# (Ex-)Major Stefan Cook.....Bwahahaha! You cowardly nutjob! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2009, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237 "2009-07-16T17:28:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2009, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/81 "2009-07-19T21:39:18Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > And so correcting that failure is achieved by going in and bombing the bejesus out of the country? I don’t think that’s necessarily what’s going on in Afghanistan. We bombed the shit out of Iraq, for better or worse, but not nearly so in Afghanistan. My biggest concern aside from the deaths of innocents and the possibility that this effort may be unwinnable in the conventional sense is the immense stress we are putting on our military, both man and machines. I can’t imagine how much money it’s going to cost to replace and refurbish everything that’s been lost or damaged, not to mention restoring a sense of well-being in the minds of our troops. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2009, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/82 "2009-07-19T22:22:37Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > And so correcting that failure is achieved by going in and bombing the bejesus out of the country? I am against some of our tactical options, but not against the basic premise. I believe in defending our nation. Especially since I live in their primary target city. Besides Afghanistan isn’t really a country. It’s a dreadful mistake that we treat it as such. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/83 "2009-07-19T22:28:00Z")
Just give the man a fucking Pepsi already…dammit. EDIT: Ooops wrong thread. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![jakesteele](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ed8c4c/32.png) [@jakesteele](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jakesteele)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/84 "2009-07-20T04:10:31Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > Maybe you have heard of Major Stefan Cook. If not here is a brief rundown. > > Major Cook was a reservist who was called up for duty to Afghanistan. Major Cook said, “You can’t make me because the President hasn’t shown he was born in America, therefore he is not legally President, therefore…Ppppffftt!!” He sued. > > Orders, shmorders. A soldier’s duty and all that, bleh. > > Instead of worrying about this birther nutcase, his military command basically told him not to worry, they didn’t need him. Personally, I don’t really want this idiot out defending me either. But here is the juicy part. > > Cook works for a DoD contractor, Simtech, who was told by the DoD that Cook was no longer welcome at the DoD facility where Simtech was doing work. Of course, makes sense, you don’t want someone who challenges the authority of the CiC in Defense facilities. > > Simtech, not really having anything for Cook to do…fired his ass. Well, they said they would try to find something else for him to do, but right now, they got nuthin’. > > Bwahahahaha!! > > I was not in the military, so you may want to question my ability to call this man out, but I cannot think of anything more cowardly than using a looky conspiracy to absolve yourself of your responsibilities to your fellow soldikers. Now another soldier will go in his place, be away from his or her family and face dangerous situations, while Cook collects unemployment. > > Maybe he can find a green stimulus job. > > [Soldier sues](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/71760.html) > > [Soldier fired](http://washingtonindependent.com/51177/birther-soldier-fired-from-his-civilian-defense-contracting-job) > > Now, apparently two more a-holes have joined the suit…Maj. Gen. Carol Dean Childers and active U.S. Air Force reservist Lt. Col. David Earl Graeff. > > [Link](http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/07/two-more-officers-join-suit-challenging-obamas-citizenship-.html) Are you a soldier now or have you ever been one? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/85 "2009-07-20T04:42:00Z")
> [@jakesteele](#): > > Are you a soldier now or have you ever been one? I’ll take “Persona Non Sequitur” for $1000, Alex. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/86 "2009-07-20T07:46:57Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > I am against some of our tactical options, but not against the basic premise. I believe in defending our nation. I agree (WRT Afghanistan, not Iraq). I find the general line of argument\* “the US funded the Mujahideen, so it has no moral standing to attack the Taliban” most unpersuasive. Yes, we gave them the weapons, but then they turned on us. Kind of like how the US supplied Imperial Japan with most of its oil and metal in the run-up to December 7. And nobody can tell me that they didn’t deserve that open can of whoop-ass they subsequently received. Also, it does need to be repeated: The USSR _was_ evil. \*I’m not saying that’s your argument, **Olentzero** , but you do seem to me to be implying something along those lines. And I’ve certainly had some people explicitly state as much. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/87 "2009-07-20T12:03:19Z")
