in front of a Federal Grand Jury. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey, at least when Clinton screwed up you could <i>get</i> him in front of a grand jury. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And I kind of like that, because it's the one way to try to keep our leadership honest. Pity, that.
At any rate, the Clinton swipe was unnecessary as -- hang on, let's go to the tape:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Clinton was certainly no better, and Hell, I certainly would have done everything in my power to avoid that war.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's simply that he <i>totally</i> dodged the draft, so the situation wasn't as similar as, say, someone who joins the military with no true intention of fighting overseas or completing their term of service.
So the kid is stupid and naive, but he's hardly original. He should be punished, but let's keep this in perspective.
</tangent>
Edit:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm having some trouble finding the law that equates joining the National Guard during war time to military desertion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Also, this was a poor choice of words on my part-- I meant 'hang' in the metaphorical sense. Again, as in the total villification of his character. <i>That</i> is what I was protesting here-- let the military courts try him as they see fit, but some of the venom on this thread seemed pretty extreme.
On second thought, perhaps 'crucify' would have been a better choice of words.
As to those talking illegal wars
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As a Nobel Peace laureate, I, like most people, agonise over the use of force. But when it comes to rescuing an innocent people from tyranny and genocide, I've never questioned the justification for resorting to force. Thats what I supported Vietnam's 1978 invasion of Cambodia, which ended Pol Pot's regime, and Tanzania's invasion of Uganda in 1979, to oust Idi Amin. In both cases, those countries acted without UN or international approval - and in both cases they were right to do so.
Perhaps the French have forgotten how they, too, topppled one of the worst human-rights violators without UN approval. I applauded in the early '80s when French paratroopers landed in the dilapidated capital of the then Central African Empire and deposed "Emperor" Jean-Bedel Bokassa, renowned for cannibalism.
Almost two decades later, I applauded again as NATO intervened - without a UN mandate - to end ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and liberate an oppressed European Muslim community from Serbian tyranny. And I rejoced once more in 2001 after the US-led overthrow of the Taliban liberated Afghanistan from one of the world's most barbaric regimes.
So why do some think Iraq should be any different? Only a year after his overthrow, they seem to have forgotten how hundreds of thousands perished during Saddam Hussein's tyranny, under a regime whose hallmark was terror, summary execution, torture and rape. Forgotten, too, is how the Kurds and Iraq's neighbours lived each day in fear, so long as Saddam remained in power.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You can get free food, free housing, and free money while in the Army. My brother has a friend that went for 4 years, didn't spend a penny and walked away with almost 70 grand. Just because your a 17 year asshat doesn't dissolve your responsibility, a plumber can't say he had no idea your drains would be clogged so bad and leave after you pay him, neither should this kid.
And at 17 most teenagers are so anti establishment no one would sign up for the Army unless they really wanted to. This is just a kid trying to get some public attention and make a political scene, I doubt he even cares about the danger of it.
First off, he shouldve researched that. And thats basically saying he wanted to free-load off the United States Army for money.
Then he complains about lack of payment.
You get very cheap housing, among other things. Everything is provided for you basically, just never took advantage.
The army wasn't the most beautiful thing he dreamed about, so he ran away.
Good Game <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Of course that won't stop the military court from judging him, but according to the earlier cases, he _should_ be off the hook. And in fact, so should all the other US soldiers, if they wished to throw down their arms and go back home/refuse to go to Iraq.
Anyway even though the motive at first was for WMD's only but wasnt the whole operation called Operation: Iraqi freedom? I still thinking fighting terrorists and freeing opressed people is just grounds for war.
I think he doesnt want to follow orders because he just plain doesnt want to go.
Honestly let him go, he doesnt deserve the honor of punishment.