AWOL soldier refuses to return to Iraq

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
48
Los Angeles, CA, USA
marine said:
I will chime in here and stop the speculation...

Dishonorable Discharge: ... pretty much anything in this world worth living for is gone. You are a convicted felon...


marine,

A tad overdramatic, no? By no means I am saying that being a convicted felon or getting a dishonorable discharge is a good thing, but how shallow does one have to be to believe that the things taken away from convicted felons (right to vote, home ownership, etc.) are the only things, "in this world worth living for"?
 

mjalam

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 30, 2003
8,405
1
0
43
Bay Area, CA
marine said:
I will chime in here and stop the speculation...

Dishonorable Discharge: It is the equivalant of having a felony conviction on your record. You lose your rights to vote, own land, house, pretty much anything in this world worth living for is gone. You are a convicted felon.

The only way someone can "earn" (I use that word, because you really do have to earn it.. its not just handed out liberally like government cheese) is to go to a General Courts-Martial. That is the ONLY way you will get a DD.

And yes, you will check the box on any job application that you have a felony conviction. And when you dont, and they do a background check.. even a quick one.. it will pop up.

A general courts martial is the equivalant of a Grand Jury.

It does not say whether or not he had removed himself from society and hid out for awhile before turning himself in, and by the tone of the article, I suspect that he showed up on his proper day to return and said he was not going back over. I am sure the press would have lit up in big bold print the number of days he was actually in an unauthorized status. To be a deserter you must be "AWOL" for over 30 days, and show an intent not to return.
My guess is he will be given an Adminstrative separation under Other than honorable conditions and be sent on his way back to whatever coffee bean picking country he came from.



umm...i'm a convicted felon (granted i graduated college) but i haven't had that many problems at all..so saying everything worth living for is gone is complete bs
 

marine

poker brat
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
3,867
73
48
50
Fort Worth, TX
Nick,

Please forgive my use of "figures of speech" in the use of my language. I realize I must spell things out completely word for word in order to help people to understand how serious a Dishonorable discharge really is.

Please forgive my creative speech in trying to get across the seriousness of a DD. And I apologise for not passing the Nick Douglas speech and grammer test yet again.

Along with a large majority of DD's comes some serious time in the brig... usually along the lines of 10+ yrs spent making big rocks into little rocks. Reduction to E-1 and forfeiture of all pays and allowances.

So while "everything worth living for" is not true, you are not going to wake up thinking to yourself how great it is to be there.
 
Last edited:

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,476
151
63
Bowling Green Ky
Kosar I find the on goings in both Koreas facinating as well.

Been quite interesting since last elections in a nail biter with the old crowd (pro U.S.) losing out to the young crowd (who have known nothing but properity at the expense of the old crowd)
Roh Moo-hyun's present impeachment proceedings are throwing some new light on issue.

---and you are correct, if war ever breaks out--anyone near DMZ is toast. I think China may be asset this time if push comes to shove as war there will hurt them worse than N.K who has little to lose. I think China has already informed N.K of their consequences if they use nukes---however China will not say it publically as it is leverage in the Taiwan and Hong Kong situation--which is another story.

In case you don't have it here is interest link to Korean news.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/asia/kr.html
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
DTB actuley all you guys are so right. This is not playing in the sand like Iraq. This army is huge and has the big boys toys. I believe they may use them because they have little to lose and there leader is nuts. That's why this is so much more important then Iraq. We know this guys ships scuds and other weapons around the world. But I guess theres no law about that becasue other countries do the same. The key is find out where there going. Some oil and food is small price topay for peace. AS LONG as he does not break the agreement again. But remember someone did call his country a name and then he started acting up. So we must be a little extra carefull when dealing with a nut. It maybe said we will toast the place. But like Kosar said were so clsoe to good and bad in that area. We could toast many of our own. They need to keep the dude talking and China has to stay in the middle. But China for it's part may put great pressure on us about Taiwan. That could be another huge problem not handle right.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
good stuff

good stuff

dtb and kosar......i agree that china is kind of cracking the whip on "lil` kim".....they have,from reports i have read,cut off some of the economic aid to the n koreans a few times to make the point that they won`t have them shit-ing in their backyard....

in this case,we are a little lucky that china realizes the potential for disaster that this nitwit represents......

this is the case in point of how dangerous it is to stand by while these little dictators accrue nuclear armaments...your hands are pretty much tied if things get a little dicey when they hold the ultimate trump card.....

