Are their families really helping, here?

By protecting their children, are they fostering a lack of culpability?

For the LA Times story, "In Defense of Their Soldiers," by Rennie Sloan and Ellen Barry, 19OCT04:

" [Theresa] Hill [a long haul truck driver and mother of one of the soldiers involved in the recent refusal of orders] said she was certain the publicity has helped her daughter. "As soon as [Clarion-Ledger reporter] Jeremy Hudson broke the story, they were released miraculously," she said. Hill also believes that the effort has smoothed the way for soldiers to resist orders in the future.

"More soldiers are going to be standing up and saying: 'Look, this is a dangerous mission. It's going to put others in harm's way,' " said Hill, 42. "


From the Philadelphia Enquirer, "Fate Of Defiant Soldiers Undecided, Military Says," by Tini Aran, same date:

" The mission was later carried out by other soldiers from the 343d, which has at least 120 soldiers, the military said. "


So, more soldiers will be able to refuse orders, thereby giving the work that they feel is too dangerous for them to other, more dutiful soldiers. Joyous rapture.
It's a bad precedent on a slippery slope of unaccountability. I feel it's symptomatic of our current society, and I've felt the effects of it myself. If there are no repercussions to these soldiers, how can there be repercussions further down the line for others?


[quotes extracted from Early Bird news provided by Department of Defense, 19OCT04]
3,299 views 26 replies
Reply #1 Top
Fuck these fucking fuckers!
Reply #2 Top
Fuck these fucking fuckers!


Very nice! And worded... well, perfectly. Dangerous mission, huh? What about those Soldiers needing the supplies?
Maybe they were released from the tent they were held in, but this should not be the end. They had better receive some form of consequences for their actions.
Reply #3 Top

What about those Soldiers needing the supplies?

What about the soldier who completed this "suicide mission" hours after these cockmonkeys mutinied?

Reply #4 Top
Isn't almost every mission a dangerous mission though? I mean, I totally agree with you about this pseudosoldier... right on the money.
Reply #5 Top
What about the soldier who completed this "suicide mission" hours after these cockmonkeys mutinied?


That's right. I forgot to add that in.

Isn't almost every mission a dangerous mission though?


Kind of comes with being a Soldier. But, we train to make situations less dangerous and more survivable. These guys were completely wrong. They failed to follow lawful orders (at a minimum) and need to face the consequences for their choices.
Reply #6 Top
What about the soldier who completed this "suicide mission" hours after these cockmonkeys mutinied?


As a non-military person, but a student of history, there was so many other missions that people have had to engage in that were so much more dangerous than this one.... like compare driving that truck to say, going over the top at the Somme 1917....
Reply #7 Top
Kind of comes with being a Soldier. But, we train to make situations less dangerous and more survivable. These guys were completely wrong. They failed to follow lawful orders (at a minimum) and need to face the consequences for their choices.


I agree, there is a difference between making a situation less dangerous and insubordination....
Reply #8 Top
Hmm I'm not a soldier ( and will never be one ) but are they supposed to be trained to be IN dangerous areas? Weak armor IS iffy but It's not like a team of 5 soldiers with rusty spoons as a weapon sent to fight unknown but more than 100 for sure enemies?
Reply #9 Top
Hmm I'm not a soldier ( and will never be one ) but are they supposed to be trained to be IN dangerous areas? Weak armor IS iffy but It's not like a team of 5 soldiers with rusty spoons as a weapon sent to fight unknown but more than 100 for sure enemies?


I really don't know what your point is here. Are you arguing for or against the Soldiers that refused to follow lawful orders? You first question makes it sound as if we should only train our troops to act in safe places. I just plain can't understand your second question.
Reply #10 Top
As I understand it, XX is against them refusing to do the mission.
Reply #11 Top
As I understand it, XX is against them refusing to do the mission


Good enough for me. I must be too tired tonight... words getting blurry...
Reply #12 Top
Is it not a know fact that many people join the Army for less than honorable reasons. It should not surprise us if they act exceedingly less than honorable when their self-centered bodies are called upon to step out of their safe zone for the good of others? Shame on them! Honor to those who do serve well.
Reply #13 Top

Fuck these fucking fuckers!


Yeah, what he said.


