|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:03 PM Original message |
Poll question: Should an American Soldier, 2008, be allowed to refuse to report for duty without consequence? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:07 PM Response to Original message |
1. I oppose the war, but ending the conflict is our job, not the military's |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:10 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. I certainly agree with that last bit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:13 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. spot on post... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
midnight (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:09 PM Response to Original message |
2. Yes......When the consitution has been violated it is a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:12 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. Your concept of "protect us from domestic enemies" is that any GI should interpret the Constitution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:35 PM Response to Reply #5 |
24. Former "grunt" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:43 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. What if this soldier decided the time to have this Constitutional crisis was in battle? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:00 PM Response to Reply #27 |
37. Yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:13 PM Response to Reply #2 |
8. What part of the Constitution did it violate? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:10 PM Response to Original message |
4. I'd be real interested in hearing what form of twisted logic would lead one to think it's okay. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedCappedBandit (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:12 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. What was in that oath? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:13 PM Response to Reply #6 |
7. Google is your friend: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:15 PM Response to Reply #6 |
11. Well part of it is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:20 PM Response to Reply #11 |
15. Yeah. I don't see anything in there that allows for cold feet, change of heart, or moral epiphanies. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedCappedBandit (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:30 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. From your link: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:34 PM Response to Reply #19 |
23. Lets put them together |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
atreides1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:56 PM Response to Reply #23 |
36. Let's Put them together completely |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:05 PM Response to Reply #36 |
50. The key part of that post was this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:47 PM Response to Reply #15 |
29. I should have read further |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:51 PM Response to Reply #29 |
34. Presumably you also detest people who dare to disagree with you. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:25 PM Response to Reply #29 |
49. "Obviously you have no respect for our soldiers." Thank you, Karl Rove. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tomg (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jun-17-08 11:49 AM Response to Reply #29 |
95. Dogtown, great posts. You nailed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-18-08 12:57 PM Response to Reply #95 |
96. Thanks, tomg |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jody (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:14 PM Response to Original message |
10. Uniformed employees of DoD are the only people in the U.S. who cannot quit their job and any attempt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:17 PM Response to Reply #10 |
12. Ummm civi's can quit any time they wish |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:18 PM Response to Reply #12 |
13. I think the key word there was "uniformed" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:32 PM Response to Reply #13 |
20. Ack... For some reason I read UnInformed.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:36 PM Response to Reply #20 |
25. Heh. Given the amount of disinfo the Republicans feed them, you're not far off. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jody (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:25 PM Response to Reply #12 |
18. I carefully said "Uniformed employees". Have a nice day. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:33 PM Response to Reply #18 |
21. You did and my lying eyes saw UnInformed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jody (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:05 PM Response to Reply #21 |
51. UnInformed was a Freudian slip but in many cases it may be an apt descriptor. See a LTTE below |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thothmes (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:33 PM Response to Reply #10 |
74. In which case did the SCOTUS make the ruling you refer to? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jody (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:21 PM Response to Reply #74 |
82. Mea culpa, I should have said the Ninth court of appeals said “stop-loss” was legal and the case was |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:19 PM Response to Original message |
14. Yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:25 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. The key words might be "Without Consequence" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:33 PM Response to Reply #17 |
22. Soldiers don't have to follow illegal orders now...and it is supposed to be without consequences |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:42 PM Response to Reply #22 |
26. An order to show up for duty isn't an illegal order. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:47 PM Response to Reply #26 |
30. Didn't say it was did I? I'll answer..Nope, sure didn't....on both counts, actually |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:50 PM Response to Reply #30 |
31. I don't konw whether they should or not - i admire those who do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:09 PM Response to Reply #31 |
40. For one, why would you want a piss poor soldier working with your soldier? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:17 PM Response to Reply #40 |
43. You may have something there |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:21 PM Response to Reply #43 |
47. But they aren't vetoing the order...just not being a part of it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:35 PM Response to Reply #47 |
56. Well it would depend on your reasons |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solly Mack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:52 PM Response to Reply #56 |
59. In Germany it has to be a good valid conflict...and I imagine |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:50 PM Response to Reply #17 |
33. Not if it violates the law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:52 PM Response to Reply #33 |
35. Being ordered to show up for duty is not an illegal order and it violates no law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:06 PM Response to Reply #35 |
38. Refusing ordered to muster |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:09 PM Response to Reply #38 |
