The soldier who refused to fight. CO applies for refugee status in Canada

[JohnyCanuck]

The U.S. Army wants him in Fort Bragg, N.C., home of the 82nd Airborne Division, "America's Guard of Honor." But this week Mr. Hinzman, 25, passed the 30-day limit for being absent without leave. He officially became a deserter.

Just before midnight on Jan. 2, he and his wife, Nga Nguyen, 31, quietly loaded their 21-month-old son, Liam, and a few belongings into their 1996 Chevrolet Prism and disappeared into the darkness for a 17-hour drive to the Canadian border. They left just before his unit -- the second battalion of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment -- was shipped overseas.

<snip>

As a result, Mr. Hinzman is believed to be the first U.S. soldier to apply for refugee status in Canada after refusing combat duty in Iraq -- the first echo of the 12,000 deserters and 20,000 draft resisters who came north more than 30 years ago to escape the Vietnam War.

Jeffrey House, picked by Mr. Hinzman from a list of lawyers provided by the Quakers, says the first thing his new client asked was whether U.S. officials could cross the border and take him back.

They can't. They never could. But other things have changed. In the Vietnam era, the federal government never declared fugitives from the military to be refugees; it just didn't look too closely at how they got into the country or qualified as landed immigrants. Mr. Hinzman isn't likely to receive the same laissez-faire scrutiny.

I feel sorry for this guy, but I am not optimistic he'll be allowed to stay in Canada. The new Canadian PM, Paul Martin, has made it clear he wants to overcome the negative image that Dubya has of Canada after it became evident that the previous PM, Jean Chretien, and Dubya didn't get along. Martin has close ties to the business community and now that Canada's economy is more dependent than ever on trade with the US, the business leaders and CEO's are placing heavy pressure on Martin and all Canadian politicians to kiss Georgy Boy's ass and not to do anything to piss off the US government. I can't see Canada accepting deserters and draft dodgers like they did in the Viet Nam era.

The Soldier Who Refused to Fight

[Malva Zebrina]

1. Hinzman is welcome to use my house as an underground railroad.

my house is open to him and his family and any others who feel as he does. I have several acres in which Quakers or those objecting to this illegal war, and desiring to protect thier families, can hide from the AWOL commander in chief, insane idiot who was not elected and who loves sending our children to die for his oil buddies.

Open to anyone resisting this fascist despicable man, George Bush and his family--that includes the vacant, rictus smiling wife and the two stupid daughters.

[Legate]

2. While I did not and do not support the war.

He should be punished harshly. What exactly did he think he was getting when he signed on the dotted line? He wasn't conscripted and there are other options he could have pursued.

[Malva Zebrina]

3. I don't think jhe signed on to obey the orders of an insane man

much like those who were under Hitler.

No, he has the obligation to his own conscience to refuse to follow evil and kill for a man like Bush who did not fulfill his own obligations during a war.

Nope, a man with a family is not obliged to follow an illegal invasion and is not obliged to follow an evil man.

[ldoolin]

4. So...

Hitler's soldiers didn't have a duty to disobey?

"But...I was just following orders."

Desertion from the military should be completely legal. It's the same as quitting your job if you work for the police department or fire department.

[PVnRT]

5. Not if you sign a contract

Which is what happens when you enlist.

What this brings to light is just how difficult and byzantine it is to get CO status, which is absolutely ridiculous.

[ldoolin]

6. Then let the military sue, then...

...and seek civil damages against the person who quit their job before their contract was up. That is the only extent the military should be allowed to go.

Also, CO status should be much easier to get. No argument there. But that would involve changing the regulations to allow for selective objection to a particular war, and to allow for objection on political grounds as well as religious. It's only a small step from there to making joining the military just like signing on with the police department or fire department. No enlistment period, it would be like hiring on for any other high-risk job. And why not?

[Columbia]

8. Why not?

There are many reasons.

Conscientious objectors are not allowed to enlist in the military period. There is no changing your mind after you sign that contract. I don't buy the "I never thought I'd actually have to go to war" bit at all either. You sign the contract, you fulfill it, otherwise you pay the consequences.

