| Author | Message | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 708 Registered: 1-2003 |
I'm in the nuclear propulsion field. Enlisted, but this field gives accelerated advancement and large bonuses. With a high enough ASVAB score you get guaranteed schools, then it's up to you to pass them. And being stuck on a ship for months at a time is definitely not a ton of fun, but what I do feels more worthwhile than what those soldiers in the desert have to do. | ||
| MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member Username: Markpdx Post Number: 940 Registered: 4-2003 |
I think there are good and bad jobs to be found in all the services. Navy guys may not spend alot of time wandering around the desert but being stuck in the bowels of a ship for months on end is probably not much fun either. If you don't mind me asking Randall, what field are you in? Did you go in with some prior experience/degree that got you locked in with a particular job? Are you officer/enlisted/civilian employee? | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 705 Registered: 1-2003 |
Hey neb, How about this: I didn't join a branch where I'd be out in a desert wasting my life. I did a little research and knew that this particular field would have me work with the least idiots, most pay and least BS jobs. I won't give you my full name because I don't won't some idiot ex-jarhead making •••• up about me. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 632 Registered: 11-2002 |
This is sickening. These "soldiers" joined at a time when they thought NOTHING was going to happen. As far as they were concerened, they were just paying for school. SURPIRSE!!! YOU'RE A SOLDIER! Now you gotta do the sh!t we trained you to do! What? You miss mommy? Awwwww... You miss your wife? Awwwww.... You don't like getting up early? Awwwww.... You don't like being at war? Awwwwwww..... YOU SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT BEFORE JOINING!!! Hey Randall, you agree with these guys. How about this: Post your FULL NAME, your UNIT, and your CO. I'll e-mail him all your posts, and we'll see what happens. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 702 Registered: 1-2003 |
Here's another article about soldiers that are ungrateful to be serving the Iraquis: http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/7316.htm | ||
| Bill Woodward (Slackjaw)
New member Username: Slackjaw Post Number: 10 Registered: 7-2003 |
No offense taken, Nebula. My skin is way thicker than that! --Woody | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
Junior Member Username: Aventino Post Number: 131 Registered: 6-2003 |
IMHO the US military are just doing a job and a difficult one at that. I don't think they should be there either but that is between military command and the politicians who want results but who have little appreciation of the actions. Reminds me of a movie a wee while ago. JESSEP Have you ever spent time in an infantry unit, son? KAFFEE No sir. JESSEP Ever served in a forward area? KAFFEE No sir. JESSEP Ever put your life in another man's hands, ask him to put his life in yours? KAFFEE No sir. JESSEP We follow orders, son. We follow orders or people die. It's that simple. Are we clear? KAFFEE Yes sir. JESSEP Are we clear? . KAFFEE Crystal. | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Member Username: Wax Post Number: 510 Registered: 7-2003 |
When Tim Predmore enlisted, he did so to defend democracy, not to practice it. Prediction: Court-martial, Loss of pay, Imprisonment for 1 year, Dishonarable discharge. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 701 Registered: 1-2003 |
Article 134 is the catch all. If it's not a written rule, 134 is usually used to punish people. As for what was written, his only mistake was signing it with his rank. When people were protesting going to war here there was a lot of military out there, the official word from the commands at Pearl Harbor was that no uniforms were allowed and you couldn't make any statements to the press that include your rank or position. This is why comments are usually anonymous, which leads them to being quickly discredited. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 901 Registered: 3-2002 |
Thomas you are correct. However perhaps you might want to see what has been written to a "few" posters below that Amir has not agreed with. Thanks for your reference on what was done in the past. Ciao.... | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Member Username: Wax Post Number: 505 Registered: 7-2003 |
Ralph - I don't believe we've communicated before, but my first communication to you is: Never mock a man's religion, birthright or ancestral heritage. It's no small wonder there is a small percentage of Arabs and other ethnicities who hate Westerners because of such broad strokes of bigotry. _____ Exports? Suffice it to say, the list is long. Choose country here: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ Scroll just past halfway down to reach Economy _______ The greatest leader the world ever knew was Suleiman (Suleyman) the Magnificent, a Muslim. What follows is an extremely concise biography - which in the spirit of Telson, has been cut'n'pasted: Suleiman the Magnificent From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Suleyman I, also called S�leyman I and nicknamed the Lawmaker or the Magnificent, was the sultan of the Ottoman Empire from 1494 to 1566 and successor to Selim I. The Ottoman Empire reached its zenith and became a world power during his reign. Although the empire continued to expand one century after his death, this period was followed by a very long decline. He captured Belgrade in 1521 and Rhodes in 1522. The Ottoman victory at the Battle of Mohacs opened the doors of Hungary and Vienna, the latter of which had been besieged unsuccessfully in 1529. In the following two decades, huge territories of North Africa west to Morocco and all Middle East north to Persia were annexed. This quick expansion was associated with naval dominance for a short period in the Mediterranean Sea and Persian Gulf. He earned his nickname the Lawmaker from his complete reconstruction of the Ottoman law system. The laws that he gathered covered almost every aspect of life at the time. When S�leyman died in 1566, major Muslim cities (Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem, Damascus, and Baghdad), many Balkan provinces up to today�s Austria, and most of North Africa were under the control of the empire. ______ In addition, The greatest art - surpassing that of any -ism of western or eastern art was created by men of the Muslim faith. Again - Never mock a man's religion, birthright or ancestral heritage. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 623 Registered: 11-2002 |