> [@jakesteele](#): > > Are you a soldier now or have you ever been one? Now, let’s not turn this into a witch hunt. Not all soldiers are bad! ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/88 "2009-07-20T12:09:52Z")
I see where you’re coming from, **Fuji**. That’s not my perspective, however. A few points: 1. There’s a whole mountain of hypocrisy behind playing up the Taliban and Saddam Hussein as the new threats to world peace and by God, _something_ must be done when the US clearly had no problems with either of them doing what they did twenty to thirty years ago, e.g. Saddam gassing Kurds in Halabja in 1984 and Rumsfeld going to Baghdad to shake his hand. 2. The US is using the same approach this time around as they did last time - finding whoever is happy to receive funding and training against the enemy _du jour_ regardless of political or religious stance. I’m not saying Maliki or Karzai are the next Osama bin Laden but that person is already most assuredly in the mix of fighters on the US side. In other words, even if the US decisively defeats the Taliban, it will have done nothing to stop the cycle of terrorism and violence. 3. That cycle of terror and violence is not going to end as long as there is at least one global superpower seeking to exert its political and economic dominance over other regions of the world and seeking to prevent either the rise of competing superpowers or to prevent other superpowers from exerting their political and economic dominance over other regions of the world. 4. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have US dominance over the Middle East and Central Asia as their fundamental operating logic. Freedom and democracy, should they ever arrive in those countries via US military occupation, will only be tolerated so long as they do not threaten US interests. 5. Successful opposition to these wars needs to involve three forms of resistance: resistance from the occupied countries themselves, resistance from the US civilian population, and - most importantly, I feel - resistance from soldiers in the US military itself. Matthis Chiroux, Ehren Watada, and Camilo Mejia are, I hope, merely the tip of the iceberg. They’re opposing the wars for roughly the same reasons I’ve listed above, plus they’ve born witness to the actual human toll, both physical and psychological, of these wars on US soldiers and Iraqi/Afghani civilians alike. 6. As stated upthread, sometimes the right thing is done for the wrong reasons. Stefan Cook’s resistance to the war in Afghanistan is based on arch-conservative jackassery of the worst kind. Frankly, if they’ve just dumped his ass from every job he’s held so far and left him to stew in his own juices, that’s enough time and effort wasted on him. ---
**Author:** ![jakesteele](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ed8c4c/32.png) [@jakesteele](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jakesteele)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/89 "2009-07-20T15:29:40Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’ll take “Persona Non Sequitur” for $1000, Alex. Simple question, simple answer…yes or no. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/90 "2009-07-20T15:31:18Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Why else would they give him a general discharge from IRR instead of either chucking him into the brig or shipping him out under escort, if his arguments had no merit whatsoever? If he didn’t have a leg to stand on legally, he shouldn’t be a free man today. … > > Whether he’s a hero or not obviously depends on your perspective - for you, a supporter of the war in Afghanistan, he’s a deserter. For me, who opposes both wars and fully supports resistance to them, he’s a hero. He got a General Discharge, because doing anything else would have given an organized group of nutjobs a greater platform for their bogus protests. Letting him go makes him insignificant, as he should be. I’m ambivalent about the Afghan war, but I believe Maj. Cook’s phony plea for publicity puts a stain on legitimate opposition to the war. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/91 "2009-07-20T15:35:12Z")
> [@jakesteele](#): > > Simple question, simple answer…yes or no. A question so simple, in fact, _it was answered in the OP_, which you quoted in your post. [QUOTE=Gangster Octopus] I was not in the military, so you may want to question my ability to call this man out, but I cannot think of anything more cowardly than using a looky conspiracy to absolve yourself of your responsibilities… [/QUOTE] In any event, it’s immaterial. Nobody actually believes that birther stuff, and frankly I don’t want anyone that does handling weapons or representing the country anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/92 "2009-07-20T15:55:27Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > I see where you’re coming from, **Fuji**. That’s not my perspective, however. A few points: > > 1. There’s a whole mountain of hypocrisy behind playing up the Taliban and Saddam Hussein as the new threats to world peace and by God, _something_ must be done when the US clearly had no problems with either of them doing what they did twenty to thirty years ago, e.g. Saddam gassing Kurds in Halabja in 1984 and Rumsfeld going to Baghdad to shake his hand. Hypocrisy, perhaps. The thing is, if the Taliban didn’t want to be on the receiving end of a US invasion, perhaps they shouldn’t have sheltered and supported OBL after US demands to turn him over? 