Does Serving With Honor And Distinction Mean Turning Your Back On Your Country?

[mudwhistle]

The left is attacking anyone who is critical of the prisoner swap Obama made without saying a word to Congress. All of the critics from Bergdahls unit are being accused of Swiftboating him. The left seems to feel that being a deserter and a coward, turning your back on your country is a courageous act.

Is this really the way they think?

Obama seems to go out of his way to piss Americans off. I believe he knows the way liberals think and he takes advantage of it. Everything he does seems to backfire and turn into a major debate on what is right and what is wrong. It seems like he's constantly redefining what is good about this country and what is bad. Being a Christian is bad. Being white is bad. Being a family man is bad. Getting married with someone of the opposite sex is bad. Making money is bad. Being independent is bad. Making your own way in life is bad.

This guy is really screwed up, and it shows.

It's no small wonder that he chose a deserter to single out for a prisoner swap. He believes the deserter is a hero. He treated his family like their son was a warrior for good. Instead, their son turned out to be a terrorist collaborator. If this is what Obama feels is a hero, then what does this say about Obama.

 

[The Rabbi]

Susan Rice later backtracked and said the fact that he volunteered meant it was an honor and distinction. Of course every single member of the armed forces today is a volunteer, so her bland sentiment is pretty well meaningless.

 

[mudwhistle]

Susan Rice later backtracked and said the fact that he volunteered meant it was an honor and distinction. Of course every single member of the armed forces today is a volunteer, so her bland sentiment is pretty well meaningless.

If you're playing loose with the truth of course that makes sense.

I figure she feels that once you join nothing you do is wrong. Even if you frag your company commander like SGT Akbar. United States v. Hasan K. Akbar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then there's Major Hasan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

They all served with honor and distinction.

 

[deltex1]

We need to ask Suzy if Snowden acted with honor and distinction.

 

[The Rabbi]

Susan Rice later backtracked and said the fact that he volunteered meant it was an honor and distinction. Of course every single member of the armed forces today is a volunteer, so her bland sentiment is pretty well meaningless.

If you're playing loose with the truth of course that makes sense.

I figure she feels that once you join nothing you do is wrong. Even if you frag your company commander like SGT Akbar. United States v. Hasan K. Akbar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then there's Major Hasan. 2009 Fort Hood shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They all served with honor and distinction.

Akbar certainly served with distinction. He was distinct from everyone else.

 

[mudwhistle]

I guess being a total fuckup is serving with honor and distinction....

 

[rdean]

The left is attacking anyone who is critical of the prisoner swap Obama made without saying a word to Congress. All of the critics from Bergdahls unit are being accused of Swiftboating him. The left seems to feel that being a deserter and a coward, turning your back on your country is a courageous act.

Is this really the way they think?

Obama seems to go out of his way to piss Americans off. I believe he knows the way liberals think and he takes advantage of it. Everything he does seems to backfire and turn into a major debate on what is right and what is wrong. It seems like he's constantly redefining what is good about this country and what is bad. Being a Christian is bad. Being white is bad. Being a family man is bad. Getting married with someone of the opposite sex is bad. Making money is bad. Being independent is bad. Making your own way in life is bad.

This guy is really screwed up, and it shows.

It's no small wonder that he chose a deserter to single out for a prisoner swap. He believes the deserter is a hero. He treated his family like their son was a warrior for good. Instead, their son turned out to be a terrorist collaborator. If this is what Obama feels is a hero, then what does this say about Obama.

When Republicans cut food stamps for disabled veterans, keep first responders from health care for 10 years and help companies move jobs to China and help to close down more than 40,000 factories and then engage in voter suppression and try to bring down the president, then they have turned their backs on America. Letting Bin Laden go was bad enough, but trying to take credit for taking Bin Laden out was despicable. But it only highlights the depths to which Republicans have fallen.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right is going crazy again when anyone confronts its nonsense about the prisoner exchange.