Amir - I'ts been a while since I versed myself on the UCMJ, but I beleive that artivle 132 or 134 is the "catch-all" article, which has the flexibility to charge any service member on something that is not specifically mentioned in any of the other articles. It's a pretty powerful article. Disclaimer: this may have been covered earlier in this thread. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 899 Registered: 3-2002 |
Since you undoubtedly profess to know everything: and you did make comments about motorcycles, drugs, and almost everything else under the sun I came up with a question that has always bothered me that I know little about. I have a simple question for you that I have always been wanting to ask: What do the arabs produce for export for the industrialized world besides oil ????? You seem to answer everything. I would like to hear your answer here. I have very little information on this subject. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 968 Registered: 2-2003 |
We really do need an expert opinion on which UCMJ law he violated, or if someone could cite an example. Keep in mind that he violated tradition and likely at least one Army core value, Selfless Service, on a grand scale. Violating traditions and core values is just as punishable as violating written law. This wasn't a simple failure to render a salute to an Officer or superior Officer. I would wager he disrespected a large percentage of those in the Armed Forces at large, including American civilians. He will most certainly get discharged. Those who share his beliefs, in and out of uniform, will call him a hero. And to many who serve, have served, and to some civilians, he will be an individual who put himself before the Service and will not be afforded respect. In the Air Force, the core value is called Service Before Self, and one I'm more familiar with. An excellent description of what that means I found here in a quick Google search. I highly recommend reading it. http://www.usafa.af.mil/core-value/profession-of-arms.html | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 197 Registered: 2-2003 |
I see your points but I don't agree. Earlier on, however, way back when this thread started, the debate was on whether he had violated any sections of military law. Based on the legal texts referenced, he seemed to be in violation of only one. At least, that's how it seemed (and still does) to me. We need the input of an expert in military law. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 622 Registered: 11-2002 |
Amir - if 50% of the military refused a mandated order, they would be Court Marshalled and put in the brig. Plain and simple. The reason I posted the question is because no one here seems to get the point that dissention in the ranks, no matter how small, is not condoned in the military, and for good reason. One guy with ill-will towards the military cold easily turn into 100 guys, assuming the one guy had great speaking skill and amazing charisma. Also, that one guy could be a 4 star General in charge of hundreds of thousands of soldiers. What would that do to his ability to follow the orders of the CinC? Do military guys have the right to voice their opinions? Of course they do...this is America. Should they do it? Well, I refer you to a quote made by someone I don't know the name of: "Just because we CAN do a thing does not mean that we SHOULD do that thing." This guy will get his just desserts. He will be branded by his comrades, who protect his back in battle, by the way, as a coward and as a mallingerer who does not rate the striped on is sleeves. If you've ot bad things to say about the military while you are in uniform, either resign or wait our your contract, and THEN speak your position. Again, you've never served, so you have NO IDEA what dissention in the ranks, no matter how small, does to the overall moral of a unit. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 196 Registered: 2-2003 |
I think you are trying to show that the members of the armed forces are duty-bound to serve...correct? The soldier being discussed has not refused to serve. Why ask a pointless, meaningless, absurd question? What would your answer be? I am honestly intrigued as to what you are getting at. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 195 Registered: 2-2003 |
Nebs, read your own post. You asked Art and Telson to answer. OK, since you are now asking me, I will take a stab at it. I am assuming here that more than 50% would be needed to win the war. The simple answer is, you're screwed either way. If half the military disagrees, then there is a huge moral conflict that needs to be resolved first. If everyone is forced to fight, then there would be huge morale issues and desertion/treachery would be endemic. We would lose the fight. And if we only fought with half the people, we would lose as well. On principle, the soldiers who refused to fight could be court-martialed. But again, if half of them were against it, there is no way 100% of the population would be for the war. So even if they were "punished" there would probably be a regime change and a blanket amnesty granted. Bizarre question. But I have a creative solution. We send Ralph. Except we send him to.... a deserted Hawaiian island. He would see sand, go nuts, be unable to do any damage, and start taking his own drugs. The world's problems might not go away, but his would. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 619 Registered: 11-2002 |
Christ, Amir. You've done exactly what I suspected you would. You just can't answer a straight question, can you? Ok, 100% of NON-SERVING Americans vote. Now that I've clarified a relatively easy post to understand (which, it seems, you were unable to understand), can you now answer the question? Thanks. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 194 Registered: 2-2003 |
Nebula, if 100% of Americans vote for the attack, all of the military would also be included in that 100%. They get to vote too, you know. So where is this other 50% coming from? Ouch. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 193 Registered: 2-2003 |
900 posts and you still wrap your posts only halfway across the line, and then you take offence at being called a neanderthal. Lets face it you are the moron who is trying to present what the requirements are to serve in the military. Umm, no. I am reading the legal text that was referenced and applying it to the situation of the soldier. Once again you show a complete inability to comprehend a very basic concept. Still offended at being called a neanderthal? It is ashame that you come from a culture that is sadly lacking (and is quite backwards with the rest of the Western World) in many social and political ways. Umm, again, no. Speaking of cultural backgrounds, what's yours? Pickup trucks and appreciating scantily clad women? And then you claim to be advanced...post some pictures of your mother, sister, and daughter in the swimsuit thread, ok? You are the only one who's lacking here--in the upstairs department. You know you don't like what I am saying, but you can't argue against it because you are lacking some basic abilities. So you resort to what you know best. Little jibes, and flitting from topic to topic as soon as it's shown that you don't make sense. Have you ever visited the discarded senior citizens in an old folks' home in your "civilized society"? Social and political norms are too big in scope to debate here, but the Western World is not superior in many cases. Let's just leave it at that, shall we? The US Military is a professional organization. It is not like your culture where countries like Libya, Syria, and Iraq appoint officers based on absolute loyalty, political connections, and nepotism. Why you would compare a professional organization to a culture is beyond me. And there's so many holes in your argument that it's a whole archive by itself. I will grant that the US military is one of the most technologically advanced in the world. Was that ever in contention? I can imagine your mortified look as once again you realize that you have gone off on a tangent, screaming and kicking, over nothing. I understand that our culture and political system is probably a little different for you. In the Western Countries, they do not just drop golden leaves on the tunic of ones uniform; as in the muslim way. Religion has nothing to do with military advancement...even in Muslim countries. Just a little something to chew on when the drugs wear off and the bike is going slow enough for you to not have your typical Muslim-hating tunnel vision. The U.S. Military has standards that must be upheld. Your point being? The Western Countries have a different situation unlike Tariq sipping sweet tea in his tent who has the ability to apply his own standards. Lovely, just lovely. Keep digging. Great imagery by the way. Yes, they live in tents, sip tea, and ride camels around the world. Only in America do we have cars and telephones. Oh, and motorcycles, too. Right? By the way, what country is that bike made in? How come you don't ride a Harley, you unpatriotic schmuck? Of course the Western Way has worked for centuries, based on Tariq's performance in the past. Then why are you so worked up about one soldier's comments? There is a standard that must be upheld. The standards are the same should the soldier serve in Cairo, Bagram, or Chattanoga. The soldier must go through the chain of command. You do not abrogate the chain of command and run to the media. Is anyone saying that the standard is not the same in these places? Are you saying that it was not upheld? Or am I? I think I already pointed out earlier that he met virtually all the requirements as posted in the rulebook. So what are you so worked up about? Oooh, there I go annihilating you with cold, hard logic again. I know, I know, you can't take much more of this. Tell you what, next time you ride, pop a wheelie. That ought to make you feel a whole lot better. Also, since you and Nebula will have an absolute s4itfit if I mention it, I will simply leave you to look up the word abrogate and its correct usage. I think you meant to say ignore? Sand Boy? An illiterate boor like you makes a mental leap to come up with a term notable for its base, unimaginative mediocrity--and I am supposed to feel insulted? Delicious. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 613 Registered: 11-2002 |
Here's a scenario I'd like Art and Telson to answer: Assume 100% of all American vote to attack a threat to our nation. Now assume that 50% of the military, for whatever reason, does not agree with the people of the country. Is it, in this case, OK for the military to lose half of it's numbers simply because those in uniform do not agree with the people of the country? When answering this question, don't tell me that 100% of Americans didn't vote to attack Iraq, because I'm already conceding that. My point is simply an exercise designed to show the duties of the US Armed Services. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 965 Registered: 2-2003 |
"shortcut to comedy: suspending your beliefs = model american" "may be watered down with 'why think why. just drink bud dry' for the quintessential american tragedy" Luciano, it is comical. What you believe in while you are in uniform has no relevance to following orders and doing your job. You are allowed to express your opinion and your beliefs only in certain ways. The way Mr. Predmore did, is not. You are told what you can and cannot say to the public and to the media. With the intervention of the media, this one individual's beliefs will be used as a stereotype of how those serving in Iraq feel and what they believe. True or not, that is a tragedy. As to being a model American, that is what the Armed Forces teach you to believe you are as long as you continue to excel in what you do, give back a certain percent of time and energy to the community, maintain standards and discipline, and focus on self improvement along with a list of other items. You are not decorated, or promoted, unless you fit these criteria. Not only must you be a model American, you must be a model NCO or Officer. I decided it wasn't for me and I waited until my last tour was up and accepted an honorable discharge. I wasn't willing to continue making sacrifices to service the needs of an ever changing political agenda I didn't believe or agree with. But you must if you wish to succeed or promote. Please use my first name, if you don't mind.  Sunny | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 610 Registered: 11-2002 |
Bill Woodward - I served with quite a few great men and women who served in the Army and Navy. There are just as many sh!t birds in the Marine Corps as there are in any other branch. Didn't mean to offend, and I hope I didn't! (but you and I both know, the Marine Corps is the best! ) | ||
| luciano favero (Ontogenetic1007)
New member Username: Ontogenetic1007 Post Number: 33 Registered: 11-2002 |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >quote: > >Sand Boy >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Ralph, you have GOT to be kidding me... What kind of sh!t is that...? > DES - contemplate a bit ... Mr. Koslin et al are accomplishing what Mr. Predmore has accomplished, albeit in a less than literary fashion (perchance the suspension of beliefs ...) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >quote: > >Amir the name speaks for itself >and says it "all." >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >That's disgusting...! WTF...? C'est la vie L | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 265 Registered: 2-2003 |