not defending the iraqi invasion,but,back in the early 80`s,the israeli bombing of the almost completed iraqi"french supplied and built" nuclear reactor("osirak.....nicknamed after the french reactor "osiris"...osiris and iraq="osirak")was a master stroke.....

obviously,oil rich iraq had no need for nuclear energy...

very interesting short read.... http://www.alisrael.com/tamuz/....

if not for this,saddam would probably still be in kuwait....because,there would have been no way to extricate him without causing a nuclear showdown....and israel might already be history....leading to what?.....i shudder to think...

the france`s of the world scare me every bit as much as the n.korea`s...

evidence is now coming to light regarding france`s alleged deals with iraq for large oil contracts........in return for "roadblocking" the u.s. effort to force saddam to come clean on inspections and circumvent any efforts through the u.n. to bring pressure on saddam....

france is our enemy....make no mistake about it...

they`ll sell their souls to the devil....
 
Last edited:

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,297
318
83
Boston, MA
dogs, generally appreciate your posts, however I find it amusing your continuous shots at Senator Kerry on his Vietnam service. Now I live in Massachusetts and by no means am I a huge Kerry Defender, however he answered the call, was there and did receive decorations.

Contrary, Jr. spent most of this period of his life drunk, Coked up and avoiding combat, All the while cashing those national air guard checks:rolleyes:
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I wonder if they shot a couple of these dudes that would be the end to the run aways.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,476
151
63
Bowling Green Ky
Shamrock: With all due respect---do you have any supporting documentation on allegations on Bush or is this some more Micheal Moore rhetroric---and on Kerry's military you obviously missed my post on that area.--and while on that subject I would say one should let a sleeping dog lie---but since he seems to be running campaign on that issue going as far as bring his fellow boat comrades with him to campaigns--he is opening his self up to scrutiny.

And just a little more on Kerry which got my goat today.
When the shit hit the fan in Spain the new liberal leader could not wait a day to jump up and say I'm pulling troops out. Now whether he does and when is fine but he should have done it discretely as he did nothing but bolster the terrorists that they were the direct cause. --now on todays bombings in Iraq.
It was not 2 hours after occurance that they had Kerry on ranting and raving-- Is he F--ing clueless what this does to bolster the terrorist confidence???? They are hitting mostly civilians now. knowing our troops and administration won't run like last time--but certainly must be encouraged if they saw Kerry today--in thinking they can in fact turn U.S. :mad: I will be curious to read tomorrows Algezzera newspaper. They have been anti bush and pro Kerry since he won nomination---I would not be surprised after today,if in tommorows edition they don't ask for funds from terrorist to donate to Kerry's campaign.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
If for some reason pro Kerry stops some of the killing world wide. Then Pro Kerry is better then Pro Bush. Will it happen. History tells us no. Dont matter whos who in our white house. They just go about there killing when they feal up to it. All the BS we wish to spread as if there going away or slowing down is just that BS. It's not even a good reason to keep one president over another.
Anyone that thinks Bush will end the terror attacks any better then anyone else. Including others from his party. Well just keep thinking that way. Its been on going through about 7 Presidents so far. And one way we might help our self in the future. Choose our friends better. We seem to choose bad ones. Then we try and cut them off. Then they seem to make us pay for it. Such nice guys like Saddam and Bin. Old buddies from the 80's.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,476
151
63
Bowling Green Ky
I see Jack Straw was correct there are some that think 911 and countless other terrorist aggressions did happen after invasion of Afgan and Iraq.

--but admittedly some agree with you DJV--


"In an interview secretly recorded in a Jakarta prison cell, Abu Bakr Bashir told Australia's Seven television network that any effort to attack the US was good, but the methods should be adapted to the situation.

The jailed Indonesian Muslim preacher's words - aired on Wednesday night - suggest the US should be fought with force in the Muslim world and politically in the US."

But he cautioned against attacking the US on its own soil: "Nowadays, we should not attack America with weapons, politics [is] enough."

