Should American Deserters be sent back to the US?

[Disgruntled70sHab]

razor said:

I think that it would be fair if you did not want to be deployed, your jail term was the length of the deployment.

I haven't see this one, but it's a reasonable opinion, Razor.

My units, on several occasions in the past, were tagged to go overseas. The first time was when I was posted to Lahr and the entire brigade was put on standby for the 1991 Gulf War. The general had made it clear that we weren't going in as someone's rear area security. The objective was Kuwait and if he had his way he'd make sure we were going to be part of the liberation.

What I found hard was, while I didn't necessarily want to volunteer for the mission, I didn't want to be left behind either. As it was, I handed in the composition for the communications detachment I would be bringing if in the event I had to go. I didn't know until later, but that put me and my section at the top of the list.

As a former member of our armed forces I completely understand the disdain for deserters. I don't know if it is still the same, but prior to the Charter of Rights, desertion in battle was cause for summary execution.

You're right. It's no longer an option.

The Iraq "conflict" is much more complicated. There is no war. The US has not declared war on anyone since WW2. Let's not get into whether or not war was declared on them, because as we all know, Iraq did not have any links to 9/11. Because war has not been decared, the US is using that technicality to skirt UN conventions on war such as the Geneva Convention. That in itself is a good enough reason for a soldier to disobey orders/desert.

The largest part of the American recruiting problem is the initial reasoning for going into Iraq and the leadership therein.

Don't get me wrong. I've worked with some outstanding American units. However, I also worked with some others who felt they had a Hollywood persona to live up to as well.

Cheers.