41. It might well be - but should it be an act without consequence? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogtown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:18 PM Response to Reply #41 |
44. Since you want to nitpick, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:21 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. It's not a nitpick - it's the fundemental question. It's what I asked in the first place. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richard Steele (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:23 PM Response to Original message |
16. Well, that would depend upon the "duty" in question, wouldn't it? nm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
datasuspect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:45 PM Response to Original message |
28. series? you're question doenst make sense |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 02:50 PM Response to Reply #28 |
32. How would you have framed it? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:07 PM Response to Original message |
39. If the orders they receive are of an illegal nature, yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:12 PM Response to Original message |
42. Any human being should have the absolute right to refuse to kill. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:19 PM Response to Reply #42 |
45. We don't have a draft currently. People who join the military thinking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 03:24 PM Response to Reply #45 |
48. Nevertheless, they should have the right to refuse or leave. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:12 PM Response to Reply #48 |
54. Im sorry I disagree with you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:14 PM Response to Reply #54 |
55. What about the soldier's liberty to live by his conscience? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:51 PM Response to Reply #55 |
58. OK - I'm not going to pay my mortgage on my house |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:57 PM Response to Reply #58 |
61. Tell me how it works out. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 05:00 PM Response to Reply #61 |
63. No they had the Court-Martial Execution rate, but fortunately I didn't check that box. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:08 PM Response to Reply #42 |
52. If you really dont want to kill |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:11 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. The obvious answer to you comments on dishonarable is in your question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:49 PM Response to Reply #53 |
57. without reference to this particular war of aggression |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:56 PM Response to Reply #57 |
60. Which would probably be the reason the guys trying to kill them are using. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bryant69 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 04:58 PM Response to Reply #60 |
62. Is it fair to say that you oppose the existence of an American Military? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 05:02 PM Response to Reply #62 |
64. I oppose the existence of any military. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 05:26 PM Response to Reply #60 |
67. Just because its not always true does not mean it is never true. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:16 PM Response to Reply #67 |
69. Morality is always decided by the individual. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:26 PM Response to Reply #69 |
71. Yet it is possible (and necessary) to make moral judgments notwithstanding that subjectivity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:47 PM Response to Reply #71 |
76. Again, morality is determined by each individual. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:53 PM Response to Reply #76 |
77. With all due respect, the position you're taking is sophistry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:11 PM Response to Reply #77 |
80. The position you're relying on is indulging in is subjective morality. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:14 PM Response to Reply #80 |
81. So I'll ask you directly--do you think there is any difference |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:23 PM Response to Reply #81 |
85. Of course. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:31 PM Response to Reply #85 |
88. The nice thing about my position is that I don't have address the close calls. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:28 PM Response to Reply #81 |
87. Thanks for the interesting discussion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:32 PM Response to Reply #87 |
89. Thank you as well. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jun-17-08 11:30 AM Response to Reply #76 |
94. Umm do we have a draft I dont know about? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jun-17-08 11:27 AM Response to Reply #69 |
93. Are you kidding? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DadOf2LittleAngels (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jun-17-08 11:25 AM Response to Reply #53 |
92. I defense of another? I absolutely can.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 05:20 PM Response to Reply #42 |
65. I agree. That's why they do. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:23 PM Response to Reply #65 |
70. Who decides when killing is "legal" if not the individual? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:31 PM Response to Reply #70 |
72. You're arguing with straw men |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:55 PM Response to Reply #72 |
78. The state deprived me of that right when I was in the military. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:07 PM Response to Reply #78 |
79. Um, okay. Sorry that you got a raw deal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:22 PM Response to Reply #79 |
83. I didn't get 'screwed". I was able to refuse because of the circumstances. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raskolnik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:26 PM Response to Reply #83 |
86. The OP asked "Should an American Soldier, 2008, be allowed to refuse to report for duty... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
theboss (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 09:59 PM Response to Reply #83 |
91. At that point, they cease being soldiers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
theboss (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 09:56 PM Response to Reply #42 |
90. Why would a solider join the military if they refuse to kill? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brigid (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 05:22 PM Response to Original message |
66. I'm kind of torn about this one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cabbage08 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 06:09 PM Response to Original message |
68. Bottom line soldiers obey orders |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
galledgoblin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:31 PM Response to Original message |
73. no, but the circumstances should be taken into account |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 07:36 PM Response to Original message |
75. This was a fascinating poll question and discussion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SoCalDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-16-08 08:23 PM Response to Original message |
84. Nope.. there is no draft. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:32 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC