You may want to re-check the UCMJ. Look at Article 85 - Desertion
The penalties for desertion are as follows:
Completed or attempted desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years.
During time of war. Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
Why does everyone seem to assume that by “they can choose to quit” I meant “they can fuck off the base whenever and however they want” ? I was not talking about deserting or going AWOL. I have already elucidated that twice now.
Because your follow up statements are equally wrong
Yes they can.
Separation from the military prior to your contract term (without jail-time) is almost exclusively for medical reasons. If your unit is deployed and you all the sudden decide that you “don’t support this war” and refuse to deploy you will be brought up on charges.
Are there exceptions to this rule? I’m sure there are, but for the vast majority of soldiers quiting (without severe consequences) is not an option.
I don’t know what people voting Democrat has to do with it, there was a Dem president much of the time your military was in Vietnam. Not all forms of mass action = rioting by the way.
I haven’t been in the army for decades, but I think he’s at least half right. They don’t have to let you out, but I don’t think they will force you to go into combat, either. Most likely you will be given a less than honorable discharge, and at worst serve some time.
So I think his basic point, i.e. that anybody who doesn’t want to participate in what he believes is an illegal action does not have to, is correct. The penalty for not doing so may be jail, but that just makes the choice harder; it doesn’t remove it.
I agree with you that the choice is not entirely removed, what I took issue with was in Kobal2’s original post was “There is no penalty whatsoever for breaching that contract.”
This is simply not true.
People who say that we won the Vietnam war, and then left victorious, and the second we left the North Vietnamese started the war again and conquered South Vietnam by trickery are just being silly. No one could seriously believe this.
It’s like that Jack Handy quote. It makes me mad when people say the United States turned and ran like a scared rabbit. Maybe it was like an angry rabbit, who was going to fight in another fight, away from the first fight.
If leaving South Vietnam to it’s own devices was winning the war, then the British won the Revolutionary War. The British won just about every battle in the Revolutionary War, but they couldn’t win the war, and eventually they gave up. This is what happened in Vietnam. Yes, it’s a less than perfect analogy because the Americans set up a liberal republic after they won, and the Vietnamese created a communist totalitarian dictatorship. The fact that Vietnam was a hellhole for a decade or so after the North won doesn’t change the fact that the North won. The fact that they didn’t honor the peace treaty they signed doesn’t change the fact that the North won. Wars aren’t always won by the nice guys, sometimes the bad guys win.
As for the contention that, we could have nuked Vietnam into a radioactive hellscape but didn’t, that doesn’t change the fact that we didn’t win the war. War is the use of military force to achieve a political objective. We tried to use military force to achieve our political objectives, and failed. That means we lost the war. That doesn’t mean the America itself was threatened, as shown by the fact that we muddled through, and when we watched the last choppers out of Saigon we sighed, threw the newspaper in the trash and went about our business. And now, 35 years later, Vietnam isn’t exactly a great country to live in, but it’s not noticably worse than any other random crappy authoritarian third world country.
We lost in Vietnam. Yeah, maybe we could have won if we’d bombed North Vietnam harder, or sent more troops, or arrested the war protestors, or publicly shamed people for defeatists attitudes, or nuked Moscow, or sent more supplies to the ARVN, or all sorts of other things that might have happened, but in actual fact didn’t happen, and so we lost. You could also argue persuasively that losing in Vietnam wasn’t that bad because Vietnam wasn’t crtical to national security, and I’d agree, witness the fact that the United States is still here. That doesn’t mean we won, we decided it didn’t matter whether we won or lost, and so we left, which is called losing the war.
The United States has not been at war since 1945.
Did anyone say that we had been?
In that sense, everything’s a choice, and no one is obligated to do anything. Sure, there are penalties for choosing not to do certain things, which may include jail, but that just makes the choice harder; it doesn’t remove it.
Of course we have.
Keep in mind that the most destructive war our country ever waged was not accompanied by any formal declaration. It was authorized by Congress in the form of funding the thing, though, and that is what counts.
I don’t necessarilly support all those actions but…
Vietnam-Prevent North Vietnamese takeover of South Vietnam which means Communism spreads all over SE Asia due to the domino effects (which happened)
Iraq II-Prevent Iraq from getting WMDs (well we were wrong…)
Afghanistan-The Talibanists were providing a safe haven for Al-Qaeda who were attacking American soil, a war of defence
Libya-To prefvent mass murder by the Qadaffi regime against the rebels
Pinochet/Mujahadeen-The USSR did the exact same thing in many other countries not to mention that both Allende and the Communist Afghan government lacked popular support
My point is that students are not apathetic-they are merely shrewder and less fanatical.
When those helicopters fled Saigon it sure did not look like a victory parade.
While I agree that we exercise a bit too much warrior worship, we still have the most professional military in the world and this incredibly huge military has not tried to stage a military coup in my entire lifetime (the same cannot be said for other really large militaries). We don’t spit on them and call them names because we have been down that road before and it was only with hindsight that we realize how unfair and unjust we were to our own soldiers.
I was confused by how ridiculous this OP was until I realized who posted it.
Implying that those who protested against the Vietnam war weren’t shrewd or were fanatics because they actually got off their fat asses and tried to do something to stop it. Slacktivism is all well and good, but don’t paint those who actually go out and do something as somehow idiotic, insane or what not. I don’t understand why freedom loving people like yourself are so suspicious of mass protest.
I don’t mind the anti-war movement itself or just protest marches-I don’t support the riots, the heavy drug use, the open support for the Vietcong, attacking draft offices, and that sort of shit.
Originally Posted by Susanann
The United States has not been at war since 1945.
Which is it?
As far as I know, the United States has not been at war since 1945 ( the wars against Germany and Japan ), nor has the U.S.A. won a war since then.
Don’t want to get sucked into the whole re-fighting the Vietnam war thingy, but:
[QUOTE=Susanann]
As far as I know, the United States has not been at war since 1945 ( the wars against Germany and Japan ), nor has the U.S.A. won a war since then.
[/QUOTE]
Why? Because there wasn’t a formal declaration of war? Consider for a moment the fact that formal declarations of war have been the exception not the rule, historically speaking. A lot of things that were and are pretty obviously military actions and clearly fall into the definition of ‘war’ have had no formal declaration associated with them.
I think that Iraq and Afghanistan meet all the criteria for the US going to ‘war’…as does Korea and Vietnam. Whether you think we won any of those or not is, of course, your opinion, but saying they aren’t ‘war’ simply because there was no formal declaration is silly.
-XT
Then if you’ve been to private schools you or your parents should demand a refund or, if you’ve been to public schools, you owe the taxpayers of whatever state you grew up in, a refund.
Apologies if you’re from outside the US.