« New York and Georgia High Courts Rule Against Gay Marriage | Main | Random thoughts composed at 30,000 feet over the Atlantic seaboard »

Army Officer Formally Charged

Lt. Ehren Watada was formally charged yesterday for refusing to deploy to Iraq.

SEATTLE (Reuters) - The U.S. Army filed three charges on Wednesday against an officer who refused to fight in Iraq due to objections over the legality of the war.

First Lt. Ehren Watada, who supporters say is the first commissioned U.S. officer to publicly refuse to serve in Iraq and face a military court, remained at Fort Lewis base in Washington state when his unit shipped out to Iraq on June 22.

Watada called the war and U.S. occupation of Iraq "illegal" and said participation would make him a party to war crimes.

In a statement, the Army said it had charged Watada, 28, with missing movement, contempt toward officials and conduct unbecoming an officer.

"Officers are held to a high moral and legal standard. Acts contrary to this standard may be tried by court-martial," said the Army statement.

If found guilty of all charges, Watada could face several years in confinement, dishonorable discharge and forfeiture of pay, according to the Army. The missing movement charge carries the heaviest punishment of confinement of up to two years.

Today, these anti-American, anti-war leftists hold up Ehren Watada as courageous and a hero. However, after Watada is found guilty of the charges against him and sentenced to hard labor in Leavenworth, the leftists who praise him now will still have their freedom as they abandon him and move on to their next pawn for the cause.

Update: Bryan at Hot Air makes a good point:

And yet, he joined the Army after the invasion. He joined the infantry, the root word of which means "unable to speak," hence, once you've volunteered you don't get to pick and choose the wars you fight-you go where you're assigned. And you don't join an army at war only to declare that army's main mission illegal and immoral, smearing your CINC along the way. That's a crime. He should have looked into the law before joining up.


National Cowardice Day
Fort Lewis Officer Says He Will Refuse to Go to Iraq


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Army Officer Formally Charged:

» bRight & Early linked with First Cup 07.07.06

Comments (44)

I've rarely seen a better e... (Below threshold)

I've rarely seen a better example of a "Useful Idiot"..."useful" to the Left, that is.

This soon to be incarcerated moron only joined the Army in order to make this statement. Well, some speech aint FREE...this is one of 'em.

I hope the Army throws everything they can at him...including conspiracy if they can show that he joined with this intent and discussed it with others.

so long, moron. good luck in Leavenworth!! try to keep your butt-cheeks clenched!!

And, look, Watada's also si... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

And, look, Watada's also signed on for the Troops Home Fast! hunger strike!

Hoo-rah, Watada, way to backstab your former brothers in arms!

sarcasm tag/off

Hey Justrand, there's a job... (Below threshold)

Hey Justrand, there's a job opening for you in the infantry now. (/snark)

Look, I think if you sign up for the armed forces, I think you've made your bed. But if this guy sincerely (and misguidedly) sees the war as an illegal action, then he's doing the right thing BY HIS OWN RECKONING (so don't accuse me of making excuses for him). Lock him up, yes, but he's not evil or cowardly. What's evil is a categorically unquestioning loyalty to one's commanders. I'm doing my best not to make the ad-Hitler fallacy, by which I mean I'm not calling anybody a Nazi or implying any such similarities, but here goes: we held German soldiers who committed war crimes responsible. Eichmann just followed orders. Well, so what? Even the automatons in the infantry cannot simply ignore their conscience because they are ordered to. I disagree with this guy based on facts, not on principles.

He's misguided, but he is not a traitor nor is he a coward. If anyone deserves any acrimony over this, it's the anti-war groups that used him. I'm opposed to aspects of this conflict, but I totally eschew the practice of figure-heading individuals for this exact reason. Pretty shameful.

Hmmm.Considering t... (Below threshold)


Considering this guy signed up for the US Army *after* the start of combat operations in the Iraq War, I have serious doubts about both his sincerity and his intelligence.

*shrug* what the hey. It's his butt.

