The Shotgun Blog
Thursday, November 15, 2007
No Refugee Status for Deserters
As it should be. Are these men fleeing persecution? Are they afraid the government will burst into their homes and torture or summarily execute them? Will they be imprisoned for their beliefs? Is there war in their homeland? Will they be persecuted for their religious beliefs? No, they're Americans, who joined an all volunteer military. They aren't conscripts, like in Vietnam, they joined of their own free will. Like I say, if you join the military thinking you won't get sent into a conflict, you're a fool. Sounds harsh but it's true.
Posted by Leah Dowe on November 15, 2007 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No Refugee Status for Deserters:
Take that, you Roo Paul supporters! You will not be welcome in Canada when you desert!
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-15 12:53:55 PM
All I can say is that the government had better not cave in on this one.
One could argue both sides of the issue when we accepted "draft dodgers" during Vietnam, but none of these were forced to join. What is next someone who joins the firemen and then decides to run across the border the first time there is a fire?
Turn them back immediately, for they are not welcome.
Posted by: Alain | 2007-11-15 1:15:38 PM
I hope they like Kansas! They're heading to Fort Leavenworth and the United States Disciplinary Barracks for a time, then be dishonorably discharged. That means a criminal record - and no more entry into Canada. Hence, the irony of their situation.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-15 1:23:18 PM
Draft dodging is nothing for anyone to be proud of--but these two were not draft dodgers. Draft dodging, by nature, is not volunteering.
Now, if someone was totally incompetent and could not fire a riffle, could not aim, and could not keep themselves together in even the slightest stress, then they might have an arguement for a desk job.
Sure, the enticements to join an Army are good--good pay, food, lodging, exercise rooms, medical, and education. But they joined an Army--and so have a contract to fulfill. Although one can appreciate not believing in the mission in the first place, as not everyone is for every war that a country engages in--fact remains--they should have thought about that before they signed the dotted line--because once in--that's just about it!
Of course, there have always been Army deserters. A few years back, those who desserted, were not imprisoned--they were shot on the spot. And when things got softer, they were courtmarshalled, and then executed--if that was the judgement. Prison was considered a cake-walk for those who were unwilling to serve their country.
Even in WWII, there were individuals who tried to get out of serving, by stating they were consciencious objectors--and were sent to defend freedom. Some turned out to be some of the best soldiers--because they respected life and could think while they ran.
The worst thing that will happen to those two, is they will have to clean and mark time for hours on end.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-15 2:02:29 PM
Drunken old women should keep their opinions about the battlefield to themselves.
I think these deserters have already served in Iraq, and are refusing to go back. That makes them even more credible as consciencious objectors. When they joined up the rules were different. Nobody joins the US Army thinking he'll never see combat. They would have to be historically retarded.
Since the US already hates us for not sending troops to Iraq, what difference would letting a couple of deserters go through the refugee system make?
Posted by: dph | 2007-11-15 2:11:45 PM
I think YOU are the drunk one. They volunteered - not drafted - and must obey their higher-ups. Any army can be called to war at any time.
They are now suffering the consequences of their actions. HURRAY!
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-15 2:15:31 PM
Learn you facts, dph. These guys skipped out before their deployments. They never saw combat.
Posted by: NCF TO | 2007-11-15 3:47:16 PM
One of them actually went to Afghanistan, but he applied for conscientious objector status beforehand. The rules are that you deploy with your unit while your application is processed. It was turned down on grounds of insufficient evidence. When it came time to go to Iraq, he bailed. Coward.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-15 3:58:05 PM
These guys are low life lefties who thought they could 'get' something out of the military. When the military needed something from them they yellowed out.
In civilian life these guys would be looking for a welfare trough of some kind.
JFK's words "Ask not what your country can do for you, but rather, what you can do for your country" have completely been forgotten. Too bad those were noble words. Those deserters are not noble, they are cowards of the worst kind and they should face a firing squad as they did when men were men and women weren't ruling the USA (and Canada)
Posted by: John | 2007-11-15 4:04:27 PM
If Canadians do not respect the laws and administration of justice of the USA where an American flees the US to Canada are we not saying Americans have no need to respect our laws and administation of justice where a Canadian citizen takes up residence in the USA after committing a crime in Camada.Think this one through. What if a Canadian nominally living in the US, but not a citizen, crossed into Canada, while here murdered a prominent American citizen, then slipped back south across the border. Lets say he was apprehended in Texas where the death penalty applies. How and by who should justice be applied to the murderer?
Posted by: Bob Wood | 2007-11-15 4:19:39 PM
Canada has enough home-grown morons, we don't need these two.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2007-11-15 6:32:52 PM
Shouldn't those supporting these deserters be charged with aiding and abetting known criminals?
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-15 8:07:30 PM
Anybody on here want to fight? Name the place and time.
Face it, you're all very small, insignificant, ineffectual little dweebs who've finally found a place to be big tough guys. Anonymously, of course.
Posted by: dph | 2007-11-15 9:36:28 PM
And you are a miniscule pig in monkey pijammas.
You want your knee cap wrapped around the back of your head and back--which makes you a really sick puppy.
If violence is what you really want--you'll have to go duke it out with the other morons who hang out with taliban jack and the lefties--just like you. Here, we debate--something you never learnt how to do--tragic though it may appear--as they did not teach you how to debate in jeuvy; all those dreadful years. Now that you've been out for a couple days--it must feel great. Good for you.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-15 10:57:28 PM
dph is a coward, a complete and utter coward. S/He believes there are little old ladies on here - and he wants to beat them up. dph is a pathetic little excuse for a human being.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2007-11-16 12:16:25 AM
I seem to recall that the time was that deserters were shot for their crime.
Posted by: Adam Yoshida | 2007-11-16 1:46:53 AM
They haven't shot anyone in the US military for desertion since 1945, and even then that was controversial.
What will happen to these deserters is they'll be given a few months' in Leavenworth, dishonorably discharged, and let go. They'll have a criminal record to contend with, and no veterans' benefits, but such are the consequences. The irony: they'll find entering Canada very difficult with a record.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-16 6:08:35 AM
If these guys had the courage of their convictions it would be easier to respect them. I've heard some of the more fluffy-minded compare these deserters to Ghandi. Well, Ghandi was willing to face the music for his actions, and spent rather quite a bit of time in jail. Because of this, he was respected and honoured.
I guess the left's respect can be bought pretty cheaply.
Posted by: Darrell | 2007-11-16 9:09:22 AM
i'm a 6'2", 210 lb. Teutonic Germanic. let me know where you live, and i'll kick your lillywhite, pantywaist, social liberal, cupcake ass down the steps of your gay bar.
...and, name calling aside, intellectually, we're miles ahead of you. nothing you've written has been thought provoking. you haven't been noticed until now.
...and you won't be in the future.
Posted by: shel | 2007-11-16 7:01:02 PM
sorry for muddying up the thread, Leah. i have a short temper. ;)
Posted by: shel | 2007-11-16 7:03:30 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.