You cannot just opt-out of a particular duty just because you don't like it. That would be antithetical to military discipline and would undermine the effectiveness of the fighting force.

[Malva Zebrina]

10. right, it certainly would

and they could not kill innocent children and babies after they are ordered because they signed a contract and they are obliged to follow the orders of an insane man who, BTW, went AWOL himself and saved his own skin with the help of his well positioned daddy.

Yup--once you sign the damn thing, you become an non feeling murderer and have no control over it. You are a pawn of a madman and have no control over your life.

Bullshit.

[Columbia]

11. One is not obligated to follow an unlawful order

Like your baby-killer meme/strawman.

[Malva Zebrina]

12. in this case the strawman is the meme that once you sign on to the militar

you have signed on to follow the orders of a madman , whoever it is at the time. You have signed on to kill, without proper justification, tens of thousands of babies, toddlers, women, old men and children. Right?

No one, no conscientious person, is required to follow the barbaric orders of a madman. If they leave and forgo that "priveledge" then I open my house to them.

I would suggest that -people not encourage thier children to join the military and be brain washed into thinking that killing means "freedom"

I would encourage parents to instill intothier children a sense of world connection and responsibility and a sense of bonding or community with other human beings the world over.

We do not exist here in this country as an island, separate and apart from the world. WE do need to study and to embrace others in the world--we need to discard the notion that everything about our culture, is the right way to go and we need to understand why that is so. That of course takes a rather above average intelligence--in the curiousity as well as the motivation to publish that fact.

[Columbia]

13. I'm tired

of all the uninformed anti-military diatribes I see here so often. It's obvious you don't know the first thing about people in the military, otherwise you wouldn't be denigrating them so.

[Malva Zebrina]

14. perhaps I don't but I do know the first thing about being a human being

and I am sorry that you are tired.

I am also tired, but nevertheless, I will defend those in the military who would reject this idiot of a president and seek to protect themselves and their families as well as their sense of propriety in not following the orders of fascists and insane leaders.\


There is NO country in the world that can attack the United States.
there is NO threat from anywhere at all and no one around that can annhilate us.

Our military has no business attacking other countries in order to get their stuff and has no business making up excuses for the murders of thousands of their civilians, fifty percent of whom, are most likely children or babies or toddlers.

No excuse for it.

Those who do not want to follow those barbaric orders are in my opinion, real heroes and I open my house to them should they need a place to rest on their way to political safety in Canada.

I am not about to sanction George Bush as a commander in chief, when his entire foreign policy is one of murder, killing and plunder and when he himself has not an outstanding record of military service to this country.

Not in my name, thank you

[Columbia]

15. They are human beings too

And sensitive to the plight of the Iraqis and proud to help them build their country free from oppression. No amount of your rhetoric can take that away.

[JohnyCanuck]

18. And they're doing such a fine job of helping the Iraqis too.

Too bad the Iraqis are so unappreciative.

The man who lived there, Ahmed Khalif Salman, opened the front door, and a soldier shot him in the chest immediately. The soldiers brought him--still alive--outside to lie bleeding in the front yard. Then, the soldiers ordered everyone out of the house and ransacked it, stealing money and jewelry, and breaking furniture.

One of Ahmed's sons told us how the soldiers tied him up while his father lay in the yard. When they were done, the soldiers wrapped Ahmed's wound, dragged him by his feet to a vehicle, threw him in and drove away. The family didn't know where their husband and father was taken, and they searched for him at detention centers and hospitals.

They finally learned that Ahmed had died, and that the soldiers had dropped off his body at a hospital. Ahmed was 46 years old and had five children. Fadela, Ahmed's wife, told us, "Every family is suffering from this occupation."

Throughout the week, we heard other stories about U.S. raids and Iraqis being detained. The details are all the same: the soldiers come in the night, kick down the door, order everyone outside, loot the house, take the father or son, and leave. I thought of the families that I spoke with as I watched President Bush's State of the Union address and heard him talk about U.S. forces conducting "midnight raids" in Iraq.

http://www.counterpunch.org/smith02052004.html

[Columbia]

22. They are indeed

There are countless stories of appreciative Iraqis, I've met many of them myself.