I agree with Ralph. Ralph is one of the most respectable people on F-chat (which IS saying a lot). I have never seen him in any kind of flame war. He is helpful, knowlegeable, and respectful. I think Admir brought this thread to the gutter by saying: Admir: I enjoy rubbing you retards' noses in your crap Next time you get up on a podium, you might want to take your head out of your ass. Great rebuttals from the neanderthals | ||
| luciano favero (Ontogenetic1007)
New member Username: Ontogenetic1007 Post Number: 32 Registered: 11-2002 |
randall >It's funny how stupid people always use pride as a cruch. excellent with an oscar wilde ttouch mr. garofalo >When you sign up, you suspend some of your beliefs because >your there to do a job and be a model American. shortcut to comedy: suspending your beliefs = model american may be watered down with "why think why. just drink bud dry" for the quintessential american tragedy apropos mr.belief suspension - your "your" should be "you're" >Gregory (Prugna_328) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Thank you Neb, you already said most of what I am feeling. I have never served due to a lifelong physical ailment but everyday I thank God for the brave men and women who serve this country. When did this guy forget that he joined to "serve". His job is to follow orders not complain about them. Thats what those in the military do, FOLLOW ORDERS. He should be thrown out and charged with treason. Gregory - deeply fascinated with your statement (apologies to Bill Woodward and Ralph Koslin) Requesting permission to quote you at a symposium in Zurich, Nov 21st. Should this be acceptable to you, kindly contact me privately. Regards, Luciano. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 896 Registered: 3-2002 |
James: I am making refrence to the performance of the Arab militaries. Certainly many other cultures outside of Europe have fought very bravely. You are correct in your statement. I should have given more detail. | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
Junior Member Username: Aventino Post Number: 129 Registered: 6-2003 |
Ralph, better to highlight what you see as the performance and ability of the US soldier than rubbish others. Last time I looked the Gurkha weren't Western and they have been making a fine soldier since WW2 as they still do. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 7008 Registered: 8-2002 |
Ralph, irrespective of Amir's "neanderthal" comment, he's made no reference to your place of birth/country of origin, etcetera... Sand Boy...? Are you serious...? That's a direct reference to his ethnicity (read: racism)... i'm not saying Amir's right, he definitely has room for improvement when it comes to curbing his unnecessary attitude but comments like yours are just totally off base, inappropriate and downright disgusting... | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 895 Registered: 3-2002 |
DES: I have almost 900 posts since 3/2002. I do not exactly run around F-Chat calling people names and starting flame wars. You need to look at the entire thread and determine who has "started" to bring the level of this post into the gutter. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 7004 Registered: 8-2002 |
Ralph, you have GOT to be kidding me... What kind of sh!t is that...?
That's disgusting...! WTF...? | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 894 Registered: 3-2002 |
Sand Boy: Lets face it you are the moron who is trying to present what the requirements are to serve in the military. It is ashame that you come from a culture that is sadly lacking (and is quite backwards with the rest of the Western World) in many social and political ways. The US Military is a professional organization. It is not like your culture where countries like Libya, Syria, and Iraq appoint officers based on absolute loyalty, political connections, and nepotism. I understand that our culture and political system is probably a little different for you. In the Western Countries, they do not just drop golden leaves on the tunic of ones uniform; as in the muslim way. The U.S. Military has standards that must be upheld. The Western Countries have a different situation unlike Tariq sipping sweet tea in his tent who has the ability to apply his own standards. Of course the Western Way has worked for centuries, based on Tariq's performance in the past. There is a standard that must be upheld. The standards are the same should the soldier serve in Cairo, Bagram, or Chattanoga. The soldier must go through the chain of command. You do not abrogate the chain of command and run to the media. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 964 Registered: 2-2003 |
I agree, one hundred percent! Thanks Woody. | ||
| Bill Woodward (Slackjaw)
New member Username: Slackjaw Post Number: 9 Registered: 7-2003 |
Okay. I spent 15 years on active duty in the Army, including several overseas tours and one in the Pentagon. I'm currently in my 9th year in the Army Reserve, and have been mobilized and on active duty for the last 9 months. One could argue that I know the Army pretty well. In my opinion, Predmore's comments border on sedition. At the very least, he shows an incredible lack of tact. What he did amounts to stirring up controversy and inciting doubt within our ranks, and is exactly what our enemies love to see. I'm sure supporters of Hussein, Bin Laden, and other terrorists are reading Predmore's words with glee. Predmore writes that he believes he is no longer serving for a cause, that he has lost his conviction and his determination. He says his resolve and commitment have faded. If this is the truth I sincerely hope that he is not an officer, NCO, or in any position to lead troops, for he is a danger to himself and others. In any case, if what he writes about himself is true he should go to his commander and request to be relieved and sent to the rear. I would not like to be the soldier at his side in a firefight. As a soldier you have a job to do, and you do it and ask questions later. That doesn't mean you are a sheep and can't question orders or suggest an alternative plan. But it does mean that if you want to grouse and gripe you keep the dirty laundry in-house. NCO's and officers may b*tch among themselves, but never (seriously) to each other and especially to lower ranking enlisted folks. It's simply counter productive. This is nothing new, you find the same applies in business and the corporate world. Nebula, I'll attribute your comments about whiney Army-dogs and the Army not accepting men as good-natured rivalry among the Services. I've served in Joint and Combined units, and I can tell you first hand that Marines can whine with the best of us. I've trained soldiers on their way to Iraq and Afghanistan, and talked with some that have returned. The overwhelming feeling I get from them is that they are proud to serve, and although the conditions are horrible and the job is thankless, they are dedicated professionals. All good troops (regardless of their rank or branch of service) learn that sometimes you just have to suck it up and drive on. --Woody | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 192 Registered: 2-2003 |
