Platoon Defies Orders In Iraq

Written By: 4Canada
Date: 2004-10-19 11:19:00
<a href="/article/11921175-platoon-defies-orders-in-iraq">Article Link</a>

A 17-member Army Reserve platoon with troops from Jackson and around the Southeast deployed to Iraq is under arrest for refusing a \"suicide mission\" to deliver fuel, the troops\' relatives said Thursday.

The soldiers refused an order on Wednesday to go to Taji, Iraq — north of Baghdad — because their vehicles were considered \"deadlined\" or extremely unsafe, said Patricia McCook of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Larry O. McCook.

Sgt. McCook, a deputy at the Hinds County Detention Center, and the 16 other members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company from Rock Hill, S.C., were read their rights and moved from the military barracks into tents, Patricia McCook said her husband told her during a panicked phone call about 5 a.m. Thursday.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1015-11.htm

They'll be punished, and they should be, and this is why.

A military cannot function if the orders of commanding officers are not executed by the foot soldiers. Its called insubordination and the penalties for it can be quite harsh. The reason for that is EVERYTHING in the military is dependant on soldiers following orders. That's the glue that holds it all together.

This was by no means a 'suicide mission'. That's just absurd.

Citing 'safety concerns' as a reason for disobeying orders is laughable. You're in the ARMY! In the middle of a WAR! What kind of person signs up for the army then refuses to follow orders because of safety concerns? That is somewhat akin to volunteering for lifeguard duty at the local pool then watching someone drown and refusing to help them because you're afraid of the water.

The USA has an all VOLUNTEER army. I think if we had a drafted army there would be a little more concern and sympathy. But I can have no sympathy for somebody who is so incredibly stupid to sign up for the army then refuse to follow orders because there could be danger. Asinine.

I disagree, because, people in the US military signed up to DEFEND America, not go off on an aggressive, imperialist oil grab!

---
Dave Ruston

I disagree with you, this is not the local militia they signed up for, to defend the town against...whoever. They signed up for the US Army. When you sign up for the US Army, your job is to follow orders, plain and simple. You can disagree all you want, but you're wrong. A military of any sort cannot function without soldiers being expected to follow orders.

If the Americans just wanted to make an 'oil grab' why didn't they send the US Army to Alberta?

Why didn't they just buy the oil from Saddam? That would have been cheaper and so much easier politically but they didn't do that.

Iraq is one small part of a much bigger picture, probably too big for you to understand considering your fixation on blaming the US for all the worlds ills, but for everyone's sake let's hope the Americans can establish a legitimate representative government in Iraq.

The alternative is to allow the folks who arbitrarily cut people's heads off to form the government there. Those insurgents aren't fighting for a 'free Iraq', they're fighting in order to take other peoples freedom away, as can be witnessed by the subjugation of women and strict but arbitrary 'moral codes' they impose on the people when they do control an area.

No, it is you that fails to understand the complexities here. See, the US wants oil cheaper than Iraq wanted to sell it for. Even before the war, the US was importing 20 boatloads of oil from Iraq a day. And Russia, France, and China were making inroads into Iraq in a business sense, which threatened the US, who are the world`s largest consumers of oil. But the icing on the cake was when Saddam switched from buying and selling goods with the US dollar (an arrangement that artificially propped up the value of the US dollar) to using the EURO! The value of the dollar began to drop, and soon, other countries such as Iran and North Korea (axis of evil) were contemplating following suit. Venezuela and Russia are pondering this as well. But why, did the US not invade Saudi Alberta? Compliant, spineless, puppet governments in Ottawa and Edmonton both cozy up to Washington. They get their little payoff, and tell the big oil companies to come in and rape it, with nary a thought for the future of Canadian energy needs. Its the same reason Hitler didn`t invade Switzerland. COLLABERATION! But you should have seen the pressure put on the Trudeau government by Washington for nationalizing our oil industry, giving Canada greater control over it`s own resources. But Trudeau stood his ground! Alas, the sellout Brian Mulroney, killed it all. And Mr. Muldoon, not only lost respect in Canada, but he didn`t even get the respect form Reagan he hoped to by kissing ass!

---
Dave Ruston

Well, first they didn't send the army to Alberta, 'cause we are so stupid we are selling it cheaper than Alaska, so force isn't really necessary. Second why not buy it from Iraq? Well they don't just want Iraq's oil, they want to control all oil in the middle east, control supply, demand, price etc; Saddam had this funny idea of using the Euro instead of the Yanky doollar, so a soveriegn country cannot make its own rules, not if you want to play the game! Sad but true.

As for the military meaning you follow orders, true, but they signed up to defend the U.S.A., not to become an invading power and that is a big truth, not a little minor detail. They were being sent in on a suicide mission, and although many condemn the Iraqi's etc for being suicide bombers, those same people think the U.S. military should condone such behaviour?? Funny thinking, IMO.

But of course if the oil issue isn't enough, bring in the cutting people's heads off as a reason to be there. Funny how nobody in the U.S. admin was all that concerned while they were funding Saddam, or the massacre that ensued to get him into power,with the full support of Bush Daddy and the CIA? Oh but somehow that was different....not by my standards.

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Well, you`re right, Darvin. But i guess I`m just saying that in this case I tend to sympathize with dissent.

---
Dave Ruston

Hey Dave great minds think alike, must have been posting same time. Reconfirms what I was saying.

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

"The USA has an all VOLUNTEER army."

That statement does not make sense if you cannot disobey orders. When I volunteer for ANYTHING I do it because it fits with my values and my integrety. If at any time the party I am volunteering for changes it's mission statement I can leave whenever I want. "Volunteer" army is bullshit.

If the Bush gov was at all interested in the Geneva Convention, International Law, or human life in general these young people would win in a court of law against the gov. This is an illegal war. As was Afghanistan.

Do search on this site for "International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan" if you really want to know who's in trouble.

Don't join the Army when you grow up. And don't try to get a job anywhere either because if you think you can just disobey an order from your supervisor whenever you happen to feel like it you're in for a big surprise. Nobody has that kind of autonomy, except maybe housewives.

How can you say it wasn't a suicide mission if you weren't there. It's the duty of a solder to protect himself and members of his unit. They weren't refusing the job but refusing to go in substandard vehicles.

You missed the point Anon. "Volunteer" is the point. And any job I've ever had I held only as long as I felt it was going in the direction I wanted my life to go in. Which is exactly why I would NEVER join an army volunteer or otherwise.

I watched a mother in the states the other night talking about her daughter NEEDING to join the Army to get an education. Well ain't that the country you want to live in? I'm certain that's all by design.

When you volunteer for service, you take an oath to do certain things. One of those things is to obey any lawful order. You do not get to chose which lawful order to obey. You must obey them all. If the vehicle was unsafe, then it will break down. You report that to your supervisor, and they will take it through the chain of command, but you still must drive that vehicle. Whomever authorized that vehicle for use in a combat zone will be diciplined, but you have no right to refuse the order to drive it. I know most of you don't understand my views on this, but failure to obey a lawful order in a combat zone isn't like cheating on your taxes, it's more like leaving your bride standing at the altar - but it puts people's lives at risk. Who was counting on what the truck was supposed to deliver? Did that action put more people in harms' way? --- "If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

I agree.

(Does anyone care?)

---
"When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).