Desertion in time of war ne... (Below threshold)

Desertion in time of war needs to be dealt with quickly and harshly. The day he refused to deploy with his unit he should have been courts martialed and the following day he should have been in front of a firing squad. For an officer to commit this act is even worse as he could exert a level of influence on his troops.

Anythingbutrand,Yo... (Below threshold)


You are right that no matter when he joined he has the right to disobey the law as long as he is willing to pay the penalty. I think Kim's point that it will be him who will be making little rocks from big rocks and not his supporters on the left is well made. I think justrand is very apt at pointing out the 'useful idiot' aspects of the case. It does seem somewhat inconsistant though to join up after the Iraq war started and then decide he didn't want to go.

One thing is that the Army is going light on him. They could have charged him with dessertion in the face of the enemy. That has a potential death penalty attached to it. The "missing a movement" could be applied to a sailor who got drunk and missed his ship.

We don't know if he is a coward. Is his not going prompted at all by his not wanting to face the dangers of an IED? Its hard to look inside his head.

As far as the "following orders" defense. Recognize that what the people who invoked that did was participate in the systematic execution of helpless men,women and children. I hope you aren't trying to make the jump from that to the war in Iraq. Hopefully you can understand that the moral questions concerning the war in Iraq are not nearly as clear cut.

What I would like to see is the anti-war take a similar risk as the lieutenant. Off the top of my head, I could suggest they inform the IRS that they fill out their 1040 forms but not pay the taxes by prominently indicating that they think the war in Iraq is not moral and they don't want any of their tax money to go to this. They wouldn't be able to get a cell next to the lieutenant, but I suspect we could find room for them.

Great to see a lay-person a... (Below threshold)

Great to see a lay-person applying their everyday moonbat mentality to military justice. You might want to read up ABR...
Unlike the Nazis, U.S. soldiers are NOT bound to follow UNLAWFUL orders.
Any argument that this action constitutes an UNLAWFUL order is a lame, liberal poo-flinging tantrum that I will not honor with a response.

This jackass got what he deserved. Maybe he can get a job with code pink after getting out of Leavenworth. He certainly won't be able to apply at McDonalds.

First, I'm ABR. I apologize... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

First, I'm ABR. I apologized in an earlier thread for using a couple of different names on this blog because of a lazy mistake and a lack of understanding that such a thing is not to be done. I realize why now, and won't do it again. My bad.

Secondly, LJD & y.a.j., I was as clear as possible that I was not conflating the government with the Third Reich. I stated that the Lt. has his facts wrong (the nature of the war is not as he takes it to be) and not his principles (if he were right about the facts, his actions would be morally correct). Don't call me a moonbat over that, LJD. That's possibly the most even-keeled, reasonable thing I've ever said. And what, may I ask, makes you something other than a lay person? I've read about ethical dilemmas involving conflicts between virtue and duty. I'm not an expert, but in what way is my opinion less valid than yours?

Thirdly, thank you for the polite response, y.a.j. You're right that I cannot infer his lack of cowardice, and I should not have stated that he is not in fact a coward. But he did risk being charged with desertion, which isn't something one would take lightly. I guess I was preemptively addressing accusations that he is just too scared of getting shot or blown up to go do his job. That may be the case, but again we cannot infer one way or another and all we have to go on are the statements he has made.

Guys like Watada make me se... (Below threshold)

Guys like Watada make me see red. I don't know whether he's grandstanding or just a miserable yellow coward, but either way, he should be lined up against a wall and shot. He has disgraced his uniform and stabbed his men in the back. Think about the kind of miserable piece of s*** that he must be, willing to let his men go to Iraq and risk their lives while he suddenly decides that the war is "immoral" and therefore he won't go.

Disgusting filth. If it was allowed under the UCMJ, I'd even want a Romanesque type of punishment: let his men beat him to death.

Dirty bastard.

Anythingbutrand...cute. St... (Below threshold)

Anythingbutrand...cute. Stoopid...but cute.

