Pregnant Mom Of 4 Sentenced To Prison For Refusing To Serve In Iraq

reply to post by Reaper2137


And where's your outrage at people getting called up over and over, regardless of whether they are

- injured
- disabled
- pregnant
- mentally unstable

Hmm?

The more I read the opinions from soldiers here, the more I'm convinced that the military turns out far more sheep than the mass media. Unfortunately for us civilians, some of these people have pretty much devolved into something less than human.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag

No one is saying she deserves her punishment for changing her mind due to maternal instincts. It's the way she handled it that got her into hot water.

As some have already pointed out, if she had only spoken to her chain of command about her concerns, they most likely would have accommodated her.

But did she? No, she deserted and went into hiding. That's what the whole deal is about.

Originally posted by Redwhiteandblue
She had already served, it's not like she went awol. After the war she realized she is not serving her country, but serving Halliburton.

No, she had not "already served." She deserted while on leave during her first deployment during her first enlistment. She had not completed her military service obligation, she had not completed her contractual active duty requirement, she had not even completed a single deployment. She did not desert "after the war," but in 2007, and none of the material quoted here says anything about Halliburton. You are projecting your own prejudices onto someone else's actions.

reply to post by EllaMarina


Again, black and white with absolutely nothing in-between.

That is the mindset of a sheep.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


Laws are laws, you either choose to follow them or not. Please, what part of her case do you believe should excuse her from charges?

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Reaper2137

 

And where's your outrage at people getting called up over and over, regardless of whether they are

- injured
- disabled
- pregnant
- mentally unstable

Hmm?

The more I read the opinions from soldiers here, the more I'm convinced that the military turns out far more sheep than the mass media. Unfortunately for us civilians, some of these people have pretty much devolved into something less than human.

Yes, just divert and dodge. Injured soldiers? Well if they got two arms, two legs and all their digits, they they are good to go. I went more than once, and am have P.T.S.D my mind set was to go so others don't have to. I willing went, and didn't have to wait to be called up.

Mentally unstable? elaborate on please, are we talking plain ole PTSD, or more serious conditions, that is a case by case.

Pregnant, you will find is a very hot button issue for most soldiers, both male and female. I and a lot of my comrades, spent a lot of time, trying to gain combat roles, for women, and this has now become a hot button issue, because women come in, just for the pay, and have no intention on keeping their end up.

They degrade other women in uniform, each situation is different, but The military is just now getting around to implement women in combat roles.

news.yahoo.com...

When women pull this crap trying to say, that she is pregnant and deserves special treatment for her mistake. It makes all women's jobs that much harder, and makes the brass that much more resistant to change.

Women should be treated no different than men, when it comes to commitment. Had this been a single father going to military prison for ten months, I don't think you would be posting in this thread.

reply to post by EllaMarina


Conscientious objection?

Second line.

reply to post by Reaper2137


You have two choices there, comrade.

Either answer my question or get off of your high horse.

This really All about a Victimized Criminal Who Breached Contract.

Sound Cold?

Sure it does.

Apparently she did not read the fine print in the contract. I suspect she was blinded by the Signing Bonus, which can be quite appealing to some.

Now let's put it in a different perspective.. .. . . .

Say you hire a Construction Contractor to do some remodeling on your house. They typically require a deposit OR a portion of the quote up front. After you hand them the money they say thanks and ride off into the sunset and wave goodbye. That is the last you see of your money, which is Quite Often the case. Then you have to pursue them criminally and civilly, which also is usually the case.

In my neck of the woods, Shady Contractors are being sent to prison pretty regularly.

How does this situation differ?

I am only curious because how can it be good for one and not another?

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


Oh Please. . .. .

Objectors Don't Willingly Join. They are Drafted.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


I can understand that. I'd be a softhearted objector myself in the military.... if I were forced to join up and at the same time didn't know what I might be asked to do.

But there would be a big difference between me and her. I'd talk and ask for a reassignment or a discharge. She chose to leave via a pointless crime. Why didn't she act honorably? Who knows.

I wonder if someone who actually is or has recently been deployed to the combat zones overseas could clarify something for me?

