Conscientious Objector

[Benhuntn]

Hoover why don't you do a search for Hank Hill the two of you probably have a lot in common.

 

[FlyinGuy]

If someone really changes and becomes a C.O. then there will be a trail that led to that decision. That individual will be discharged honorably. If someone goes into their commander and claims to be a C.O. just to get an airline job, then there will be consequences.

 

[JPAustin]

Man, this thread should go into the AOL forums so we can watch the misinformed lefto-wackos fly away with it.

Opening remark aside though, I agree with the bare-bones majority consensus: If you decide to be a CO, don't volunteer, but appreciate those making the sacrifices that allow you to make that decision.

 

[Draginass]

My original question was sparked from hearing an story on NPR about a military officer (probably the same one mentioned on here) speaking out against the Bush Administration regarding the Iraq war. While I happen to agree with what the officer said, I don't agree with how he went about it. You don't air dirty laundry in public. He should have gone through proper channels. But what I am getting from the replies on this thread is that there are no proper channels. The take home message seems to be that you had better be prepared to do some things that you don't believe in if you join up.

Your individual opinion about politics has no place in the military organization. All military member, of course, have the right to vote, etc, but when there are pretty close controls on military members politicing and especially in uniform or in an openly partisan fashion representing the military. This is ESSENTIAL to military discipline. You don't want superiors trying to force their political slant on subordinates. That is a recipe for a quick meltdown. The military must be, and be seen as non-partisan and apolitical. When the military becomes politicized, then confidence of the citizens wanes.

There are no proper military channels for voicing ones "displeasure" with the Executives' foreign or domestic policies, no should there be. The proper channel for the individual military member in that regard is at the ballot box. You are not there to question policy. During the Clinton administration there were numerous times when he made some real boner decisions with the military, but it was my duty to comply, which I did.

If you have a crisis of conscience with the policies of the Executive, then you can resign, if eligible, or take the medicine. The military is not a political science and sociology course. The military has to actually do things, quickly and well. We can't take a vote and get everyone's opinion or "feelings" about everything. Also, I'm not entirely sure but I don't think disagreeing with the policies of the Executive is grounds for CO status. If, for instance, you're a Quaker and have strong religious convictions that ANY killing is murder, then that would clearly qualify if it was clearly sincere.

So if you can't hack it, don't join. Slack it and enjoy the freedom that others provide you.

"To be a man, you must first learn to obey."
-- Robert E. Lee while head of Washington University (later Washington and Lee University) after the War Between the States.

 

[JimNtexas]

I retired in 1994, so maybe things are different now, but I doubt it.

In my time I don't recall any aircrew who 'objected' to combat missions, although I suppose it may have happened.

In fact in my community the very worst punishment a commander could impose was telling an air crew member that he would not be allowed to fly combat missions.

 

[Huggyu2]

I am not the sort of person who can blindly follow orders without understanding the rationale behind them.

It's not the duty of "the leadership" to explain each and every decision to each and every military member and ask for an "are you good with that?" before engaging in combat ops. Many times, the reasons may not be known for years,... maybe never,... due to the political/military sensitivities on how that info was obtained, and the decision made.

There are both "lawful" and "unlawful" commands. Learning which is which is a good thing. But when a unit gets told to deploy and fight, it's time to respect the authority of "the leadership", and get the job done.

 

[BiffF15]

I retired in 1994, so maybe things are different now, but I doubt it.

In my time I don't recall any aircrew who 'objected' to combat missions, although I suppose it may have happened.

In fact in my community the very worst punishment a commander could impose was telling an air crew member that he would not be allowed to fly combat missions.

Jim,
Things haven't changed about going to war since you retired. The worst thing a combat ready crew"person" can hear is "you're not going". Any self respecting combat aviator wants to prove themselves or they should be doing something else.
Biff

 

[poor2thecore]

I guess my decision not to join the Air Force was the right one then. I am not the sort of person who can blindly follow orders without understanding the rationale behind them. To know that in a given situation, I could be sent to jail for exercising my own intelligence, reasoning, and values that may have conflicted with orders is disheartening.

Good. The military wouldn't want you anyway.

 

[pilotyip]

For those who deplore violence

Good. The military wouldn't want you anyway.

Hoover would not have fit. "For those who deplore violence, they rest peacfully in their beds at night because of the acts of those who engage in violence on their behalf, Stuart Mills 1870's" If Hoover thinks he is smarter than the rest of us, it is our job to project his right to think like a person of out touch with the reality of the rest of the world.

 

[highsky]

He'll likely cut a deal and walk while we prosecute Marines making split-second decisions

Sad, but unfortunately true. I get sick to my stomach watching what those prosecutors are doing to those young men VOLUNTEERING to serve in a place 99% of Americans don't have the balls to go anywhere near.

No excuse not stepping up to the plate with this conscientious objector $hit. Twenty years in prison would be what I would hand down as a judge.

The whole anthrax thing really pissed me off too in the late 90s. My Reserve unit, and many other Gaurd and Reserve flying units lost 75% of the pilots who refused to take the shots. Pu$$ys.