"Even the automatons in the infantry cannot simply ignore their conscience because they are ordered to."

automatons? I spent 8 years in the Marines, dipshit. The only "automatons" I knew were the protesters who routinely called us "Baby Killers".

"Get on that airplane over there" is NOT an "unlawful order". Period. The court will find this in a heartbeat. His "conscience" is not an issue here...nor is his "courage". Only his "intelligence"...which is completely lacking.

He'll have a couple years of being Bubba's love-slave in prison to think over his "conscience".

Personally, I sincerely hope the military brings each and EVERY charge they can against him...and that he doesn't see the outside of prison for a lonnnnng time!

There's NO DRAFT, dummy. He VOLUNTEERED...and AFTER the conflict began. He deserves each and every rectum wrenching thrust of Bubba's hips!!

So I guess we agree about e... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

So I guess we agree about everything, Justrand? I mean aside from you enjoying your somewhat sadistic vision of him being sodomized, which makes me a little uncomfortable. (You aren't supposed to delight in that sort of thing. Raping people is bad, even if you think the victim is a bad person.)

I stated, clearly I think, that the Lt. claims that this war is illegal and immoral, and thus is willing to face the consequences of not doing his job. I also stated that I think he is misguided, and am even open to the idea that he flat-out lied. I stated that those who volunteer to serve in the army, are bound by the rules of said army, which clearly implies that they are bound to accept the penalty if they violate said rules. Sometimes our internal moral compass forces us to disobey orders when we think they're wrong. Sometimes we're right to do so, and sometimes we're gravely mistaken (pacifists in WW II, for example), but in either case the motive is the same. I said that he just has his facts wrong. Or, if you will, he needs to readjust his compass, and accept that whatever he might think of this war, it's not like he would be fighting for the bad guys, or being ordered to do things that we would expect soldiers to refuse to do.

So please explain to me how you came to perceive me as an apologist for this guy. And if you're offended by the term 'automaton', then please think of a better word to describe someone who is essentially programmed and expected to obey without question. I meant no offence. Some of my friends are automatons, and have served in Afghanistan.

Sorry about the tag, but it... (Below threshold)

Sorry about the tag, but it is truly a moonbat quality to attempt to apply 'ethical dilemmas' and philosophy to the military experience.

You said Eichmann 'just followed orders'. Well, out side of what you see on Law & Order, it's NOT a valid defense in the U.S. military.

Yes, I am a soldier. THe Army doesn;t leave a lot to guesswork. If is crystal clear what is a lawful order and what is not. The code of conduct is crystal clear.

I just don;t understand how 'you guys' got to the point of thinking that the Army just makes this crap up as they go along. No wonder you think we're torturing everybody.

epador's fantasy:Rev... (Below threshold)

epador's fantasy:
Revoke his commission, and bust him down to E-1. Send him over there and tie him to the radiator of the first truck in a convoy every day. He won't have to carry a gun, and the only participation he'll get is eating Iraqi dust and bugs. I'm sure the insurgents will feel pity for him and leave his truck alone, protecting the lives of those inside more effectively than he might have as an officer. And if not, he'll find out who is immoral over there and who isn't, the hard way.

At least he did us all a fa... (Below threshold)