Kds, ok, no more name-calling unless you start it. On a factual level, I have never donned a McDonald's uniform. If I did, I would be proud of it. There is dignity in labor. I will also tell you that it is a far more useful contribution to society than you can ever hope to make. Ralphie boy, you are barely capable of stringing together your own statements, which are laughably strident and pointless. You appear to be a complete moron. What makes you think you can present my viewpoint to others? Try to stick to presenting your own--you're doing a poor enough job there. Just to clarify things, do you or do you not believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11? I suspect you're part of the sad 70% who think he was. Notice how I am asking you, not claiming that I know how you think. It's a trivial exercise for me to point out the irrelevance and incoherence of your posts. Keep them coming, they only make you look even more stupid, if that's possible. Surely there's a drug in your bag that can help you? | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 893 Registered: 3-2002 |
Amir: lets face it whatever the U.S. does in the Middle East will never work for you. In more simple terms (for you); it is best for the U.S., to employ a policy of isolationism when it comes to the Middle East. Pre-emption is not advised for the infidel. Once again the military is not a democracy. The soldier has no business protesting to the media. | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 272 Registered: 5-2003 |
I would hazard a guess that the closest Amir has come to a uniform, is the paper had and headset of the guy at a McDonald's drive thru. Amir, cut the name calling from your arguments, because if you were even right with any of them, that fact would probably be overlooked as a result. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 186 Registered: 2-2003 |
Great rebuttals from the neanderthals. Nebs, whether I have served or not served was never in contention. And no, you don't have to serve in order to talk about it, no matter how much you squeal that it's a requirement. Ralph, pray tell what you mean by my name "says it all." Sorry, not going to go away. I enjoy rubbing you retards' noses in your crap and watching you squirm when pinned down by logic. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 606 Registered: 11-2002 |
Mark - that's a great photo! Amir, you can argue ALL YOU WANT. The fact remains, however, that you have never served one day in uniform, and so really have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. After you have worn a US military uniform, then come and talk about how "legal" this type of action is. Watching "Black Hawk Down" and "Saving Private Ryan" does not make you qualified to speak on issues regarding life inside the military. Now go away. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 962 Registered: 2-2003 |
"It says that publicly disputing civilian leaders is not in keeping with American tradition. B.S. And certainly not illegal, even if it were against tradition, which it isn't." Amir, that statement is completely false. Sign up and you will be given a through education on what is tradition in the US Armed Forces. Until you do, don't try to educate us (those who have, currently, or haven't served) on what is or isn't against tradition. If you have an objection, you speak with your superiors to resolve it. Tim would have not been put into this position if he spoke as strongly to his superiors about being deployed instead of bad mouthing the military operation to the media. I'm glad he spoke out too. However there is a time and a place for it, this was not it. Before he was deployed and in the presence of his superiors, not the media. Now that Tim's article appears in many different languages and spreading across the Internet like wildfire, I hope that he will not be serving with my friends, and my extended family, for much longer. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 887 Registered: 3-2002 |
There are other professions where you can debate. The military is not one. Amir the name speaks for itself and says it "all." | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 185 Registered: 2-2003 |
You have to follow orders. Are there any he does not follow? When a Captain is in charge of 140 soldiers in any combat situation you will never have an opportunity to debate and discuss orders from above. Is he a Captain? Clearly, he does have the time. Who are you to speak for his time commitments? You don't have the luxury to hear every Spec-4's opinion on what should and should not be done. According to you. And the relevance of this comment to this thread is? You are required when you swear in to obey the President and orders given to you by superior officers and NCO's. Cite one instance where he has not obeyed orders. Next time you get up on a podium, you might want to take your head out of your ass. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 885 Registered: 3-2002 |
You have to follow orders. When a Captain is in charge of 140 soldiers in any combat situation you will never have an opportunity to debate and discuss orders from above. You don't have the luxury to hear every Spec-4's opinion on what should and should not be done. You are required when you swear in to obey the President and orders given to you by superior officers and NCO's. It is not a summer camp. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 184 Registered: 2-2003 |
Lovely fishing expedition. Let's examine the charges and whether they apply or not: Field Manual 27-14 Legal Guide for Soldiers, Chapter 1 Restrictions Responsibilities and Rights It says that publicly disputing civilian leaders is not in keeping with American tradition. B.S. And certainly not illegal, even if it were against tradition, which it isn't. Then it says that the statements should not be attributable to the Department of the Army. They never were. He never claimed to speak for the Army. It recommends that military rank and title should not be disclosed. Should not is a recommendation, not a requirement. Nowhere does it say cannot. Besides, he does not disclose his rank and military title. Article 88 Contempt Toward Officials He does not use contemptuous words per se, but contempt is certainly implied. Yes, he probably can be charged with a violation of this article. Article 134 General article This addresses disruption of good order and discipline in the armed forces, and conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. He is not doing that. It can be easily argued that it actually increases the public's