Kicked out of the Army
By debrakcarey
@debrakcarey (19887)
United States
6 responses
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
5 May 12
When he signed up for duty he knew what would happen if he disobeyed an order. I don't know why you are upset?
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
6 May 12
Deb, when you enter the military you are not there to think, you are there to follow orders. I have many friends in the military and they do things they don't approve of often, but they also know if they don't follow orders they are letting their team down. Again, he should have thought about this before he signed up!!!
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
7 May 12
What should have been thought about Is relinquishing our sovereingnty to an outside entity that is not bound by our laws or our Bill of Rights. What young man enlisting in service to HIS COUNTRY imagines he will be aske to wear another uniform or court martial for refusing?
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
7 May 12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsfrgJsE-_o&feature=related
Many of our soldiers are speaking up. Take a listen to those who are not suppose to think. ?? Not think? Where in the world did you come up with that?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmmMUK4S8jE&feature=related
You need to reevaluate what you believe debater.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
5 May 12
http://www.usasurvival.org/ck102602.shtml
article 1 of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations itself is what really condemns the action:
Article 15
1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 20
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
5 May 12
What people do not understand, because they do not actually READ the Constitution or Bill of Rights, is that IF we sell out to the UN, we are by default, giving up our sovereignty, our right to determine our OWN course as a nation. That means we as US citizens loose the protection of those documents.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
5 May 12
Look, I want us out of the UN as much as anyone. I believe they're a joke and a waste of our time, personnel, and money. I think it's ridiculous that we are bankrolling them, paying more than any other country in the world, so they can tell us how to run our country. Their sanctions against other countries are a joke.
That said, we are a member and everyone knows that our troops will sometimes have to work under a UN banner. I don't like it, but it is legal and they had the right to dismiss this guy for refusing to follow the order.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
6 May 12
Legal does not mean the same thing as 'right'.
I understand what you are saying. But I don't think this is right and the people responsible for it being legal are traitors in my honest opinion.
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
5 May 12
That's not right. He signed up to serve his country, not the army of a world organization that hates his country. Serving in the UN should be voluntary, not mandatory.
Have you heard about the soldier that was discharged "other than honorably" for writing that Obama is not an honorable commander in chief? He just put his opinion on a website and his life is ruined. I just heard a blurb on the radio and didn't get to investigate the full story, no coverage in local news here.
Seems to me that our soldiers are being subtly culled and herded into "good sheep" and "bad independent thinkers". Thank God most of them would never raise their weapons against American citizens.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
5 May 12
http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html
One of the tenents of the group:
We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control” during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war.
Perhaps Mr. West was a member?
1 person likes this
@mgzg11 (139)
• Croatia (Hrvatska)
7 May 12
UN missions are basically non fighting missions. They supposed to serve as peacekeepers and buffer zone between sides in conflict. I know a few things about it, since we had them deployed in my own country, and in neighborhood. As for their effectiveness on terrain, that's different subject. In most cases, they are pretty much useless.
About rights of POW's, that's should be considered in cases when war is declared. I'm not sure if USA has declared any war to any country (except global war on terror, which could be considered as global declaration of war against the whole world). And considering the fact that USA breaking rules and rights of civilians and POW's, it's a bit too much to expect that other side(s) will respect them.
As for soldiers, will they protect their own people, of course they wouldn't. Army and police are protecting the system, not the people. And since people are not economically profitable, they are not important anymore, and every use of force is acceptable to keep them from attempt of changing the system. Just as now military force is used all over the globe to secure interests and profits, it'll be used back home to protect same things.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
8 May 12
There are American millitary who have taken an oath to not use force against Americans. You can find their webpage by googling Oathkeepers.com or . org I'm not sure which. The link may be in one of the posts above this one. And as this article shows, they are also refusing to serve under the UN or to obey what they call unlawful orders. Some even have been imprisioned for refusing to serve with Obama as their commander in chief, as they believe he is not eligible to be president. Others have been discharged for speech against the military or the government. All is not well in the armed services of America.
@Citizen_Stuart (2016)
•
5 May 12
Presumably his unit had been seconded to UN duty. I'm not exactly the UN's biggest fan, I think it's a useless and expensive talking shop, but the USA is a member. As far as I can see that would make seconding units for UN duty and having the soldiers wear UN insignia perfectly legal. So the guy appears to have deliberately ignored a lawful order - something no army can put up with.