1st Lt Guard Makes Radio Address

[dotcoma]

but it's nothing like what Saddam was doing for years...

With our training, money, and funding. Who is worse? Charlie Manson or Squeeky Frome?

[Dieval]

Originally posted by roxdog,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (roxdog,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Yeah, "you've gone through it". Have you read section 802? Do you realize that the FEDS can now do WHATEVER the f#ck they want? They are basically DISsOLVING local governments. Our police are training with the military IN VIOLATION OF THE 10th amendment. I've got an ex CIA agant on tape talking about how he started a file on a girl that wouldn't date him. That's why we have a constitution. The Patriot Act is the end of our Constitutional Republic BY DEFINITION. [/b]

Originally posted by Patriot Act,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Patriot Act,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM. (a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping'; (2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and'; (3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and (4) by adding at the end the following: `(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that-- `(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; `(B) appear to be intended-- `(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; `(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or `(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and `&copy; occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'. (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: `(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;' [/b]

Where's the problem?

Originally posted by roxdog, You are confused by isms. Chinais an tyrannical, despotic, COMMUNIST dictatorship. To say "oh, they aren't perfect" is a crock.

Hmm...from 50 million political prisoners down to :
".... the Laogai Research Foundation estimates that the Laogai population is between 4 to 6 million prisoners. "
Hmmm...4-6 million out of almost 2 billion? again, I don't think this is a good thing, but it's not nearly what you were making it out to be...

<!--QuoteBegin-roxdog,@

You have to have a Halliburton RFID to sell fruit.
[/quote]And the problem is?


<!--QuoteBegin-roxdog,

"It's a war" so torture is good. I know the doublespeak....[/quote] :confused:
Again, I didn't say it was good...it said it WASN'T AS BAD AS WHAT SADDAM DID...

[Dieval]

Originally posted by roxdog, With our training, money, and funding. Who is worse? Charlie Manson or Squeeky Frome?

We didn't train his people to put prisoners in wood chippers or throw them off buildings....

[Mr.Vicchio]

Don't bring up the Patriot Act. If you do, you will be told of all the things you could lose, all the things you might suffer, all the "stories" about people being deported for no good reason! You will hear about library cards being able to be confiscated (they won't mention to this date, not a single library card has been violated)

Don't try to defend Bush, the great oil company (which ISN'T an oil company) Haliburton, who got its Defense Department contracts under clinton, controls Bush through Cheney who pushed the war to enrich his buddies.

Don't mention ANYTHING good America has done, the more oyu push, the father back they will go to show how America is run by the Skull and Bones and that whatever evil is out ther, America has done evil so hasn't any moral right to do anything.

Bring up our victory of WWII, they point out the most deaths by a WMD were by two US Dropped A-Bombs. (And oh yeah Bushes Grandfather did business with Nazi Germany and they will weave a long and twisted thread that shows Bush must be culpable for actions his grandfather committed some 50 years ago and Bush has a Swastika tattoo'd on his left but cheek...)

Anyhoots, what did I miss?

[Dieval]

I think you got it all Vic....don't you just want to feel bad because we are the worst people on the planet?

this has become quite an off topic thread. what happened to the lieutenant? did we reach a concensus?

[Zeebadee]

The lieutenant is in no danger, he was not on active duty or inactive training status when he made his comments. He violated no articles of the UCMJ.

People like Vicchio simply refuse to believe that they have lost any freedoms until they are personally affected. By that time, there will be no recourse. Freedoms voluntarily given up won't easily be regained.

why is he so quick to suppress free and truthful speech? i think he merely wants to hear that the US is always right and always successful, and resents any statement to the contrary as lack of patriotism or being a softie. open your eyes mrV. we've been led astray.

[Suburbanite]

Personally, I think a soldier should have more respect for his position, and I would dishonorably discharge him or whatever else was an option. Of all the people, the Military and some others have a responsibility to the country, and turning their positions into political ones is not conducive to anything productive.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs, and resents any statement to the contrary as lack of patriotism or being a softie. open your eyes mrV. we've been led astray.

No one mentioned Patriotism but you..

I don't know where you guys get the idea that this LT can slam bush when he's off duty and not be subject to articles of the UCMJ. He's an officer and CANNOT say what he did, period. On duty or off. If he were to get into a fight with an NCO while off duty, then he would not be prosecuted by the military.
I'm sorry but I want these guys in the military to keep these kind of opinions to themselves. When this LT becomes a civilian, than he can say whatever he wants.

it's hard to say that the military is not a political entity. politics affect their lives and america's honor every day. why should they have no choice in political voice? do they have to vote for the incumbent as well?

this second iraq excursion has by no means been a sweeping success and has by no means earned america any honor, and rightfully so. if politics had been done differently this may not have been the case. arguably political positioning to downplay the cost of the war made us underequipped and shortstaffed in iraq. what could be worse for the military, and now for america's image? party politics and stonewalling has cost us iraq.

it's not too late to change but george bush 'never makes mistakes' and probably will choose to be stubborn, hopefully at the cost of waking people up to his ignorance.

why is it unbecoming of a soldier to question why and how he risks his life? if becoming a soldier means surrendering your mind to the hive and propaganda then count me out, permanently.