At least he did us all a favor and stuck to his guns. Imagine if this turd was actually smart and had planned his future out (think Gore and Kerry). He could have been voicing his concerns publicly, careful not to actually voice criticisms of elected officials (that would have still landed him in hot water), then reluctantly deployed with his unit "to take care of his men and see them safely through this illegal war" (imagine the uplifting press he would have gotten, he would have been overwhelmed by the virtual orgy of the press giving him the full monica for such courage, such resolute determination to protect his men and the press would have followed him everywhere in Iraq, reporting on his every thought and action in glowing terms). Of course no one would have trusted him and he would have probably been relegated to some unimportant task (making coffee or some gopher task in a HQ) that he couldn't screw up in a relatively safe environment (what sane solder would actually follow this guy and what sane commander would allow this idiot to command soldiers in combat). Hell, the Army might have discharged him rather than having him around in Iraq. He could have done his time in Iraq and returned home, separated from the Army, and then become the new Jesse MacBeth (tons of unsubstantiated war crime stories intertwined with his personal heroism and virture), peddling stories like John Kerry before Congress, and been nailing every hippie chick in sight (rather than looking to be the hippie chick getting nailed by every convict in sight). In the not too distant future he could have looked forward to running for the Senate seat currently held by Inhofe (WWII vet) when he retires, using his service and subsequent peace activities to set him up for a life long seat in the Senate (Kerry). Instead, thankfully, he's going to be a convicted felon with no war record. In several months, no one will remember him, unless they do some "Where are they now" stories on folks that either deserted from the military (the guys hiding out in Canada) or actually took what was coming to them. That Navy Petty Officer that was the last big military poster child for the peace crowd is a prime example of what Lt Watada has to look forward to from his pals. The guy was convicted and you don't hear so much about him anymore. He was all the rage for a couple of months and then they moved on while he moved to a cell. As I said at the beginning, this guy has done us a tremendous favor by sticking to his guns so we don't have to deal with him as an elected representative. For that very small favor, Lt Watada, you media whore soon to be prison whore, thank you.

Largebill has it right. The... (Below threshold)

Largebill has it right. The point of this nasty business is to weaken our fighting ability by lowering morale, sapping resolve and, worst of all, eating away at the structure of military discipline that makes our volunteer forces more than just marching societies. Firing squad, pronto.

He claims to believe the wa... (Below threshold)

He claims to believe the war is illegal and immoral, which, if he really believes that, should have been just as self-evident to him the day he enlisted as it was the day he was ordered to deploy.

So one way or the other, he's full of crap. It's just a matter of whether he was lieing from Day One when he signed up and swore the oath.

And for anyone who wants to... (Below threshold)

And for anyone who wants to argue how brave he is for actually staying to face a Court Martial, think of it from his angle. He's a media whore and needs the affirmation of the Peace Groups. If he actually ran, he would have gotten little attention. Most Americans, regardless of political affiliation, are not going to respect someone who ran away to another country to avoid his obligation and then proceeded to criticize the country from the safety of a foreign country. The couple of guys the media and Peace folks try to trumpet from Canada fell flat (how long did they remain news?). That story is old news from Vietnam so no one cared about them and no one wanted to hear about them. By staying, he gets the attention he craves. The media fawns over him, the Peace Groups rally in his defense, and he probably gets to meet famous people. By running, he would have been no one after a short period and just a footnote for the peace groups as a "brave individual."

..Then there must be someon... (Below threshold)

..Then there must be someone here who will replace Watada's vacancy among the active ranks, right?

Oh maybe the guy got scared... (Below threshold)

Oh maybe the guy got scared. I remember my father watching one of his Marine brothers break into a flat-out run right before they left for a patrol. He said the guy was white as snow and gibbering like he was insane. He refused (thankfully as my father said) and was punished for it. So I'll give Ehren Watada the benefit of the doubt but he's still have to pay.

I'm more mad at those leftists that are using this situation. This is one guy! The vast majority of soldiers have gone with their units and did what they had to do. Making the ridiculously small minority into a FAT ISSUE just plain sucks.

A few thoughts:1. ... (Below threshold)

A few thoughts:

1. Officers do not receive hard labor, they receive solitary confinement for their entire sentence (or at least they did 10 years ago when I was in.)

2. A soldier is required to disobey an unlawful order. Regardless of what anyone thinks about the war, Bush did get Congressional approval for this action which is all the Constitution demands for the deployment to be lawful.

3. I encourage the generalization that our soldiers and marines have no ability to think on their own. Our military's decentralized decision making process is our biggest advantage and the biggest reason we adapt and overcome.

RedStayteToofPayst,<p... (Below threshold)


I don't feel like paying my income taxes for 2006.

I'm sure there's a liberal out there willing to pay them for me, right?

