So apparently two American soldiers have fled to Canada attempting to avoid being shipped to Iraq. They have to pled their case before a refugee board before they will be given asylum.
Is this how it worked for Vietnam draft dodgers? If not, why is this situation different? Is the only different the question of conscription or has a new treaty been signed to prevent draft dodgers coming to Canada?
A “draft dodger” was someone who avoided military service mandated by Selective Service conscription (which was abolished in 1973). You could “dodge” the draft by going to Canada, knowing the “right people”, exaggerating physical and/or mental infirmaties, never registering to begin with, etc. Look at the various “chickenhawk” sites on the web and you’d be surprised at the number of famous “draft-dodgers” there are.
If I understand you correctly, it seems those soldiers trying to enter Canada are already in the military. Not to be presumptuous but it seems to me they are commiting dessertion (sp?) which is a very serious military crime. Outright draft-dodging (which hasn’t been committed since 1973) is one thing but dessertion is a serious breach of military law and this could be why Canada is giving serious thought concerning whether these should be allowed entrance into Canada.
Canada may give them asylum, given that the punishment for desertion in wartime can be death.
Canada certainly won’t give them asylum as draft dodgers, because these chuckleheads WEREN’T DRAFTED. The draft was abolished in the 70s. Everyone in the military today volunteered.
If a soldier doesn’t want to go to Iraq, the ethical thing for them to do is to refuse orders to go to Iraq, and ask to be discharged. They might face a bit of jail time and an other than honorable discharge, but if they really believe the war in Iraq is wrong they should stand up and say so.
They certainly don’t face execution for “desertion during wartime”, since that only applies to desertion while on active duty.
Canada will only grant you asylum if the crime you are charged with is not considered a crime in Canada. Since there was no draft in Canada during the Vietnam era, Canada refused to extradite back to the US people accused of dodging the draft. However, of course it is a crime in Canada to desert the armed forces, and therefore Canada will eventually (after whatever neccesary hearings or processes) extradite anyone whose only claim to asylum is that they volunteered for the military and then didn’t want to go to Iraq.
Here is desertion as defined by theUCMJ.
And there is the paragraph that seems to apply:
“(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service;”
And here is the prescribed punishment:
"© Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.”
If they went to Canada without the intent to return then it sure looks like they deserted to avoid hazardous duty. If the Iraq thing is “war” as intended by meaning of the UCMJ then they could get the death penalty. That would no doubt take a rather contentious trial to settle. Canada might not extradite unless the US agrees not to seek the death penalty.
It should be noted that no US military person has been executed for desertion since WWII.
When these chumps get extradited (I’m confident they will be) they’ll be court-martialed and probably get a few years in the pokey.
Could they not argue that since the war and occupation of Iraq is illegal and the reason for their desertion? Since Canada is not (thank goodness for a Liberal government) a member of the coalition I can see the merit in this argument. Thus, by extraditing the soldiers Canada would then be condemning them to fight an illegal war. Does this argument carry any worth?
They could argue that pigs fly and their poop don’t stink. What wars in recent history HAVE been legal, and by which measure do you declare them legal or illegal?
Yeah, they should tell the court the war is illegal. If that doesn’t work they could claim Baby Jesus told them to let someone else take their turn in Iraq.