'Twas hardly an unforeseeable consequence. > [@](#): > > 1. The US is using the same approach this time around as they did last time - finding whoever is happy to receive funding and training against the enemy _du jour_ regardless of political or religious stance. I’m not saying Maliki or Karzai are the next Osama bin Laden but that person is already most assuredly in the mix of fighters on the US side. In other words, even if the US decisively defeats the Taliban, it will have done nothing to stop the cycle of terrorism and violence. You may be right about the US creating the next OBL in Afghanistan. However, I’m cautiously optimistic that things will turn out better than in the 80s, as instead of using proxies, the US is putting its own blood and prestige on the line this time. > [@](#): > > 1. That cycle of terror and violence is not going to end as long as there is at least one global superpower seeking to exert its political and economic dominance over other regions of the world and seeking to prevent either the rise of competing superpowers or to prevent other superpowers from exerting their political and economic dominance over other regions of the world. Strongly disagree with you here. Even if the US abandoned Israel and followed a strict policy of non-interference in the affairs of predominantly Muslim countries, there would still be groups of bitter, angry losers there who would rather foment hatred against outsiders instead of improving their own societies. I largely agree with your other points. However, I would add that, while I think that the Chriouxs, Watdas, et al. may be acting out of a sense of personal integrity that on an individual level is commendable, I think it would be extremely dangerous for US security if such internal opposition within the armed forces ever became widespread. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/93 "2009-07-20T15:56:53Z")
> [@jakesteele](#): > > Are you a soldier now or have you ever been one? No, I haven’t. Have you ever learned to read? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/94 "2009-07-20T16:00:38Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Hypocrisy, perhaps. The thing is, if the Taliban didn’t want to be on the receiving end of a US invasion, perhaps they shouldn’t have sheltered and supported OBL after US demands to turn him over? 'Twas hardly an unforeseeable consequence. Probably the same principle under which we’d refuse to turn over George Bush if he was wanted in The Hague. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/95 "2009-07-20T16:01:11Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Hypocrisy, perhaps. The thing is, if the Taliban didn’t want to be on the receiving end of a US invasion, perhaps they shouldn’t have sheltered and supported OBL after US demands to turn him over? 'Twas hardly an unforeseeable consequence… You know for a fact, you have evidence, that the Taliban could have turned him over had they wanted to? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/96 "2009-07-20T16:09:28Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > I see where you’re coming from, **Fuji**. That’s not my perspective, however. A few points: > > 1. There’s a whole mountain of hypocrisy behind playing up the Taliban and Saddam Hussein as the new threats to world peace and by God, _something_ must be done when the US clearly had no problems with either of them doing what they did twenty to thirty years ago, e.g. Saddam gassing Kurds in Halabja in 1984 and Rumsfeld going to Baghdad to shake his hand. No one portrayed the Taliban up as a new threat to world peace. They played them up as the force in between us and our objective, Al Qaeda. As for your comments on Saddam, I doubt you’ll find any argument here, we pretty much universally agree that invading Iraq was a boneheaded move. > [@](#): > > 1. The US is using the same approach this time around as they did last time - finding whoever is happy to receive funding and training against the enemy _du jour_ regardless of political or religious stance. I’m not saying Maliki or Karzai are the next Osama bin Laden but that person is already most assuredly in the mix of fighters on the US side. In other words, even if the US decisively defeats the Taliban, it will have done nothing to stop the cycle of terrorism and violence. You seem to have this idea that history somehow ends at some point. It doesn’t bear out. History is a succession of stories that build upon one another. The idea that we will eliminate all threats once and for all is pie in the sky and unrealistic. In Iraq we have laid the groundwork for having to fight a unified Shia Islam sometime in the future and that’s unfortunate. In Afghanistan Karzai is from the Afghani secular royalist faction of the Pushtun tribe and not comparable to an Islamist Muj. We didn’t favor the secular royalists in the past because people like Bearden respected the Muj who were actually