Totally Matt...look, sport,... (Below threshold)

Totally Matt...look, sport, the prison rape METAPHOR was just that...a METAPHOR for this moron doing VERY HARD TIME. Exceptionally hard time!

Why? Because his was a DELIBERATE attempt to undermine the United States Military. DELIBERATE. And I don't want our military undermined!

As for your comment: "please think of a better word to describe someone who is essentially programmed and expected to obey without question. ." HORESEHIT.

You take a VERY pejorative word...and then say: "I meant no offense" again, HORSESHIT.

Our VOLUNTEER force is NOT "programmed" to "obey without question". They ARE trained to follow orders, but are expected to know a legitimate one ("Board the airplane, trooper") from an ILLIGIMATE one ("Machine gun those orphans over there").

This moronic tool of the treasonous Left was ONLY asked to board an airplane. PERIOD.

He has GOT to serve very hard time...or the damage to the moral and discipline of the United States military will be massive. I am confident that our military sees this the same way.

RedStayteToofPayst: You dow... (Below threshold)

RedStayteToofPayst: You down in the ditch starving with St. Cindy? Are you willing to stand up (and slim down) for your convictions?

Here is the way it is. Ind... (Below threshold)

Here is the way it is. Individuals soldiers do not have the right, nor the authority to decide which war is legal and which isn't. That is not the intent of the rules that give you the right to disobey an unlawful order. Anyone with half a brain knows that.

The legality of the conflict is upon Congress and the President. Watada has absolutely no say. If the President says go somewhere, he must go. If he is then asked to do something like rape someone, at that time, he can refuse the order because that is illegal. No one, not even the President can lawfully give such an order.

We did not punish ordinary German combat soldiers as someone alleged above. We went after those who ran the death camps and committed atrocities. Regular German soldiers had no such worries. Again, anyone with half a brain would know that

Every member of the armed forces receives regular briefings about the laws of armed conflict to include the use of deadly force. They are told what kinds of orders are considered to be unlawful orders.

Regardless of how you view the war or your politics, thems the facts. Watada has no right or authority to declare this an illegal war. If he did, it would mean complete and utter chaos, destroying the chain of command and military discipline. He will be court-martialed and I hope he gets stuck with a BCD or a DD - essentially felony convictions.

My creds: I spent 20 years on active duty in the USAF. The law of armed conflict was explained to me once a year or more as it is for everyone who wears a uniform.


I'm so damn tired of libera... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

I'm so damn tired of liberals who make variations of the claim that if you're for the war, then you have to be in uniform fighting the war.

Well, how come all of the "human shields" disappeared from Iraq before the invasion? How come the peacnik libs won't put their money where their considerable mouths are and go be human shields in Iraq NOW?

That's rich, JustRand. I re... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

That's rich, JustRand. I refer to "jarheads" as automatons, based on everything I've learned about the military from my friends that have served and the movies on the subject that I have enjoyed with them; you then insist I was trying to smear the soldiers. You're entitled to your interpretation, but it's not a fair one.

Then you state that your post about the pending ass-rape this guy faces, which another commenter with military experience says doesn't happen as officers get solitary confinement, is meant as a metaphor. Right. And you weren't being sadistic. Okay.

Glad that's straightened up.

I suggest you have a look at the most recent polls of the armed services as to their opinion of what needs to be done in Iraq. I don't think they disapprove of the mission, but I sure think they are tired of it. And I mean really tired, not "tired" like Glenn Reynolds (by which he probably meant "bored", I would assume).

Totally Matt: "everythin... (Below threshold)

Totally Matt: "everything I've learned about the military from my friends that have served and the movies on the subject that I have enjoyed with them;"

impressive credentials!

facts are facts. Watada is going to be prosecuted...deservedly. I just hope the military makes him an absolute Poster-Child for military discipline.

end of story.

Justrand:The on... (Below threshold)


The only "automatons" I knew were the protesters who routinely called us "Baby Killers".

This makes me wonder if you were really in the Marines. If you were, you would be cognizant of those certifiably soulless automatons who do the paperwork (or not) every week so that you're pay would be short or long or, in any event, screwed up every which way.