 

[J.E.D]

Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt because of unproven claims that he abandoned his post? Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt even IF it is proven that he abandoned his post?

The answer to both questions is NO. We bring our men and women home. If it is determined that he committed an offense, then let the military courts deal with him.

How dare any of you convenient-patriots judge him. your partisan attacks, baseless slander and calls to leave him in enemy hands based on nothing but hearsay are damaging to the morale of those serving right now and damaging to this country.

 

[Katzndogz]

We need to ask Suzy if Snowden acted with honor and distinction.

Snowden didn't serve. He wasn't in the military. Maybe you mean Bradley Manning.

 

[mudwhistle]

Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt because of unproven claims that he abandoned his post? Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt even IF it is proven that he abandoned his post?

The answer to both questions is NO. We bring our men and women home. If it is determined that he committed an offense, then let the military courts deal with him.

How dare any of you convenient-patriots judge him. your partisan attacks, baseless slander and calls to leave him in enemy hands based on nothing but hearsay are damaging to the morale of those serving right now and damaging to this country.

Does the fact that he volunteered excuse everything he does from then on?

 

[mudwhistle]

I remember you guys.

You're the same little fuckers that accused me of being a baby-killer just because I volunteered.

 

[kaz]

When Republicans cut food stamps for disabled veterans, keep first responders from health care for 10 years and help companies move jobs to China and help to close down more than 40,000 factories and then engage in voter suppression and try to bring down the president, then they have turned their backs on America. Letting Bin Laden go was bad enough, but trying to take credit for taking Bin Laden out was despicable. But it only highlights the depths to which Republicans have fallen.

Even if this wasn't a load of crap, it would still be pure deflection.

 

[J.E.D]

Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt because of unproven claims that he abandoned his post? Does a soldier who volunteered to serve his country deserve to be abandoned by his country and have his and his family's name dragged through the dirt even IF it is proven that he abandoned his post?

The answer to both questions is NO. We bring our men and women home. If it is determined that he committed an offense, then let the military courts deal with him.

How dare any of you convenient-patriots judge him. your partisan attacks, baseless slander and calls to leave him in enemy hands based on nothing but hearsay are damaging to the morale of those serving right now and damaging to this country.

Does the fact that he volunteered excuse everything he does from then on?

Of course not. But what we don't do is judge him based upon unproven accusations. We get to the bottom of it and then deal with it. And we DON"T leave him behind even IF it is proven that he deserted. None of us know what he was going through psychologically. If he was having an emotional breakdown, suffering from combat stress, or was in a state of mind that led him to make poor decisions, is that really his fault? And once again, no matter what the circumstances, we don't leave our soldiers behind.

 

[Stephanie]

Probably to Obama it does, he probably wanted to give him a medal for it

anyone denouncing this country Obama see them as a hero, because he feels the same about us

that's why he looked so proud of him and paraded him around like his new pet

 

[J.E.D]

I remember you guys.

You're the same little fuckers that accused me of being a baby-killer just because I volunteered.

Really? I was born in 1974; so that wasn't me.

I assume that you served in Vietnam. The way returning Vietnam vets were treated is despicable. Of all people, those with your experience should be the first to defend this soldier.

 

[J.E.D]

Probably to Obama it does, he probably wanted to give him a medal for it

anyone denouncing this country Obama see them as a hero, because he feels the same about us

that's why he looked so proud of him and paraded him around like his new pet

Speaking of mental issues

 

[konradv]

Probably to Obama it does, he probably wanted to give him a medal for it

anyone denouncing this country Obama see them as a hero, because he feels the same about us

that's why he looked so proud of him and paraded him around like his new pet

Who did Obama parade around? To my knowledge Bergdahl hasn't even returned home yet.

