Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (5218)	2/7/2004 9:36:37 PM
From: twmoore	Respond to of 20039

His reasoning,he believes that the invasion of Iraq is an international human rights violation in which he can not take part.I tried to post this article,but couldn't.I posted the info on the author for a search if anyone was interested.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (5218)	2/8/2004 2:21:03 PM
From: Don Earl	Respond to of 20039

<<<It's a pity that the American "deserter" appears to be a coward rather than an exile of conscience. I'd say it severely weakens his case for asylum if his only goal is to prevent his own injury or death.>>> Possibly. IMO our system is flawed in the way of offering college tuition as a bounty for military service. It does eliminate the obligation of rich folks serving their country, since the only people likely to join are poor, and the pay at any rank is barely pocket change. No doubt many people join out of a sense of duty and honor, but the system doesn't make any attempt to screen for that sort. It's biased in favor of enlisting those in such dire financial straights that those who sign up would do just about anything to dodge a lifetime of near certain poverty. There have been many societies throughout history where the warrior class was held in the highest esteem, even to the point where nobility made up the bulk of the armies, but that would hardly describe our military. Most days our society treats enlisted personnel with outright contempt. I think it would be more fair to say this person is dishonest rather than cowardly. Not to put too fine a point on it, but my view is a person would have to have rocks in their heads to go to a desert, so they may spend their days in sand storms, on 130 degree days, getting shot at by unfriendly strangers, all for $16K a year. At the same time, if this isn't something a person is willing to do, they shouldn't take an oath which includes obligations along those lines. Contrary wise and counterpoint, perhaps it's our policies toward military personnel that is less than honest. It seems to me a person willing to risk their life to defend their country should do a little better than a person willing to put special sauce on a Big Mac.