As for the article you linked to, it is one that is put out by a writer for Socialist Worker who is a member of Campus Antiwar Network and was given a guided tour by Occupation Watch. Pretty much as biased a source as you can get.

[JohnyCanuck]

25. Yeah any negative stories are just the result of lying socialist commies

I don't doubt that they are individual cases of Iraqis being helped by the US presence. While it would be nice to be able to write off all criticism of the US occupation and accounts of Iraqi's being mistreated by occupation authorities as socialist propaganda and lies, that clearly is not the case. The question is over the long term will a thriving Iraqi democracy with liberty and freedom for all emerge after the US has poked its stick in the hornets nest. Back in the 20's, the British tried to do the same thing the US is attempting to do now. They didn't have much success back then dealing with all the conflicting interests, tribes and ethnic groups and imposing a regime acceptable to Britain. Personally I don't think in the long run the US will do any better in imposing a "democratic" government acceptable to the US.

www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?pid=1218

Hilfiker, a poverty doctor for many years and also the author of, among other works, Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen, reported for Tomdispatch from Iraq before the April invasion of that country and recently made his second postwar trip there as part of a Christian Peacemaker Team delegation. (The Christian Peacemakers now have a permanent presence in Baghdad.) He is a sober and fair man, ready to consider all sides of any matter. Here is his report on one local incident, a single close-to-the-ground encounter between Iraqis and their occupiers. I commend it to you. Tom

An Excerpt from Hilfikers account of his recent visit.


Under Saddam," one of the lawyers had said, "there were certainly many human rights abuses. So, at the beginning, we were pleased to receive the Coalition Forces and even welcomed the use of force to remove Saddam. But now they treat us badly. Now, things are no different from under Saddam. The Coalition Forces have become the dictators."

Virtually everyone I talked to in Iraq claimed to have favored the U.S. intervention to overthrow Saddam. Even now, most people I spoke two in my two weeks in the country didn't want the U.S. just to pick up tomorrow and leave. "The Americans have destroyed Iraq's institutions," said even the Papal Nuncio in an interview, "so you Americans must make sure they are rebuilt." But this military occupation has brought with it a level of violence that makes reconstruction -- of institutions or lives -- impossible.

There is an absolute difference between military occupation and peacekeeping. There is simply too much violence in an occupation for genuine peacekeeping to occur. As long as the U.S. military occupies Iraq as the harsh representative of a foreign power, the resistance will increase.

Postscript: Only on returning to the United States and Googling the name Nate Sassaman did I discover that the colonel already had achieved a level of notoriety here by commenting recently to journalists, "With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them."

The thing is the US is interested in establishing "democracy" in Iraq in so far as the Iraqi government goes along with US goals in the region including establishing profitable opportunities for Georgy Boy's and Dick's cronies in the oil business and the strategic goals as layed out in the PNAC plans to establish permanent positioning of US troops in military bases in the area to exert US control over the oil resources in the region. If a Democratically elected Iraqi government said to the US thanks very much for liberating us from Saddam, but we don't want you to have permanent military bases in our country and we'd rather not make deals with Halliburton because we've seen what a bunch of war profiteers they are. Just see how long that government would be allowed to remain in control. The US has never objected to dictators, it's just the dictators they can't control that they get upset about and manufacture wars to get rid of.

President Karimov government was awarded $500m in aid from the Bush administration in 2002. The SNB (Uzbekistan's security service) received $79m of this sum.

The U.S. State Department web site states "Uzbekistan is not a democracy and does not have a free press. Many opponents of the government have fled, and others have been arrested." and "The police force and the intelligence service use torture as a routine investigation technique."