 

[longknife]

Okay, to all of you who clearly have no idea what you are talking about - here is the most basic rule of being in the US military - The Code of Conduct. It is one of the very first things recruits are taught - often at the first processing point before going to the basic military training:

Article I
a. I am an American fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

b. All men and women in the armed forces have the duty at all times and under all circumstances to oppose the enemies of the United States and support its national interests. In training or in combat, alone or with others, while evading capture or enduring captivity, this duty belongs to each American defending our nation regardless of circumstances.

Article II
a. I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

b. As an individual, a member of the armed forces may never voluntarily surrender. When isolated and no longer able to inflict casualties on the enemy, the American soldier has an obligation to evade capture and rejoin friendly forces.

c. Only when evasion by an individual is impossible and further fighting would lead only to death with no significant loss to the enemy should one consider surrender. With all reasonable means of resistance exhausted and with certain death the only alternative, capture does not imply dishonor.

d. The responsibility and authority of a commander never extends to the surrender of a command to the enemy while the command has the power to fight and evade. When isolated, cut off, or surrounded, a unit must continue to fight until relieved or able to rejoin friendly forces through continued efforts to break out or evade the enemy.

Article III

a. If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

b. The duty of a member of the armed forces to use all means available to resist the enemy is not lessened by the misfortune of captivity. A POW is still legally bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and ethically guided by the Code of Conduct. Under provisions of the Geneva Convention, a prisoner of war is also subject to certain rules imposed by the captor nation. When repatriated, a prisoner of war will not be condemned for having obeyed reasonable captor rules, such as sanitation regulations. The duty of a member of the armed forces to continue to resist does not mean a prisoner should engage in unreasonable harassment as a form of resistance, retaliation by captors to the detriment of that prisoner and other prisoners is frequently the primary result of such harassment.

c. The Geneva Convention recognizes that a POW may have the duty to attempt escape. In fact, the Geneva Convention prohibits a captor nation from executing a POW simply for attempting escape. Under the authority of the senior official (often called the senior ranking officer, or SRO), a POW must be prepared to escape whenever the opportunity presents itself. In a POW compound, the senior POW must consider the welfare of those remaining behind after an escape. However, as a matter of conscious determination, a POW must plan to escape, try to escape and assist others to escape.

d. Contrary to the spirit of the Geneva Convention, many enemies who have captured American POW's since 1950, have regarded the POW compound as an extension of the battlefield. In doing so, they have used a variety of tactics and pressures, including physical and mental mistreatment, torture and medical neglect, to exploit POWs for propaganda purposes, to obtain military information or to undermine POW organization, communication and resistance.

e. Such enemies have attempted to lure American POWs into accepting special favors or privileges in exchange for statements, acts or information. Unless it is essential to the life or welfare of that person or another prisoner of war or to the success of efforts to resist or escape, a POW must neither seek nor accept special favors or privileges.

f. One such privilege is called parole. Parole is a promise by a prisoner of war to a captor to fulfill certain conditions such as agreeing not to escape nor to fight again once released—in return for such favors as relief from physical bondage, improved food and living conditions or repatriation ahead of the sick, injured or longer–held prisoners. An American POW will never sign nor otherwise accept parole.

Article IV

a. If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information nor take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

b. Informing or any other action to the detriment of a fellow prisoner is despicable and is expressly forbidden. Prisoners of war must avoid helping the enemy identify fellow prisoners who may have knowledge of particular value to the enemy and who may, therefore, be made to suffer coercive interrogation.

c. Strong leadership and communication are essential to discipline. Discipline is the key to camp organization, resistance and even survival. Personal hygiene, camp sanitation and care of sick and wounded are imperative. Officers and non-commissioned officers of the United States must continue to carry out their responsibilities and exercise their authority in captivity. The senior, regardless of service, must accept command. This responsibility and accountability may not be evaded.

d. If the senior is incapacitated or is otherwise unable to act, the next senior person will assume command. Camp leaders should make every effort to inform all POWs of the chain of command and try to represent them in dealing with enemy authorities. The responsibility of subordinates to obey the lawful orders of ranking American military personnel remains unchanged in captivity.