I had the same thoughts when I heard about what they had done...what about the soldiers who completed what these asswipe losers refused to?  It's not like they were being sent on an unneccessary supply run, they were taking food water and fuel to other soldiers.  Did they even have a thought for those who they were supposed to be taking the supplies to?  Or did they not care?


Here's another thought I had...why does it always seem to be Reservists who make the news for doing shit like this?  When was the last time you heard about a group of proper soliders (full timers, in other words) refusing orders en masse?


As for the families...they tend to not know squat about the way the military and the military judicial system works, but go off half cocked squawking about things they know nothing about (like Mrs Hill and Mrs England did).  No, I don't think they help at all.

Reply #14 Top
Again the choir chimes in by shouting,
Fuck these fucking fuckers!

Reply #15 Top
You get an insightful from me on this one.  The part about it being symptomatic of current society is spot on.  Everyone seems to think that they are more important than everyone else these days.  I have not one ounce of respect for anyone who would disregard their responsibility knowing full well that they would just be handing it over to someone else.  Sorry, my life is much more important than yours....bull flop!  People like that should be publicly flogged and humiliated including the parents.  If my sons join the military, they will be expected to do their duty and be there for their fellow soldiers.  Noone will have their back if they turn tail and run.
Reply #16 Top
I think the world needs another Patton... someone who would just up and slap someone....
Reply #17 Top
I heard on NPR today that disciplinary action was being taken. I'm not a soldier, so I won't deign to tell any soldier how to do his/her job. But when my boss tells me to do something I don't want to do, I do it anyway. I know that's not the same as being in the military. But we here in civilian life don't hear about the thousands of soldiers who do their jobs every day. Yet we hear about this group who refused. I think there's something wrong here.
Reply #18 Top
Hmm my post may be a little ambiguous, but basically I said this:

If they are trained to be in dangerous areas, they cannot protest based on how dangerous the mission is. But what makes it worse is that their mission weren't that dangerous anyway.
Reply #19 Top
Fuck these fucking fuckers!


Good, but too subtle for how I feel. Where's a political commissar with a pistol when you need one? Shoot the ringleaders, and the rest will fall in line. Besides, didn't you say (at work) that the people that actually did the mission for these losers took no fire, and suffered no casualties?

"Come home with your shield, or on it."
-mother of a soldier, ancient sparta-
Reply #20 Top
If they had been in an infantry squad in a combat situation, and had refused to advance while others did it would be "In the Heat" and worthy of worse than a fucking.
Reply #21 Top
we're not hearing a lot over here about this thing, at least not through official channels, I heard about it today reading the Yahoo news. You're right, though, Pseudo. There needs to be long lasting and very public repercussions for this. I don't know all the details, but around here, "it's too dangerous" describes just about anything, and it is never an excuse for refusing a mission.
Reply #22 Top

I don't know all the details, but around here, "it's too dangerous" describes just about anything, and it is never an excuse for refusing a mission.


Exactamundo.  If it was so dangerous, how come none of the relief convoy got hurt? 


 

Reply #23 Top
Good to see a post from you, from forward, especially about this incident. Thanks for chiming in, and keep your head down, Wanderer.
Reply #24 Top
As a former reservist (SCARNG) who trained right beside the 24th INF ( '80-'86 )I am so ashamed of these gutless, selfish, poor excuses for human waste, that the proper vulgarity to call them cannot come to mind.
My recollection of the military utililization of reserves is that of "round out", during Desert Storm my old unit ( 1/263rd Armor ) was a FAD 3 attached to the 24th Inf Div. they were sent to the NTC and mothballed by politicians, never deployed.
They're were upset, dissapointed, and overall inraged at not being trusted to proform their mission.
That is the spirit of the reserves that I remember, not whinning, cowards refusing to do their sworn duty.
Reply #25 Top
One of our soldiers wound up over in Kuwait working as a mechanic... and odd assignment for a Korean linguist, but he did his job. He said that the Reserve and National Guard units that he had contact with (he wound up issuing them spare parts to fix their trucks) were actually head-and-shoulders above the unit that he was assigned to, and a few other Active units as well.
While I'm certain there may be whole units of malingering fucks in the Reserves, I have some faith that the majority of them are patriotic individuals who want to do their job (and then go home). Cheers to those folks.