Now I would like to introduce you to Muzafar Avazov, a 35-year old father of four. Mr Avazov had a visit from our presidents friends security force (SNB), the photographs below detail the brutality and inhuman treatment our tax dollars subsidize, with the full knowledge of our president and his administration

Muzafar Avazov, body showed signs of burns on the legs, buttocks, lower back and arms. Sixty to seventy percent of the body was burnt, according to official sources. Doctors who saw the body reported that such burns could only have been caused by immersing Avazov in boiling water. Those who saw the body also reported that there was a large, bloody wound on the back of the head, heavy bruising on the forehead and side of the neck, and that his hands had no fingernails.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3943.htm

[Columbia]

26. Yes, if that's all they look for

You can dredge up any number of anti-occupation stories and you will not convince me that the Iraqi people are not better off now. And I may never change your mind either, but you have not had the chance to speak to real Iraqis who suffered under Saddam. You haven't heard the personal stories of those who had family and friends who were tortured and killed under his heavy hand. You haven't seen the pictures of the ones who "disappeared" because they chose to speak out against the Ba'ath party line. Maybe if you had, you would think a bit differently on the matter.

There are problems in Iraq, and it is truly sad and disheartening that they exist. Those who do harbor anti-US sentiment and speak publicly about it are only able to do so because of the liberation. Also, most of the problems are a result of a concerted effort of anti-Iraqi and US interests to create a divide and destroy their joint cause to create a stable, representative government and a strong, peaceful future. Unfortunately, a lot of the negative sentiment I hear is not so much out of concern for the Iraqi people, but for political reasons, and I think that is sad.

[Malva Zebrina]

32. let me get this straight

It is fine to attack another country, kill ten thousand of their people and then rejoice that we liberated them. Is that your premise? If it is, I think it very very sad indeed.

This is a board for Democrats only as far as I know and you think it just fine to set the precedent that an American president can lie and aggressivelu attack of false premises, in order to invade a weak country that had no weapons, no millitary to speak of and only a big bad moustached man, one who we supported not too long ago, in the way of what that president wanted--his oil and now you think it just fine that we can do that because thee people needed to be "liberated"

It sounds to me like you are on the side of George Bush and have embraced the neocon strategy.

ten thousand estimated to have been murdered, not to mention those who were maimed and thank god we liberated them. I someimes think that those who successfully can put this image out of their minds and heads have never had children-never knew the preciousness and the love one extends to their children, the hopes that ride on them, and the maturity to realize that the hopes of a better world rests with the children



http://www.robert-fisk.com/ more pictures of the American slaughter of Iraqi children here--this is no "straw man" but I suppose tacking on a moniker like that takes away some of the pain of the reality this is real human life snuffed out with American bombs--huge bombs dropped from the sky--over and over and over in an action resembling that which the evil man Hitler performed as blitzkreig--we called it Shock and Awe--on a lie of an equallu evil man who tells you he did it for the good of the Iraqi people whom needed to be "liberated" by his most fascist self--warning, these are brutally graphic

[Columbia]

34. Since you seem to have so much concern for the children

Let me ask you this. Have you ever spoken to any? Do you really know what the Iraqi people have gone through or want? Have you talked to the parents of malnourished babies dying from diarrhea because Saddam withheld medicine from his people? How about the men who had their ears cut off for deserting the army? I don't suppose you would prefer this action for your precious deserter in Canada right now? It may surprise you, but a majority of Iraqis believe that despite the temporary hardships, the war was worth it for them to be free (check Gallup polls of Baghdad). It may not have been worth it for you or in the minds of many Americans, but for Iraqis, many are forever grateful.

I said before that most people seem to care more about the politics than the actual welfare of the Iraqi people. You seem to intimate that I am not a Democrat because you believe I am for this war. Do you forget about all the Democrats that voted for the resolution? Some of them are Democratic candidates for President. In any case, I was never for the war in Iraq. Out of anybody on this board, I probably had the most to lose and am most greatly affected by it. I also do not like the policies of the sitting President, but that does not change the reality of the situation over there. I will not cross my fingers and hope that Iraq falls into civil war as I know many are probably hoping so that they can say "I told you so!" and make Bush look bad. No ma'am, there are things that are greater than politics and the Iraqi people deserve a chance at peace and freedom unhindered by US partisan interests.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

19. I see both sides of that logic...

Once you sign up, your in. There is no change of heart during wartime. It was unfortunate the soldier discovered his principles when he did.