respect for the armed forces when reasoned views are put forth from within the ranks. Even if they oppose the military command's stance on some issue. Unless you are just a gun-totin' jarhead wanting to offload your rounds and play with your other high-tech toys and stake a claim on other people's property (basically theft-in this case, theft of oil and other Iraqi resources), you really should open your mind up to dissent. Is it so wrong for someone to not agree with you? Umm, no. Disloyal Statements May be punishable. Not "are" punishable but "may be" punishable. Yes, these charges can be leveled against the soldier as well, but it would be a fishing expedition. Disagreement with the war does not indicated disloyalty, although I am sure the claim could be made. The counterclaim that he is fighting with loyalty and with the trust of his fellow soldiers is equally strong. He hasn't deserted and he has not compromised anyone's safety. At worst, someone can mistakenly infer from his statments that he is disloyal, but the words certainly don't prove that he is disloyal. Very tough to prove on the basis of what he wrote. Voicing a dissenting viewpoint and actuallt being disloyal are two different things. So he can possibly be charged with one thing from here, which any good defense lawyer (yes, you are entitled to them in court martials as well) should be able to plead down to a dishonorable discharge at worst. Hardly a justification for the scandalized responses from the "armchair generals" who are besides themselves. As Commander-in-Chief, how much more dishonor has Dubya brought onto the armed forces and onto the United States with his illegitimate war? And that jaunt in the flight-suit on the carrier deck...how much dishonor did he bring to the serving airmen with that stunt? How about the inherent dishonor in spin doctoring, which is basically a nice term for lying? How about theft on the grandest scale? I don't see anyone pressing for charges there? Instead of being shouted down, perhaps the good soldier and exemplary citizen's voice should be heard. You cannot silence the truth. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 3286 Registered: 2-2001 |
This guy wants to get himself court martialed. Troops cant contradict or openly speak against their Commander in Chief without running that risk As for a reason, I can think of 2, OIL & Bush's personal vendetta against Saddam | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6958 Registered: 8-2002 |
i like Telson and Randall... | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Member Username: Wax Post Number: 502 Registered: 7-2003 |
 | ||
| MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member Username: Markpdx Post Number: 913 Registered: 4-2003 |
Of course you don't hear these guys bitching...  not my photochop | ||
| MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member Username: Markpdx Post Number: 912 Registered: 4-2003 |
Here is a little tech on the subject: Field Manual 27-14 Legal Guide for Soldiers, Chapter 1 Restrictions Responsibilities and Rights
Uniform Code of Military Justice
Tim Predmore's editorial to the Peoria Journal Star, in my estimation, falls within the category of foreign policy and military matters as mentioned in the portion I posted from FM 27-14. We will probably never know but I certainly wonder if he recieved permission from his Commander to send that letter. Whether or not it was within his rights to write that letter it was, at minimum, a very dumb decision. Perhaps I am naive to workings of the military but I suspect that the brass does not view such letters with any particular kindness. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 961 Registered: 2-2003 |
"It is illegal, however, for the military command to issue orders that would cause a soldier to break the law. Waging war against a country that poses no threat and waging war for illegitimate reasons is a direct contravention of international law." Amir, you haven't served before, or have you? Its called an unlawful order. In a combat situation, this doesn't apply, sorry. I think you should brush up on your UCMJ. http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/blmcm.htm International law will deal with those giving those orders, just as the UCMJ will deal with orders those that are not followed outside of a combat situation. As Mark intoned, an editorial like this is cause for disciplinary action. There are several ways you can be discharged. Honorably, General, Medical, Other, and Dishonorable (that I can recall). Tim needs to choose one that best suits him. Under the link I posted, our friend Tim in uniform can be disciplined any number of ways for that editorial. Those in uniform have MORE strict laws and guidelines to follow. Figure it out yet? | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 180 Registered: 2-2003 |
MarkPDX, Nebula, Kds, etc. try to wrap your brain around the fact that the soldier who is question his presence in Iraq is not disobeying orders by speaking his mind. It is illegal, however, for the military command to issue orders that would cause a soldier to break the law. Waging war against a country that poses no threat and waging war for illegitimate reasons is a direct contravention of international law. Those orders came from the Commander-in-Chief. So who is breaking the law? Who should be landing in a world of hurt? Who is barking out words like treason whenever their orders or the logic behind them are questioned? Figured it out yet? | ||
| MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member Username: Markpdx Post Number: 911 Registered: 4-2003 |
Maybe not treason but it is a good way to land yourself in a world of hurt. IIRC there was an Air Force officer that faced some serious repercussions for badmouthing Bush not long after the election. I will try to find some info. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 699 Registered: 1-2003 |
And if he was in many other countries militaries he wouldn't be risking his life for no reason. We are obliged to follow orders, but that doesn't mean we can't question them. That also doesn't mean we are supposed to be mindless sheep; unless you're an infantry Marine- then you should be a sheep. I love how many idiots think that anyone that disagrees with the president should be thrown out for treason. Show how pathetically stupid some Americans are. | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Member Username: Wax Post Number: 498 Registered: 7-2003 |
If he was in the Iraqi military while Hussein's regime was in full control, he'd have been summarily executed on the spot. | ||
| MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member Username: Markpdx Post Number: 910 Registered: 4-2003 |