e. The Geneva Convention Relative to Treatment of Prisoners of War provides for election of a "prisoners' representative" in POW camps containing enlisted personnel but no commissioned officers. American POWs should understand that such a representative is only a spokesman for the actual senior ranking person. Should the enemy appoint a POW chain of command for its own purposes, American POWs should make all efforts to adhere to the principles of Article IV.

f. As with other provisions of this code, common sense and the conditions of captivity will affect the way in which the senior person and the other POWs organize to carry out their responsibilities. What is important is that everyone support and work within the POW organization.

Article V
a. When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

b. When questioned, a prisoner of war is required by the Geneva Convention and this code to give name, rank, service number (Social Security number) and date of birth. The prisoner should make every effort to avoid giving the captor any additional information. The prisoner may communicate with captors on matters of health and welfare and additionally may write letters home and fill out a Geneva Convention "capture card."

c. It is a violation of the Geneva Convention to place a prisoner under physical or mental duress, torture or any other form of coercion in an effort to secure information. If under such intense coercion, a POW discloses unauthorized information, makes an unauthorized statement or performs an unauthorized act, that prisoner's peace of mind and survival require a quick recovery of courage, dedication and motivation to resist anew each subsequent coercion.

d. Actions every POW should resist include making oral or written confessions and apologies, answering questionnaires, providing personal histories, creating propaganda recordings, broadcasting appeals to other prisoners of war, providing any other material readily usable for propaganda purposes, appealing for surrender or parole, furnishing self-criticisms and communicating on behalf of the enemy to the detriment of the United States, its allies, its armed forces or other POWs.

e. Every POW should also recognize that any confession signed or any statement made may be used by the enemy as a false evidence that the person is a "war criminal" rather than a POW. Several countries have made reservations to the Geneva Convention in which they assert that a "war criminal" conviction deprives the convicted individual of prisoner-of-war status, removes that person from protection under the Geneva Convention and revokes all rights to repatriation until a prison sentence is served.

f. Recent experiences of American prisoners of war have proved that, although enemy interrogation sessions may be harsh and cruel, one can resist brutal mistreatment when the will to resist remains intact.

g. The best way for a prisoner to keep faith with country, fellow prisoners and self is to provide the enemy with as little information as possible.

Article VI
a. I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

b. A member of the armed forces remains responsible for personal actions at all times.

c. A member of the armed forces who is captured has a continuing obligation to resist and to remain loyal to country, service, unit and fellow prisoners.

d. Upon repatriation, POWs can expect their actions to be reviewed, both as to circumstances of capture and conduct during detention. The purpose of such review is to recognize meritorious performance as well as to investigate possible misconduct. Each review will be conducted with due regard for the rights of the individual and consideration for the conditions of captivity; captivity of itself is not a condition of culpability.

e. Members of the armed forces should remember that they and their dependents will be taken care of by the appropriate service and that pay and allowances, eligibility and procedures for promotion and benefits for dependents continue while the service member is detained. Service members should assure that their personal affairs and family matters (such as pay, powers of attorney, current will and provisions for family maintenance and education) are properly and currently arranged. Failure to so arrange matters can create a serious sense of guilt for a POW and place unnecessary hardship on family members.

f. The life of a prisoner of war is hard. Each person in this stressful situation must always sustain hope and resist enemy indoctrination. Prisoners of war standing firm and united against the enemy will support and inspire one another in surviving their ordeal and in prevailing over misfortune with honor.

Every single one of us who took the following oath of office have agreed to abide by this code.


The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
(Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."
(DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

Nowhere does the oath say, "only until I feel like disagreeing with current policies or finding that I don't like what those over me want me to do."

 

[mudwhistle]

Seems to me, the left has more of a problem with the soldiers that died looking for him than with Bergdahl.