Now tell me--is it possible after reading above--could anyone concur "who" they are counting on politically--if you can't grasp it consider events in Spain last week--They think Americans will follow suit---I say they're wrong,for now. If it happens 10 or 20 years down the road--I don't know
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I call most of it just BS. But like I said it dont matter whos sitting in DC. At least through the last 3 R and 2 D it has not. No sign of it stopping soon. Even if everyone kissed and made up. We will always have Israel held aginst us. I can see why other governments may want a change here. Folks have to be open to new ideas. Were still thinking like 1991. More or less finishing work Dad should have. Nothing new coming out of DC other then we are at war. We could have said that for along time. Im waiting to see how this undertaking in Iraq ends. Just plan civil war and full of terroist. If the ruleing consel we more or less placed in power desides. Ok we want UN in here to work with us. Thks U S you can go home now. I wonder If we would listen. Because every time I here Bush say we are not a occupier nor will we be. I think he might be playing with words.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,476
151
63
Bowling Green Ky
Hmmm Kerry not getting any campaign fundings yet from terrorist yet (that we know of)but did get a public endoresment yesterday.
Appears he was right about foreign leaders supporting him.:D

"Thursday, March 18, 2004



WASHINGTON ? He may have not been one of the foreign leaders with whom John Kerry (search) spoke about his presidential candidacy, but former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad (search) endorsed Kerry anyway on Thursday.

The former prime minister, who made headlines in October for saying at an Islamic Summit Conference that "the Muslims will forever be oppressed and dominated by the Europeans and the Jews," said Kerry would keep the world safer than President Bush.

"I think Kerry would be much more willing to listen to the voices of people and of the rest of the world," Mahathir, who retired in October after 22 years in power, told The Associated Press in an interview.

"But in the U.S., the Jewish lobby is very strong, and any American who wants to become president cannot change the policy toward Palestine radically," he said.

Kerry said last week that he has talked with several foreign leaders who said they want him to win the presidential election in November in order to introduce "new policies."

Kerry would not name any of the leaders with whom he spoke, but his campaign made clear Thursday that none of them was Mahathir, whom a Kerry spokesman described as not the kind of leader Kerry wants backing him.

Kerry "rejects any association" with Mahathir, "an avowed anti-Semite (search) whose views are totally deplorable," said Kerry foreign policy adviser Rand Beers in a statement.

?This election will be decided by the American people, and the American people alone. It is simply not appropriate for any foreign leader to endorse a candidate in America?s presidential election. John Kerry does not seek, and will not accept, any such endorsements,? Beers said.

Kerry has already received another endorsement from a less controversial, yet still foreign leader

Jose-Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (search), the newly elected president of Spain, said in an interview with Spanish radio on Wednesday that American voters should change their leadership and support Kerry.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Quite an interesting alliance----I have a question concerning newly elected Spain leader. They have captured several involved and will have more in furure-- now when the majority are imprisoned --what if the other terrorists threaten more violence and killings if he does not release them? Does he give in to their threats once again, the terrorist have already branded him an easy mark without question.
 

Turfgrass

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 26, 2002
1,153
5
0
Raleigh
djv said:
Were still thinking like 1991. More or less finishing work Dad should have. Nothing new coming out of DC other then we are at war. We could have said that for along time. Im waiting to see how this undertaking in Iraq ends. Just plan civil war and full of terroist. If the ruleing consel we more or less placed in power desides. Ok we want UN in here to work with us. Thks U S you can go home now. I wonder If we would listen.

For one thing, despite the U.N.'s professed aversion to war, what it really seems to object to is victory. In the U.N.'s 58-year history, two wars have been waged under Security Council auspices: Korea and the Gulf War. Both ended with less than total victories, leaving in power two of the worst tyrannies on earth, which are now two of the world's most dangerous rogue states. (If the U.N. instead of the Allies had fought World War II, Germany might still be ruled by Nazis instead of weasels.)
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Sometimes those Leaders from over here and there. Know more about what is going on then we get told here. Tony will say something for Bush soon. I thought we would here from Canada to. But then I guess they dont have alot of good to say about JR. That is to bad. Mexico that dude will have nothing but high fives. He should Bush is trying to help get rid of some of his population problem. You know when I think about it. I dont give a rats ass what any of them think. Pro bush or Kerry. Just get to work here at home and fix what is needed.
 
P

PRO190

Guest
Max 1yr and a "BAD CONDUCT" discharge :lol:

Why not just give him a TIMEOUT and send him to his ROOM:cursin:




The New military OATH ::
MEIJA :: " I VOW TO FAITHFULLY SERVE AND PROTECT MY COUNTRY , at LEAST TILL I FEEL LIKE IT SERVES NO PURPOSE FOR ME "
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
That's it. Boy thats a bad message to send to others. If we were really at war they would be shot or in prison for years.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top