Amir - If not an order it is at least an unspoken rule. Writing an editorial badmouthing the mission is way out of line. Anybody else read this book? pic links to info on Amazon  | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 179 Registered: 2-2003 |
What orders is he not following? Or are you saying that because you don't like or agree with what he's saying? | ||
| Gregory (Prugna_328)
Junior Member Username: Prugna_328 Post Number: 60 Registered: 9-2003 |
Thank you Neb, you already said most of what I am feeling. I have never served due to a lifelong physical ailment but everyday I thank God for the brave men and women who serve this country. When did this guy forget that he joined to "serve". His job is to follow orders not complain about them. Thats what those in the military do, FOLLOW ORDERS. He should be thrown out and charged with treason. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 958 Registered: 2-2003 |
There is nothing wrong with a little venting, however, its usually handled amongst the unit and not turned into fuel for the media like this was. Everyone in uniform I met, from the office clerks to special operatives in foreign uniforms, has a conscience. When someone in uniform begins a public statement with this, "For the past six months, I have been participating in what I believe to be the great modern lie," I hope they're shipped back to CONUS before they have time to pack. Accept a dishonorable discharge and become a public speaker if you believe so strongly or beg for a job that won't disturb your conscience. If you don't want to be there and you disagree so strongly, you say no when your asked to do something. That word "No" especially when on deployment ALWAYS creates waves. There is someone else to take your place. When you sign up, you suspend some of your beliefs because your there to do a job and be a model American. Don't worry fellas, Tim Predmore spoke for himself and I suspect will not be there much longer where his beliefs don't matter. What did I just end up posting to the Dan Snyder thread? Oh yeah, there is a time and place for everything. Don't slip on the steps for the pax on your way out (for those who don't know the reference, the big narrow metal steps leading to the passenger area of transport planes, quite slippery if you have a huge sack with your junk on your back). | ||
| Jeffrey Wolfe (86mondial32)
Member Username: 86mondial32 Post Number: 490 Registered: 5-2003 |
Art.. as a Viet Nan solider that did not understand the basics of a firefight you have nothing of value to add about this topic. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 603 Registered: 11-2002 |
art - It's very easy for those who served in Vietnam to be completely biased about military action for the rest of their lives. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2685 Registered: 6-2001 |
Randall: It's very easy for those who didn't serve in war time to be gung ho. They don't understand the issues, nor are they willing to admit they don't: they've seen it on TV, or played at it. Art | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 265 Registered: 5-2003 |
Amir..... Coming from someone who cannot even post their answer in THE CORRECT THREAD....that is quite an observation. Touche.....now go home and practice punching a stick thru a hole into a piece of cardboard. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 697 Registered: 1-2003 |
The typical infantry jarhead is an idiot. I see the pieces of •••• in Waikiki all the time, starting fights and just being an annoyance to the rest of the island. Marines are just lambs for the slaughter, which is fine by me because it's a branch full of assholes and punks. By the way, the ASVAB is more like an extremely dumbed down SAT. You're probably one of those guys that just squeaked by at the 28th percentile. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 177 Registered: 2-2003 |
Nebs, how come you are not serving in the current war, the one you support so whole-heartedly? Kds, just because you were an intelligence officer (if we are to believe that), does not mean that you: 1. have any intelligence 2. were exposed to any intelligence relevant to this discussion that was factual. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 601 Registered: 11-2002 |
Oh, and Randall, why not get ballsy like your first post on this thread said? Instead of sitting on your couch and talking out your ass, why not manipulate that fat body of yours into a Marine Corps E-Club and make those remarks? | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 600 Registered: 11-2002 |
Laugh it up, Squid. Low ASVAB scores (a test that rates you on your ability to identify different plumbing tools) does not a bad soldier make. Jealousy's a b!tch, eh? Nothing like being a glorfied taxi service for the REAL fightin' men. | ||
| Tyler (Bahiaau)
Intermediate Member Username: Bahiaau Post Number: 1078 Registered: 12-2001 |
"Fact is, they were unhappy that they were forced to uphold their end of the bargain, and they didn't like running three miles a day, having to wear a uniform, having to cut their hair, and having to take orders. " I think Nebula hit the nail on the head. I've seen plenty of these types. Guys like this are a disgrace. I've got several friends in Iraq and other parts of the world and they are very proud to be there. I know my friends are disgusted with cowards like this and I know I am. To my friends overseas and to all the U.S. and British troops I say thank you for your service! | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 264 Registered: 5-2003 |
Try reading a new website called www.frontlinevoices.org for letters from soldiers stationed in Iraq that are from the opposing viewpoint to this "one" brought here by Telson. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 696 Registered: 1-2003 |
The Marine Corps only accepts men?? LOL, is that why they have the lowest ASVAB standards of any branch? It's funny how stupid people always use pride as a cruch. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 598 Registered: 11-2002 |
Oh, and I just noticed that he's in the Army. That explains a lot, as the only thing worse than a whiney Army-dog is a snaggle-toothed bag of trash Squiggly like Randall. The Marine Corps only accepts men. Wish the same were true of the Army and Navy. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 597 Registered: 11-2002 |
Hey Randall, he's Un-American and Un-Patriotic. When I served, there were a few jack-off sh!t-birds like this guy. They were pissed that the contract they signed was BINDING, and had nothing but b!tches about how rough and stupid military life was. Fact is, they were unhappy that they were forced to uphold their end of the bargain, and they didn't like running three miles a day, having to wear a uniform, having to cut their hair, and having to take orders. This dude is nothing more. A putrid sack of garbage. He can talk all he wants. No big deal. He's only letting the rest of the world know what a whiney little girl he is. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 695 Registered: 1-2003 |
