Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Letter from a Conscientious Objector? What a "Good American soldier" should be doing; disobeying orders.


Recently, again, some people insist that the individual US soldier cannot be held responsible for the US militarism and imperialism and killing of brown-skinned people 24/7. I think they are wrong.


Any soldier fighting on foreign soil is a criminal. Bar none. That includes Japanese soldiers in China in WWII, German soldiers in France and the Balkans and Russia in the same war, and that includes ALL US forces stationed overseas and in combat in foreign nations.


Another commentators wrote something along the lines of "regular German soldiers were not put on trail at Nuremberg" after World War II in response to my insistence that "Just following orders" is no excuse... Nobody remember the ten thousand conscientious objectors in American who fled the Vietnam War?


By the way, the utter notion that "regular German soldiers weren't tried at Nuremberg" is completely false. There were over 1,800 Germans put on trial at Nuremberg; even lowly prison guards, businessmen, radio commentators, and magazine editors were tried at Nuremberg.


Anyhow, I got this from a friend, and thought you'd enjoy what a "Good American soldier" should be doing; disobeying orders.... Or shall we be selective in our wars and ideas? Maybe you're right! Nanking was a very bad thing in China, but not all the Japanese soldiers there were bad guys. Some of them were trying to do what is right (Yes, I'll bet there were - and they were shot if they tried to desert.)

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi it is me Aaron Egon Moser.

The officers in the military took an oath to the Constitution of the United States of America not the President or Congress. If the President or Congress gives an unconstitutional order it is not valid so officers under oath are obligated to not follow it. According to the "stripping doctrine" if an officer of the state gave an illegal order it was them and not the state that gave the order so just following orders is not an excuse if they are illegitimate orders.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2009/03/03/declaration-of-orders-we-will-not-obey/

Anonymous said...

To compare us soldiers to Nazis, you should be ashamed of yourself.

mikeintokyorogers said...

Yeah, I'm ashamed of being an American and ask you soldiers "Just what American freedoms are you protecting in every foreign war since 1898?"

LIke I said, if you are an American military on foreign soil then you are in violation of the constitution. Period.

Killing brown skinned children overseas 24/7? Nazis.... Oh, yeah, I forgot... Not all the soldiers are bad.

mikeintokyorogers said...

THis is what the US military is about: http://lewrockwell.com/rogers/rogers250.html

Mr said...

Hi Mike,

A few questions..

1. What if a soldier is conscripted, and forced between being in the military, or being imprisoned/killed?

3. What if a soldier is a pacifist and in a non-combat role?

2. What if a soldier is in a medical field to save life?

3. What if a soldier is in a foreign country under the UN?

4. What if a soldier is in a foreign country for "peacekeeping"?

All the best.

mikeintokyorogers said...

Thanks Mr. That's what I like! Intelligent dialogue (not resorting to jingoism!) All good questions...
1. What if a soldier is conscripted, and forced between being in the military, or being imprisoned/killed? Well, today's US military is volunteer, so people claiming that "some of them mean well" seems a gross contradiction. But that is not your question; To answer: Muhammad Ali is a good case in point: Go to jail. Or, if death is the other option, then go to the military and become AWOL at 1st available chance.

3. What if a soldier is a pacifist and in a non-combat role? I believe in a strict Christian definition because it is easy t be transferred into a combat role; http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Christian_pacifism#Differences

2. What if a soldier is in a medical field to save life? I have a hard time with this one too. Sure most are there to perform medical services, but that is, once again, in the US case, t support foreign invasion... Also the history of the US military shows some quite distasteful use of "doctors" and "medicine." Some case even giving our own troops medicines and vaccinations as tests. "making the world safe for hypocrisy".

3. What if a soldier is in a foreign country under the UN? The UN is a criminal organization that is de-facto a support group for US imperialism. It should be disbanded.

4. What if a soldier is in a foreign country for "peacekeeping"? Why do foreigners think they know what's best for the locals? How would you or I feel if there were foreign soldiers on our soil?

Those are my hard-headed opinions....Could be wrong... Don't think so, though! Thanks!

Zanchito said...

So many people, so many excuses. I don't know why is it so hard to accept. You tell it as it is, Mike! Here the government and the media fabricate some sort of conflict a couple or three times a year. Really silly stuff, like somebody sailed too close to one of our fishing ships, or some african country was doing maneuvers (in their own soil, but they don't tell you that) too close to our military barracks (why the hell do we have barracks over there?!), and people go all apeshit (literally gesturing like apes) and patriotic on that, for a time. This is usually preceded by some scandal, or the scandal happens during the "hate week" as I've come to call them, always. Funny that coincidence, huh?

Anonymous said...

Mike, if you extrapolate that "Not all US soldiers are bad" then it stands to reason that not all Nazis are bad. Seems a fair comparison to me. Many Nazis weren't convicted at Nuremberg too!

Anonymous said...

From Aaron Egon Moser

Anonymous said...
To compare us soldiers to Nazis, you should be ashamed of yourself.
July 3, 2012 10:56 AM

Hay Mr. Spammer did you even read the article? Probably not. Us soldiers that is generalization that he did not use he is even admiring this solider at the end of his article.

Andy "In Japan" said...