[Suburbanite]

You can think all you want. That won’t ever change. You can NOT say whatever you want though. A Soldier is not a Civilian and does not enjoy that right, or many others. Frankly, I don’t want tax payer money going to people who join the army without the commitment to it.

then why would you support a draft?
isn't discourse and planning key to winning a war? to changing tactics in a war you are losing? we need to know this kind of thing and soldiers offer the best 1st hand accoutns. if you are telling him to be silent then you are saying morale is more important than being right.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bob_Dobbs,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>it's hard to say that the military is not a political entity. politics affect their lives and america's honor every day. why should they have no choice in political voice? do they have to vote for the incumbent as well? [/b]

They can vote for whom ever they want, but once we have a leader(Bush), he is their commander and chief...public opinions of him are for people outside of the military...notice how I said PUBLIC opinions?

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs,@ this second iraq excursion has by no means been a sweeping success and has by no means earned america any honor, and rightfully so.

Walking right into the heart of the enemy in the matter of a few days is not a success? Sure there have been alot of issues that have come up, it's not perfect, but the main part of the war was a success..
<!--QuoteBegin-Bob_Dobbs,

why is it unbecoming of a soldier to question why and how he risks his life? if becoming a soldier means surrendering your mind to the hive and propaganda then count me out, permanently.[/quote]
If you question your superiors orders, you put yourself and your fellow soldiers at risk. That's unacceptable in a combat situation. If he had concerns about losing his life for his country, in a purely VOLENTARY military, then he should never have joined up...

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by dave654, I don't know where you guys get the idea that this LT can slam bush when he's off duty and not be subject to articles of the UCMJ.  He's an officer and CANNOT say what he did, period.  On duty or off.  If he were to get into a fight with an NCO while off duty, then he would not be prosecuted by the military.  I'm sorry but I want these guys in the military to keep these kind of opinions to themselves.  When this LT becomes a civilian, than he can say whatever he wants.

We get that idea from the UCMJ itself. Check out section 802, article 2.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

"Walking right into the heart of the enemy in the matter of a few days is not a success?"

who denies that we have the best military ever? do you deny that grave mismanagement cost us lives and stability, and is killing americans and iraqis and costing us billions every week?

"They can vote for whom ever they want, but once we have a leader(Bush), he is their commander and chief"

are you saying that truth and accountability end once all the votes are counted? sometimes it does feel like that, actually. if my boss made such greivous errors as bush did in iraq, i'd look for a new job.

"If you question your superiors orders, you put yourself and your fellow soldiers at risk. That's unacceptable in a combat situation. If he had concerns about losing his life for his country, in a purely VOLENTARY military, then he should never have joined up... "

oh, i didn't know lives were at stake at the radio station. disobeying an order during combat is one thing. chatting about bush being a douchebag while you're under RPG attack is one thing. but this is entirely another. shut your lies about the war. i only have time for the truth. you're a secret sophist and would hail a dictator if bush said it was necessary to eliminate terror.

[Mr.Vicchio]

IF you AREN'T in the military, you just can't understand.

Look, best example.. after the war started, the Navy base near here had protesters out front of the gate, the navy guys were NOT allowed to even VOICE their disagreement or approval of the actions of teh protesters. Why? Can you answer that one guys?

I love how you guys think you have me pegged as some sort of.. not sure yet, but you are sooo wrong.

no, you talk to me. why are soldiers barred from their opinions?

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, IF you AREN'T in the military, you just can't understand. Look, best example.. after the war started, the Navy base near here had protesters out front of the gate, the navy guys were NOT allowed to even VOICE their disagreement or approval of the actions of teh protesters. Why? Can you answer that one guys? I love how you guys think you have me pegged as some sort of.. not sure yet, but you are sooo wrong.

You don't seem to understand what active duty means. The Navy guys were on active duty, and subject to the UCMJ, which does restrict how they may voice their opinions. Most reservists serve on active duty two weeks a year, and one weekend a month. During those periods, they are also subject to the UCMJ. Outside of those periods of duty, they have complete freedom of speech, the same as any other citizen. A reservist may be called up for duty for extended periods of time, which does place him back under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ.