It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Our soldiers have done what was asked of them by the American public, through its representatives. Until we have enough solidarity, and intestinal fortitude, as a people to demand these wars and actions come to a complete stop. Then our lack of action is the same as permission.
don't have the free time, energy (its all being spent trying to keep from going under treading water), or for some, the warrior status, in them to fight for freedom.
have the right to live peacefully, will peacefully and expect PEACE.
Carreau
reply to post by Unity_99
don't have the free time, energy (its all being spent trying to keep from going under treading water), or for some, the warrior status, in them to fight for freedom.
If you don't have the "free time" energy or the courage to fight, you neither deserve or should receive freedom. You deserve to get exactly what you DO have "free time" energy and courage for: nothing.
have the right to live peacefully, will peacefully and expect PEACE.
There is no such "right" on this planet and there never was. The only "right" you have to to get what you are willing to sacrifice for and with you it looks like nothing.
I didn't take an oath to defend the Constitution. I didn't sign any contract to the American people. Just because I was born in thr US doesn't mean I have to fight for anything.
Is there anyone posting that can DENY that everyone involved in Iraq is guilty...BY LAW....of war crimes??
Really? So people who are forced to work round the clock, and in the US in some states, forced to do this even when they haven't stopped bleeding after childbirth, with poor health, low pay, and substandard living conditions for many, are supposed to change the world?
I didn't take an oath to defend the Constitution. I didn't sign any contract to the American people. Just because I was born in thr US doesn't mean I have to fight for anything.
imasheep
As I seem to be retorting the same lame comments about following orders and the obligations of uniformed personnel, I decided to finally put this topic to rest.
Noone can retort what follows. Its all law, readily found if you'd like to call me on it. The law is the law...ignorance of it is no excuse.
Article 90 of the Uniformed Code of Justice
"One has a duty to follow LEGAL orders of superiors. Any serviceman who follows any unlawful order will be prosecuted.
The Supreme Court has ruled on this stating that,"Servicemen act at their own peril when obeying orders."
United States v Keenan
Keenan obeyed an order to kill an unarmed Vietnamese Citizen. He was found guilty of violating his oath to the Constitution and sentenced to life in prison.
The Military Court of Appeals held that,"The justification of acts done persuant to orders DOES NOT EXIST if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be ILLEGAL."
According to the Manual for Court Martials:
"An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful...This inference does not apply to ANY ILLEGAL order such as one that directs the commission of ANY crime. (Article 93)
UCMJ 892.ART.92(1)
"Military personnel have an obligation to follow any lawful order, BUT...they also have the duty and moral obligation to DISOBEY any unlawful orders, including direct orders from POTUS" "The moral and legal obligation is to the Constitution of the US."
The Constitution is CLEAR..."All treaties signed by the Government are equivalent to the law of the land itself." (Article 6 paragraph 2)
1948-Nuremberg :
The chief prosecutor stated the following: "The very essence of the Nuremberg Charter is that individuals have intentional duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience to the individual State."
Now thst I've given unequivocal proof of what the LAW and US CONSTITUTION states, lets proceed to drive the final nail in the coffin that is this discussion:
The Iraq war was UNCONSTITUTIONAL at the onset. There's all kinds of legal references which state this fact, but I will use just one. The UN has ruled that pre-emptive war in the name of Democracy violates every treaty of war that nations have signed.
So...if the decision is made that the orders to begin or continue the war are illegal, then each bomb dropped is a war crime, each bomb loaded is a war crime, each support effort will be aiding and abetting a crime. Each death, especially those of civilians is a war crime...not collateral damage.
Given that over 50% of Iraqi citizens are under the age of 16, it is a war against children and a crime against humanity.
Having proven beyond a doubt that the LAW states unlawfuul orders aren't to be followed, I again say that anyone who participated in Iraq or Afghanistan violated the Constitution and their contract to the American people and should receive NO benefits whatsoever. There is no reasonable argument which allows for any retort.
I leave you with this quote from Albert Einstein:
"If just 2% of the military refused to participate, the wars could not continue"
Quit thinking with emotion. The law is the law and it applies to everyone without regard and ignorance is no excuse. You don't have to like it, but like you are all saying...vote it out, but until then, you are obligated. to follow it.
imasheep
reply to post by ripcontrol
You'd have a case if my thread had anything to do with medical care for injuries. It doesn't.
Low interest loans, free (or nearly free) college, tax free groceries, are other freebies that are just given away.
Lets make an analogy...see if you can take your blinders off and follow it:
Almost all of you have claimed that Obama should be impeached for abusing power and willfully violating both the Constitution and the oath He took to protect the document.
How is that any different than what I am claiming?? I remember when that drone took out those American Citizens. There were threads with a hundred flags about it going at the time. The call was that it was treason.
It was...perpetrated by the Commander and Cheif of the Armed Forces. By proxy, anyone who had direct knowledge of the event beforehand, or was culpable in helping it happen, is guilty of treason. Hence, they violated their contract and none should ever get ANY benefit paid to them. By doing so...We The People become accessories after the fact, and by allowing it....We make it clear that We condone it.
Funny thing about the rule of law...it applies to everyone...or its supposed to...otherwise, what's the point of this Republic? Why should one group have more Liberties than another? If I violate a contract, rule of law dictates I will not get any benefits associated with the contract. It should apply accross the board...and there's really no justifiable retort to that that makes any sense in reality.