I'm surprised no one called that soldier un-American, or accused him of lack of patriotism. I'd like to see all the pile of •••• warmongers sitting on their couches at home join up and take their asses over to Iraq. If you're so for this war, go prove it. While you're at it write a big check to Uncle Sam to help pay for something you're so for. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1777 Registered: 2-2001 |
God Bless our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan for protecting us and the rest of the world from terrorists and other lunatics. Ernesto | ||
| Jonas Petersen (Karsten335)
Member Username: Karsten335 Post Number: 602 Registered: 11-2002 |
Bruce and Nebula. Why the attitude? - If it's facts, then don't clander him for showing them to us. Just becuase you 2 support the war, doesn't mean that every other person does. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2679 Registered: 6-2001 |
If it's factual, what's the problem? If it isn't factual, then attack the lack of veracity. Telling someone to shut up, because you don't like the facts, says more about you than them. Art | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 586 Registered: 11-2002 |
Holy Christ would you SHUT THE F@CK UP!!!! | ||
| Bruce Wellington (Bws88tr)
Advanced Member Username: Bws88tr Post Number: 3137 Registered: 4-2002 |
GET OFF THE CRACK, MAN.......... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 71 Registered: 8-2003 |
 "We are facing death in Iraq for no reason A serving US soldier calls for the end of an occupation based on lies Tim Predmore Friday September 19, 2003 The Guardian For the past six months, I have been participating in what I believe to be the great modern lie: Operation Iraqi Freedom. After the horrific events of September 11 2001, and throughout the battle in Afghanistan, the groundwork was being laid for the invasion of Iraq. "Shock and awe" were the words used to describe the display of power that the world was going to view upon the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom. It was to be an up-close, dramatic display of military strength and advanced technology from within the arsenals of the American and British military. But as a soldier preparing to take part in the invasion of Iraq, the words "shock and awe" rang deep within my psyche. Even as we prepared to depart, it seemed that these two great superpowers were about to break the very rules that they demanded others obey. Without the consent of the United Nations, and ignoring the pleas of their own citizens, the US and Britain invaded Iraq. "Shock and awe"? Yes, the words correctly described the emotional impact I felt as we embarked on an act not of justice, but of hypocrisy. From the moment the first shot was fired in this so-called war of liberation and freedom, hypocrisy reigned. After the broadcasting of recorded images of captured and dead US soldiers on Arab television, American and British leaders vowed revenge while verbally assaulting the networks for displaying such vivid images. Yet within hours of the deaths of Saddam Hussein's sons, the US government released horrific photographs of the two dead brothers for the entire world to view. Again, a "do as we say and not as we do" scenario. As soldiers serving in Iraq, we have been told that our purpose is to help the people of Iraq by providing them with the necessary assistance militarily, as well as in humanitarian efforts. Then tell me where the humanity is in the recent account in Stars and Stripes (the newspaper of the US military) of two young children brought to a US military camp by their mother in search of medical care. The two children had, unknowingly, been playing with explosive ordnance they had found, and as a result they were severely burned. The account tells how, after an hour-long wait, they - two children - were denied care by two US military doctors. A soldier described the incident as one of many "atrocities" on the part of the US military he had witnessed. Thankfully, I have not personally been a witness to atrocities - unless, of course, you consider, as I do, that this war in Iraq is the ultimate atrocity. So what is our purpose here? Was this invasion because of weapons of mass destruction, as we have so often heard? If so, where are they? Did we invade to dispose of a leader and his regime because they were closely associated with Osama bin Laden? If so, where is the proof? Or is it that our incursion is about our own economic advantage? Iraq's oil can be refined at the lowest cost of any in the world. This looks like a modern-day crusade not to free an oppressed people or to rid the world of a demonic dictator relentless in his pursuit of conquest and domination, but a crusade to control another nation's natural resource. Oil - at least to me - seems to be the reason for our presence. There is only one truth, and it is that Americans are dying. There are an estimated 10 to 14 attacks every day on our servicemen and women in Iraq. As the body count continues to grow, it would appear that there is no immediate end in sight. I once believed that I was serving for a cause - "to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States". Now I no longer believe that; I have lost my conviction, as well as my determination. I can no longer justify my service on the basis of what I believe to be half-truths and bold lies. With age comes wisdom, and at 36 years old I am no longer so blindly led as to believe without question. From my arrival last November at Fort Campbell, in Kentucky, talk of deployment was heard, and as that talk turned to actual preparation, my heart sank and my doubts grew. My doubts have never faded; instead, it has been my resolve and my commitment that have. My time here is almost done, as well as that of many others with whom I have served. We have all faced death in Iraq without reason and without justification. How many more must die? How many more tears must be shed before Americans awake and demand the return of the men and women whose job it is to protect them, rather than their leader's interest? � Tim Predmore is a US soldier on active duty with the 101st Airborne Division, based near Mosul in northern Iraq. A version of this article appeared in the Peoria Journal Star, Illinois" http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/ 0,2763,1045345,00.html  "There is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is little incentive for him to make common cause with them. Don't attack Saddam. It would undermine our antiterror efforts." Brent Scowcroft National Security Advisor to Presidents Gerald Ford & George Bush senior Wall Street Journal, 15 Aug 2002 |