However, I think the liberation of the Iraqis was only a secondary goal. It may have been foremost in the hearts and minds of the soldiers themselves, but its unlikely that the admisistration had such altruistic motives.

They guy saw the big picture and left. If he doesn't get the CO status, he has to come back and take his lumps. The unfortunate price of freedom.

[ldoolin]

21. I know a lot about people in the military

...and my house is open to any of them who refuse to fight in Iraq at any time.

[ldoolin]

20. Good!

That would be antithetical to military discipline and would undermine the effectiveness of the fighting force.

Good!

You don't get it do you? There shouldn't be any "fighting forces", period. War and the military are the most despicable things in the world.

If something undermines military discipline - GOOD!
If something undermines the effectiveness of organized murderers - GOOD!

If this post gets me banned from DU - GOOD! because it looks like I'm in the wrong place. Fuck the military. And fuck anyone who in any way supports it.

[Columbia]

23. While I disagree, you are entitled to your opinion

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. … A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their own free choice-is often the means of their regeneration."

- John Stuart Mill

[ldoolin]

24. J.S. Mill...

...right wing proto-libertarian of the utilitarian variety, i.e. "the end justifies the means".

I prefer Mark Twain (see "The War Prayer"), Edward Abbey ("the world will not be free until the last Soviet kommissar is strangled with the entrails of the last Pentagon officer"), Henry David Thoreau (went to jail for refusing to pay war taxes), and John Prine:

Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore
They're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
And Jesus don't like killing, no matter what the reason's for
No your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore

[mrgorth]

35. We have pro-war people on the board now?

Great.

[Muddleoftheroad]

36. Funny how people say stuff like this UNTIL they are threatened

But thanks for one of the most memorable posts ever at DU, though I would gladly forget it.

[Mari333]

9. Hes a true hero

and I tried to talk my own stepson into going to Canada. He didnt, but I wish he would have.
This isnt a war, its a bloodbath. Until you have a young one on their way over, its some abstract thing no one thinks about.
No one signed up for an illegal bloodbath based on LIES. and this occupation and fraudulent war is lie.
The troops even know it.
www.bringthemhomenow.com
www.mfso.org
www.vaiw.org

[RapidCreek]

17. He thought he was signing up to protect the United States

not to be a mercenary for Haliburton.

RC

[CrownPrinceBandar]

16. Something tells me...

you might get a few takers if things go badly in November.

Foamdad

[ComerPerro]

7. He should have filled out that "standard form"

You know, the one Dubya filled out so that he could leave the Guard in a time of war to go work on a campaign...

[Vernunft II]

27. I salute this guy

To be honest, I´m surprised it took that long until people started running. I hope CDN will let him stay.

[tkmorris]

28. It didn't take that long.

Someone had a documentary piece out at least a couple of months ago about a latino private who had gone to Vancouver rather than ship out. He was living day to day but was not having any second thoughts about his decision. The documentary didn't give any figures that I remember but it was made clear that he was not by far the only one to do this.

[Vernunft II]

31. I wonder what became of him.

Now that you mention the case I do remember vaguely I did read of this here on DU back then.

[German-Lefty]

29. Come to Germany and apply for asylum

It takes a long time (~2 years) to process a claim. You won't be allowed to work, but we'll provide you with room, board, and a little spending money.

[Vernunft II]

30. That wouldn´t work I´m afraid...

You couldn´t get recognized as "Asylant" when you come from the USA so your only chance would be to come in with a tourist visa and find a job. If your future employer goes through the trouble to prove the "Arbeitsamt" that he needs this particular person and nobody else for the job you can get a work permit and then also a permit to stay.

I have some personal experience in the field and can provide details if required.

[BiggJawn]

33. One of the post-11 Sept spasms we all went through...

...was a treaty with Canada, requiring them to send back suspected felons and "persons of interest" whether they claim refugee status or asylum or not.

This is seen by some (including me) as a mechanism to force Canada to return Draft resisters when it comes to that next year (if Chimp steals the election again)

I'm sure Mr. Hinzman would "qualify" under the treaty....