on the front-lines fighting, not the ones who comfortably lived in exile in western states. > [@](#): > > 1. That cycle of terror and violence is not going to end as long as there is at least one global superpower seeking to exert its political and economic dominance over other regions of the world and seeking to prevent either the rise of competing superpowers or to prevent other superpowers from exerting their political and economic dominance over other regions of the world. You could have stopped at, “That cycle of terror and violence is not going to end.”, you don’t need to qualify it. Humanity will be at war for the foreseeable future, there is nothing coming down the pike that should lead us to believe a peaceful world order will spontaneously break out during our lifetimes, unless of course we develop life-extension during our lifetimes, then maybe when we are three-hundred years old we might see a shift in human consciousness. > [@](#): > > 1. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have US dominance over the Middle East and Central Asia as their fundamental operating logic. Freedom and democracy, should they ever arrive in those countries via US military occupation, will only be tolerated so long as they do not threaten US interests. And? So what’s your point? We should let someone threaten us as long as they are a free democracy? > [@](#): > > 1. Successful opposition to these wars needs to involve three forms of resistance: resistance from the occupied countries themselves, resistance from the US civilian population, and - most importantly, I feel - resistance from soldiers in the US military itself. Matthis Chiroux, Ehren Watada, and Camilo Mejia are, I hope, merely the tip of the iceberg. They’re opposing the wars for roughly the same reasons I’ve listed above, plus they’ve born witness to the actual human toll, both physical and psychological, of these wars on US soldiers and Iraqi/Afghani civilians alike. Except it doesn’t appear that a ground swell of people in the US actually agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/97 "2009-07-20T16:12:31Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Strongly disagree with you here. Even if the US abandoned Israel and followed a strict policy of non-interference in the affairs of predominantly Muslim countries, there would still be groups of bitter, angry losers there who would rather foment hatred against outsiders instead of improving their own societies. > > I largely agree with your other points. However, I would add that, while I think that the Chriouxs, Watdas, et al. may be acting out of a sense of personal integrity that on an individual level is commendable, I think it would be extremely dangerous for US security if such internal opposition within the armed forces ever became widespread. Right, they might not be attacking us, but they’d be attacking whoever else they saw as an impediment to their goals. Global Jihadists want one thing and that’s an ascedent Islam. They want to see Darul Harb cleansed and a world united under Darul Islam, their strict interpretation of political Islam no less. As it is they spend far more capital killing other Muslims over theological minutiae than they do killing westerners. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/98 "2009-07-20T16:25:00Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Probably the same principle under which we’d refuse to turn over George Bush if he was wanted in The Hague. Well, in the real world, we both know the world’s most powerful nation would never hand over any of its high leadership for external prosecution. _Realpolitik_ aside, I also find the implied moral equivalence between a military invasion whose planning was publicly debated on the world stage for months prior to its initiation and a sneak attack which deliberately targeted thousands of civilians to be repulsive. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/99 "2009-07-20T16:26:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You know for a fact, you have evidence, that the Taliban could have turned him over had they wanted to? Nope, but then again, I seem to recall the Taliban’s argument to be largely “he didn’t do it” as opposed to “he’s not here”. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2009, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237/100 "2009-07-20T16:32:34Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Well, in the real world, we both know the world’s most powerful nation would never hand over any of its high leadership for external prosecution. _Realpolitik_ aside, I also find the implied moral equivalence between a military invasion whose planning was publicly debated on the world stage for months prior to its initiation and a sneak attack which deliberately targeted thousands of civilians to be repulsive. The point is not whether or not the two are equivalent. Obviously they’re not. However, if Bush was called up, we wouldn’t refuse on the grounds that he didn’t do anything wrong, but that as a sovereign state we’re not handing over one of our nationals to be tried in a foreign court. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-major-stefan-cook-bwahahaha-you-cowardly-nutjob/503237.md?page=6)