It's been my impression that there ARE ways to get yourself out of this sort of a situation....from within the system and within the laws each signed up to follow and gave an Oath for? Perhaps I'm wrong and the system is just indifferent to a near foolish extreme, but isn't it in the military's best interest to help someone OUT of the system if they absolutely, 100% and with some real conviction, do NOT want to be there? (As opposed to no one 'really wants to be here' kind of thing)

I imagine that all includes being deployed, as scheduled and obligated, then fighting the issue from over there... but it strikes me as odd that any branch would actually keep someone 'against their will' as it basically amounts to? They'd likely turn to doing damage from within and outright sabotaging things. Oh..Not like an enemy or anything...but there are a thousand little ways to make sure important things don't work as they need to.

Vets or active people, am I wrong in assuming she would have had avenues other than just going AWOL like the legal obligations she signed into didn't exist?

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Reaper2137

 

You have two choices there, comrade.

Either answer my question or get off of your high horse.

I did answer your question, you just didn't like the answer, but I will answer it again for you in more detail.

- injured
As I said, If they have two arms and two legs and all their digits than they should continue to serve. I was injured in Iraq, I have extensive nerve damage though out my back, yet given the chance I would rejoin. I'm out raged, that Injured soldiers, who wish to continue to serve are denied the opportunity to do so.
- disabled
I am disabled, I am out raged on how they are treated after they get out, and I"m also out raged that we can not continue to serve.
- pregnant
As I said, some one who give others a bad name, have used it as an excuse so much, that it has become a major problem. Which causes other women, who wish to serve in combat roles a harder time, I understand accidents happen, but in the Military when it comes to deployments, the number of pregnancy's skyrocket. Statistics if you wish to look them up will back me up.

- mentally unstable
Once again, it depends on the problem, I have P.T.S.D and I would rejoin in a heart beat if they would let me. There are those, who have more severe problems, that slip through the cracks, my cousin hit his head, in the Air Force, and developed schizophrenia some time later. He is out raged that he was not allowed to continue to serve.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I wonder if someone who actually is or has recently been deployed to the combat zones overseas could clarify something for me?

It's been my impression that there ARE ways to get yourself out of this sort of a situation....from within the system and within the laws each signed up to follow and gave an Oath for? Perhaps I'm wrong and the system is just indifferent to a near foolish extreme, but isn't it in the military's best interest to help someone OUT of the system if they absolutely, 100% and with some real conviction, do NOT want to be there? (As opposed to no one 'really wants to be here' kind of thing)

I imagine that all includes being deployed, as scheduled and obligated, then fighting the issue from over there... but it strikes me as odd that any branch would actually keep someone 'against their will' as it basically amounts to? They'd likely turn to doing damage from within and outright sabotaging things. Oh..Not like an enemy or anything...but there are a thousand little ways to make sure important things don't work as they need to.

Vets or active people, am I wrong in assuming she would have had avenues other than just going AWOL like the legal obligations she signed into didn't exist?

There are ways out of it, it depends on the unit commander and individual unit S.O.P but you can request a transfer, to another area of operations. You just have to be willing to work with your unit and chain of command. Also one has to go through, the proper channels.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


YES, .. Definitely so.

There are many avenues.

You can either go through your Chain of Command, Or, you can contact the JAG assigned to your unit.

I know a girl who is a Lesbian and she tried to use that to get out. I didn't work. So, she wrote a letter to a Congressman. After about 6 months or so she was granted a "General Discharge".

Now she has to pay be the $25,000.00 signing bonus she received. Actually it was only $16,000.00 because they don't give it to you all at once. They make payments to you. They gave her a lump sum after signing and then so much every 6 months after.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
And what about her four (now motherless) children, what good has this sentence done them!

What good has this sentence done anyone?

It shows other would-be deserters that AWOLs will not go unpunished.

And they shouldn't.

A Bullet to the Head Cures Desertion. Like I said before She is LUCKY that in today’s military they are willing to work with her. That is why she is doing prison time.

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


I should add that letting someone off easy for an objection of conscience is essentially rewarding someone for their thoughts.
No one can prove that anyone's thoughts are sincere. For all we know, this particular lady just decided she'd had enough of the overseas military life, left in the retrospectively worst way possible, and needed to make up what would seem like a good excuse for doing so. A heartbreakingly emotional reason that would appeal to the minds and souls of... dare I say it?... sheep.

like they told us , anybody who was drafted ,step forward
so if she objected then dont sign up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
oh & her getting pregnant is no big deal when i was in thats how girls chaptered out!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


Double

Post