The United States Government is an equal opportunity mass murderer. They murder many brown skinned people 24-7, and they also murdered white skinned people.

Our Great Leader, Clinton, mass murdered white skinned people in Bosnia. Clinton also mass murdered white skinned people in Croatia. In addition, he mass murdered white skinned people in Kosovo.

Emperor Bush II mass murdered white skinned people in Georgia where there is an area called Ossetia.

Name a President of the United States, and if it's in the last 75 years, you will name a mass murderer. Brown or whites or yellow or red skin, what does it matter?

Anonymous said...

There will never be an end to the apologists for murder... No point in even entertaining the idea

Martin J Frid said...

Great post Mike, interesting topic. In Sweden we have conscription (as in South Korea, Israel, and many other countries) and if you refuse, the police will come to your door and get you. Either to throw you in jail or to get you to change your mind. Talk about ludicrous. The police forcing young men to learn how to kill. Yeah, I know, it is called "defense" but it is still "learning to kill" often with huge guns from Bofors or aircrafts with missiles from SAAB and Volvo or landmines...

"Conscientious objector" is a hero.

Anonymous said...

Mike, how about writing more about Japan? I get the impression your not getting much intellectual sustenance in the land of the rising sun. Is it boring there?

Mr. Nobody said...

Hello Mike,

My apologies on the previous numbering.

The military is the only profession that I know, where one can sign a contract under the age of consent, and yet, is also disallowed from leaving, with the possibilities of imprisonment, or death.

Even if ones volunteers, why is an individual guilty for joining? Many professions aren't what they are cracked up to be.

In any other profession, if one finds out that criminal or immoral activity if going on, one is allowed to leave, are they not?

With a significant number of people joining do to their station in life, or their economic surroundings, how guilty are they, if the choice is between impoverishment and the military?

-----

A few questions about the SDF of Japan. Isn't the SDF guilty of UN and "peacekeeping" roles? Also, the following:

1. If the SDF is strictly for self defence, why then does Japan spend more on the SDF than the militaries of India and Italy, and almost as much as Germany?

2. If the SDF really is just for self-defense, then why were the SDF in a huge number of countries under the auspices of the UN?

3. Why were the SDF in Iraq?

4. Why is the Japanese Navy currently patrolling off the coast of Somalia? Since Somolia defined it's sea territory to be 200nm/440km, I believe that Japan has most likely invaded Somali territory.

5. Why does the current administration of the JPG, want to organize an Asian version of NATO?

The SDF may have previously been strictly for self defence, I think today, it is a military force similar to most others.

mikeintokyorogers said...

Hi Mr. N!
A few questions about the SDF of Japan. Isn't the SDF guilty of UN and "peacekeeping" roles? Also, the following:
1. If the SDF is strictly for self defence, why then does Japan spend more on the SDF than the militaries of India and Italy, and almost as much as Germany? Under the Japanese constitution, Article 9, Japan is not allowed to participate in any military activities outside of Japanese territory.

2. If the SDF really is just for self-defense, then why were the SDF in a huge number of countries under the auspices of the UN? Complete and total violation of Article 9 and MANY Japanese are furious about it.

3. Why were the SDF in Iraq? Ditto above. That was a big reason the LDP was booted out of power.

4. Why is the Japanese Navy currently patrolling off the coast of Somalia? Since Somolia defined it's sea territory to be 200nm/440km, I believe that Japan has most likely invaded Somali territory. Another gross violation of the constitution.

5. Why does the current administration of the JPG, want to organize an Asian version of NATO? MOst likely the thinking is the best way to tame China is to make her your friend (VERY Asian way of thinking). Still, a violation of Japan's constitution.

The SDF may have previously been strictly for self defence, I think today, it is a military force similar to most others. No. Every time there is talk of Japan's SDF doing anything overseas, it becomes a huge constitutional fight and that prime minister will lose his job. That's why, after just two years in Iraq, the Japanese left and the most popular PM in recent memory, Junichiro Koizumi, got the boot soon after to take the blame for that episode.

mikeintokyorogers said...

OH, I didn't finish answering #1: The reason japan spends so much on military is that Japan is occupied by the USA and when the USA tells Japan what to do, Japan reluctantly does it. The best thing that could ever happen to this nation is to get out from under the US security treaty and become an equal partner with her Asian neighbors rather than always under the USA skirt.

mikeintokyorogers said...

Here is a glimpse of what went on here when the Japanese SDF went to Iraq: http://www.china.org.cn/english/international/86196.htm
The story doesn't mention about the massive demonstrations that were held in Tokyo and all around Japan demanding a stop to this unilateral action by the prime minister in violation of the constitution.

Jimbo said...

As always, you pose an interesting dialogue, マイクさん. My brother is in the military to pay for school, as is his wife, and I have no doubt that if they were shipped somewhere overseas they would go without too much fuss, but that doesn't necessarily make them bad people. But then again, they are eye doctors and would likely never come into a "kill these villagers" type of situation.

It's a tough situation for sure. I applaud the actions of Mr. Baker for standing up for what is right, at the risk of his freedom (from jail), but at the same time, I can understand how many would be hesitant to take up the same cause.

But in the end, killing innocent people is wrong no matter what, so you'll get no real argument from me. For any real progress to be made, however, things need to change from the top down.