In the Navy, we called them "personnelmen." Just saying the word makes me reach for my wallet and shiver.

If military justice is just... (Below threshold)

If military justice is just that, this jokers book won't be out for a long, long time. Hope he enjoys the broad, flat Kansas landscape.

astigafa...sorry about you'... (Below threshold)

astigafa...sorry about you're having been in the Navy! :)

as for the Marines, yes, we had our share of mindless clerks. though that is not what numbnuts was referring to.

Hey Violenceworker, your po... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

Hey Violenceworker, your point about us not prosecuting ordinary soldiers is false. In fact, the people responsible for such things even try to get former 17-year-old translators who worked for death squads extradited to face charges of war crimes. Have a look:


The guy serving food in the cafeteria at Auschwitz would be charged with a lighter crime than Eichmann, of course, but it seems he might still be held responsible to an extent. I'm not saying that this is fair, as the only alternative to following orders was often summary execution; nevertheless, the people responsible for hunting down and prosecuting Holocaust perpetrators seem to think that in the face of such vile conduct, morality requires seventeen-year-old conscripts to ask, What would Prometheus do?

Sorry to go off-topic, but I find the tangent interesting.

And Justrand, I wasn't trying to assert myself as an expert on military affairs because I've seen Platoon AND Full Metal Jacket (booyah!), but only to disclose the foundations of my considered opinions (personal testimony and pop culture, like most people who haven't served). Watada will be tried, and the more restraint the military shows (i.e. following procedural rules throughout the trial as opposed to conducting a kangaroo court), the better they will look, to the public and to the military. Anyone hungry for a lynching should frickin' well move to Saudi Arabia.

TM,Who was the 17 ye... (Below threshold)

Who was the 17 year old translators? What unit did he serve in? Was is a regular Wermacht unit? One full of draftees?
No, it was a deathsquad. The EKO. They were all drawn from the SS, SD and the Gestapo. They were not common German soldiers.
The same goes for the men working in the camps. They weren't regular Joe's. They were the hard core Nazi's, commited to the cause. No, the men assigned to work in the camps were pulled from units that were idealogicly compatible. Again, the SS. Not consripts.

Crack open a history book son.

Amazing to watch the one th... (Below threshold)

Amazing to watch the one thread that everyone pretty much agrees on - that Watada should be prosecuted and should serve time - devolve into ten thousand other things no one can agree on.

We did not prosecute the av... (Below threshold)

We did not prosecute the average soldier. Do you have any freakin idea how many people that would be? We went after those who ran the camps, the SS and the Gestapo. The average German soldier was not prosecuted as a war criminal and many actually helped rebuild the country. Learn som history!


Hey Oyster, I disagree! Wan... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

Hey Oyster, I disagree! Wanna fight about it?! :)

VW, I've taken courses in military history, including one about the aftermath and demobilization in Europe. Regular German infantrymen were not prosecuted; however, conscripts closely associated with the cleansing brigades and death camps, even in administrative and supportive roles, have been prosecuted, although I don't think any have been executed. You didn't have to be a hardcore SS true believer to be a water carrier for the death squads, ya know. They didn't have a lot of manpower towards the end of the war, so tons of blue-eyed blond kids were thrust into heinous circumstances and given the choice of facilitating crimes against humanity or being shot along with the other victims.

SCSI, did you read the article I linked to? Dude was 17, translated words, and didn't kill anybody. If you think that's over-zealous prosecution, I'll let you say so, but I tend to tread carefully around all things having to do with the Holocaust.

And as far as this relates to the topic at hand, I am not, nor is anyone else, saying that Lt. Watada was in the same boat as a 17 year old blond German farmer in 1944 who was unfortunate enough to speak Polish (or Russian or whatever it was).

I am so sick of this self-a... (Below threshold)
cate s.:

I am so sick of this self-absorbed bastard! Living out here in the Aloha state he is hearlded as a hero by most of the locals out here. I think this so called man is a mere child who has had his way for his entire life. He says now he would go to anywhere but Iraq. He's a JO and JO's don't make those kind of decisions. So, right now he's the cause celeb but when he's sitting in lovely Leavenworth he will be forgotten by as the Code Pinkers, his own Rep. Neil Abercrombie and all the dotes out here in the HI Democratic party like his old man will have forgotten him. However, for the time being he's enjoying his new found celebrity status. OF course there will probably always be a job waiting for him at the far left leaning University of Hawaii.

TM,Did YOU read the ... (Below threshold)

Did YOU read the article? Where does it say he was only a translator who never killed anyone?
Do you know anything about the EKO? What they did, and how one became a member?
But to hold him up as an example of an ordinary German soldier being held accountable is just assinine. Open a book, read up on the IMT and Nurenburg, see who was put on trial and why. See why members of some units and groups were put on trial just for affiliation.

Oberlander is in legal trouble with Canada for not disclosing his affiliation when he emmigrated, which is a crime.

Sorry. Full disclosure, SCS... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

Sorry. Full disclosure, SCSI: I followed that case while in school, and it was repeated over and over again (by his lawyer) that there was in fact no evidence of any wrong-doing on his behalf, apart from having probably the worst summer job in the history of human kind. Part of the Jewish community in Canada decided that he is a war criminal, and that he needed to be deported. Lacking evidence to support these claims, they settled for the immigration issue.

I've read about those trials. And you are mistaken that the only people put on trial for crimes against humanity were demonstrably true believers. Furthermore, a lot of the true believers started out as more passive participants, and got caught up in it. (Think of the Stanford Prison experiment, only real and worse.) It's unclear to what extent we can hold a partially or completely brainwashed person responsible for their actions, but rest assured the answer probably hasn't got a lot to do with your gut feeling on this issue.

Yeah. Anyway, Watada has bad judgement and I'm going to go fix a bourbon and play some video games. Have a good night pplz.

"then please think of a bet... (Below threshold)

"then please think of a better word to describe someone who is essentially programmed and expected to obey without question" - Totally Matt

Thus proving that statement that you've never served a day in uniform.

TM,I never said "tha... (Below threshold)

I never said "that the only people put on trial for crimes against humanity were demonstrably true believers" or anything to that effect. You have reading comprehension issue. You see what you want to see, I think.
But members of the SS and the like were tried for their membership alone.
And please, to compare the Stanford excercise with being a member of the SS is just bullshit.

Anyway, the whole point is that your arguement that regular Germans soldiers were prosecuted for war crimes is utter bullshit, unless you count the Waffen SS and EKO as regular German soldiers.

Stop an unlawful order? how... (Below threshold)

Stop an unlawful order? how can deployment any where be considered an unlawful order.I guess the left can argue almost anything these days Whether it makes sense or not.Levenworth is too good for him,.

The Waffen SS and EKO were ... (Below threshold)
Totally Matt:

The Waffen SS and EKO were not exclusively fascist psychopaths, was my point, SCSI. I think it was obvious too. And the Stanford comparison was just that: a comparison, not an equivocation or anything like that.

Cro: what's your point? Who cares? Do you want a list of administration hawks who haven't served either? I don't care that they haven't, and nobody really cared that Clinton didn't either. Why do you care whether I have? Have you served? Wait, don't tell me, because I don't care.

Totally Madd:It's ... (Below threshold)

Totally Madd:

It's not about who cares, it's about knowing what the F you're talking about.

From your earlier generalizations, and repeated apologies, you do not know what you're talking about.

Sure you're entitled to 'free speech' and all that. You're also entitled to make an ass of yourself.

For future reference: issuing a disclaimer before an idiotic comment does not magically undo that idiotic comment.

Whatever junior. You tried... (Below threshold)

Whatever junior. You tried to make claim regular everyday soldiers were sent to trial, got called out as using an EKO trooper as an example.
Then tried to claim the article said things it didn't.
Now you change the whole thrust of your argument.
Crack open a history book, and get your facts straight.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy