Support NeoGAF

[ErasureAcer]

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041015/NEWS01/410150366/1002

Refusing orders to deliver fuell...because they're "suicide missions".

Bush didn't plan this war out one bit.

Wrong place, wrong war, wrong time.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Since you can only mutiny on a ship I would say you are wrong.

 

[bionic77]

Since you can only mutiny on a ship I would say you are wrong.

What is it called on land?

 

[pnjtony]

Disobeying a direct order? Perhaps even....treason?! duh duh dun

 

[Pimpwerx]

What is it called on land?

Getting fired. :lol PEACE.

 

[xsarien]

Getting fired. :lol PEACE.

More to the point: The only feasible way to get out of Iraq. It's pretty sad that it's come to this.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

As it is applied here, probably insubordination. Mutiny is taking control of a vessel from the Captian of a ship.

These soliders didn't try an usurp control from the XO they just refused to obey an order.

 

[Cloudy]

I'd do the same thing. At least I'd be alive while locked up

 

[pnjtony]

I do hope this get's wider coverage though.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I do hope this get's wider coverage though.

Probably not. I mean if you look at it that is an isolated story that is appropriate to local news coverage. Now then if you start to see a patten of those actions then maybe so.

 

[ErasureAcer]

I stand corrected. thanks for the definitions!

the one US soldier asks, "what will happen to me if I attack my commanding officer?"

While I'm happy these troops are turning on their commanders and not just being pawns...shouldn't we be a bit worried that if this is happening to these guys...it is probably happening elsewhere in Iraq? Troops being sent on "suicide missions". Probably after one or two times barely making it through...I don't see why they'd want to chance it for a 3rd time.

The plan in Iraq is just not working. These guys weren't given the proper equipment from the get-go. I don't blame them for refusing orders...I think more US troops should do it...even if it does mean losing the war.

 

[Escape Goat]

Army Reserve troops, these are people not typically assigned to active duty correct?

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I stand corrected. thanks for the definitions!

You are welcome. Actually I was being partly comical (and smug) I got what you were content of your arguement and that is what was most important.

 

[DarienA]

Army Reserve troops, these are people not typically assigned to active duty correct?

No generally not. Army Reserves drill one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer, we are expected to be available to be called up to supplement regular duty troops if necessary(Army reserve troops train in all the same skills as active duty troops, engineering, infantry, etc.), suffice to say I think most Reservists who've been activated NEVER anticipated something like this, for this amount of time period when they signed up.

 

[pnjtony]

yeah, reservists aren't on active duty, but I have a feeling these reservists have been in a good rotation for over a year now. They tapped the reserves VERY early on in the war

 

[Escape Goat]

So these troops are people who signed probably signed up just for an reliable job and steady income. It doesn't suprise me there would be ones out there who are not prepared or capable of the job they are doing.

 

[pnjtony]

yeah, the steady income of the $50 a week they get. hahaha

 

[Escape Goat]

What do you expect for having to do training once a month? I know alot of people at school that are in the reserve.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

So these troops are people who signed probably signed up just for an reliable job and steady income. It doesn't suprise me there would be ones out there who are not prepared or capable of the job they are doing.

It doesn't suprise me either. The reserve system should be changed. I think that within their mandatory commitment time there should be some time during that commitment where they are to have at least one 6 month engagement (2 would be idea). If the current administration plans on using the reserves they have been then reserves should have some long term engagement with regular duty at some random interval so they can be prepared for something like this.

 

[olimario]

While I'm happy these troops are turning on their commanders and not just being pawns...

You're happy about this? Wonderful.
These people signed up of their own free will to be pawns. They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

 

[xsarien]

They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

Unless you're in the military, I really suggest you not mouth off as to what these people should've expected when they signed up for the reserves.

 

[Mrbob]

That link doesn't work anymore....

 

[demon]

You're happy about this? Wonderful.
These people signed up of their own free will to be pawns. They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

You're right. The government can do with them as they please, regardless of how justified it is. The reserves and national guard, too. Hey, they signed up, they should expect anything!

 

[DarienA]

So these troops are people who signed probably signed up just for an reliable job and steady income. It doesn't suprise me there would be ones out there who are not prepared or capable of the job they are doing.

Are you f'n kidding me? There are a high percentage of reservists who actually apply thier military skills to what they do in the real world, pilots, engineers, etc... I certainly take offense to the though that reservists aren't prepared to do their job... F U. Being active duty doesn't automatically make you better at your MOS.

You're happy about this? Wonderful.
These people signed up of their own free will to be pawns. They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

As a honorarily discharged reservist I have to say please STFU unless you've been in.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Unless you're in the military, I really suggest you not mouth off as to what these people should've expected when they signed up for the reserves.

You should expect to get in a wreck when you get in a car. I mean it can happen so you shouldn't be suprized when a semi come barrelling down the interstate at you.

Assuming that it could be a possiblity and expecting it are two different things.

 

[olimario]

Is this war far fetched? Did they not think this a possibility?
I don't understand.

 

[xsarien]

Is this war far fetched? Did they not think this a possibility?
I don't understand.
I take that risk when I opt to drive my car.

Yes; coming out of the 90s I know I wouldn't; and that's a terrible analogy.

They signed up to be reservists, a unit of the military that's generally not needed for distended periods of time in very hostile areas. But that's the situtation they're in now thanks to poor planning - sorry, almost no war planning - and they're ill-equipped for the task.

I'd do the same thing if I were in their place. Further, if I had the power I'd make anyone who openly, fervently, and/or blindly supports this war go over to Iraq to fight in place of reservists who value their lives over Bush's war for a nice, clean slate for commercial development in the middle east.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Since you can only mutiny on a ship I would say you are wrong.

No.

mutiny: Open rebellion against constituted authority, especially rebellion of sailors against superior officers.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mutiny

 

[DarienA]

The amount of time reservists have been called to active duty during this situation far exceeds the normal expectations, also the calling up of IRR forces back to active duty AND issuing stop loss orders are all highly unusual circumstances going on at the same time. In addition many of those reservists after serving for a year in Iraq and being told there were going home, were then asked to turn around and go BACK to Iraq. No one could have predicted this.

This is from an article back in July:

“It’s not just the National Guard or the Reserve component units that are doing missions other than what we designed them for,” he said. “Our entire force is doing that.”

Stretched by war needs, the Defense Department has declared a “stop-loss” to prevent the separation of troops who have finished their obligation. The Army is so stretched for manpower that in April it broke a promise to some active-duty units, including the 1st Armored Division, that they would not have to serve more than 12 months in Iraq. It also has extended the tours of other units, including some in Afghanistan.

“We’re taxing our part-time soldiers, our Guard and Reserves, nearly to the breaking point,” Skelton said. “We have to be aware that the families back home are paying a significant price. We don’t want to break the force.”

Critics say the stop-losses and dipping into the Individual Ready Reserve amounts to conscripting people to fight in Iraq. Some say the military needs a permanent increase in troops.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Is this war far fetched?

This particular war? In 1998 - 2000 yes. 2001 sort of. 2002 maybe. 2003+ yes.

Did they not think this a possibility? I don't understand.

Going to war? I sure some of them thought it was a possibility. More than not most thought it was a good way to get some skills that they could use in the private sector and education benifits. I don't think any of them thought they would have to do mutiple tours back to back.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

No.

mutiny: Open rebellion against constituted authority, especially rebellion of sailors against superior officers.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mutiny

Good catch and a nice try but, they didn't have an open rebellion against the XO. They refused to obey a legal command.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Good catch and a nice try but, they didn't have an open rebellion against the XO. They refused to obey a legal command.

I was responding to your statement that a mutiny must happen on a ship.

And, while it might be stretching the definition ever so slightly, isn't refusing to obey a command an open rebellion?

 

[Escape Goat]

I certainly take offense to the though that reservists aren't prepared to do their job... F U. Being active duty doesn't automatically make you better at your MOS.

So you are aware of how well all the reservists in were trained? And how well they excelled through the training? Were they prepared psychologically? Apparently not.

And I'd expect nothing less than a personal attack in one of your posts, Darien. Job well done.

 

[DarienA]

So you are aware of how well all the reservists in were trained? And how well they excelled through the training? Were they prepared psychologically? Apparently not.

And I'd expect nothing less than a personal attack in one of your posts, Darien. Job well done.

And you're aware of how poorly trained or how poorly psychologically prepared they are? Like most things the REAL answer lies somewhere in the middle. And you're damn right that was a personal attack you insulted a group of people I've lived with, planned with, froze with, marched in the mud and rain with, sweat with, and fought with, you can bet your ass I'm gonna defend them. To insinuate that Army Reservists are somehow less prepared to do their duties because they are active duty is to basically say well you're reserve and you won't be called up anyway so you'll get sub-standard training. Army reservists do their basic and advanced training in their MOS' side by side with active duty soldiers. My own platoon probably was about a 50% split. Ft. Jackson, South Carolina and then Ft. Sill, Lawton, OK baby... nevah forget!

If you feel I took it too personally maybe it's because I have friends who DIED the first visit to Iraq(Kuwait) and they were some of the smartest, bravest, funniest folks I've ever had the pleasure of spending time with.

There's a little perspective for you.

 

[Phoenix]

As a honorarily discharged reservist I have to say please STFU unless you've been in.

You can't dismiss someone's opinion just because they haven't actively participated in the military. One thing that is 'obvious' from being military trained is that refusing orders and a break down in the chain of command would be disasterous. The reserves are expected to participate in combat actions when called upon - that too being obvious. During the course of combat operations there will be things that you will do that will seem (and may actually be) excessively dangerous and borderline suicide, but if the battle plan calls for that - you ARE expected to carry those orders out. If you have issues with that, the military/armed forces are NOT the place for you to be.

 

[Triumph]

Where is Col. Kurtz when you need him?

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

but...but..but bush supports the troops. he'd never send them into harm's way without the proper equipment, right? right? go...bush?

The situation mirrors other tales of troops being sent on missions without proper equipment.

"Aviation regiments have complained of being forced to fly dangerous missions over Iraq with outdated night-vision goggles and old missile-avoidance systems. Stories of troops' families purchasing body armor because the military didn't provide them with adequate equipment have been included in recent presidential debates."


BUT KERRY IS A FILTHY LIBRUL!!!!!

darienA: why do you hate america!? you want to fight them there or here!? you want another sept 11th?

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Where is Col. Kurtz when you need him?

why do you hate freedom!? you want to send the wrong message to our troops!?

 

[DarienA]

You can't dismiss someone's opinion just because they haven't actively participated in the military. One thing that is 'obvious' from being military trained is that refusing orders and a break down in the chain of command would be disasterous. The reserves are expected to participate in combat actions when called upon - that too being obvious. During the course of combat operations there will be things that you will do that will seem (and may actually be) excessively dangerous and borderline suicide, but if the battle plan calls for that - you ARE expected to carry those orders out. If you have issues with that, the military/armed forces are NOT the place for you to be.

No I was dismissing the opinion because it was oli. Save the speech, please. Soldiers are expected to use their brains as well as their brawn. Besides brute force soldiers the military also wants smart soldiers, it is expected in some situations that a soldier may ask for clarification of orders, there are also situations(not necessarily this one), where a soldier by the nature of their own doctrine would not follow an unsafe order, or an order that goes against the military doctrine. In this situation however I don't think we've been told the whole story. A Sgt of 24 years doesn't refuse an order just for no reason.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

No I was dismissing the opinion because it was oli. Save the speech, please. Soldiers are expected to use their brains as well as their brawn. Besides brute force soldiers the military also wants smart soldiers, it is expected in some situations that a soldier may ask for clarification of orders, there are also situations(not necessarily this one), where a soldier by the nature of their own doctrine would not follow an unsafe order, or an order that goes against the military doctrine. In this situation however I don't think we've been told the whole story.

you want to fight them there or fight them here!?

 

[DarienA]

you want to fight them there or fight them here!?

LOL

 

[iapetus]

\Mu"ti*ny\, n.; pl. Mutinies. [[iFrom mutine to mutiny, fr. F. se mutiner, fr. F. mutin stubborn, mutinous, fr. OF. meute riot, LL. movita, fr. movitus, for L. motus, p. p. of movere to move. See Move.[/i]] 1. Insurrection against constituted authority, particularly military or naval authority; concerted revolt against the rules of discipline or the lawful commands of a superior officer; hence, generally, forcible resistance to rightful authority; insubordination.

Mutiny isn't limited to the navy - anyone can do it. If you're going to be a pedant, be an accurate pedant...

 

[mrmyth]

Hey Sarge
!

 

[Phoenix]

there are also situations(not necessarily this one), where a soldier by the nature of their own doctrine would not follow an unsafe order, or an order that goes against the military doctrine. In this situation however I don't think we've been told the whole story. A Sgt of 24 years doesn't refuse an order just for no reason.

I think we're pretty much seeing the whole story - or as much as we really need to know. The Sarge felt the vehicles were in no condition to make the run and they would not have necessary support to perform the job safely. If I were in his position, I would probably do the same thing as I wouldn't want to willingly expose my ass with no support and vehicles improperly equipped for the action I'm about to undertake. However, military courts have not always sided with this for one simple reason - those actions may endanger the lives of other soldiers on the ground . I would be live close air support saying 'its too hot, we'll got shot at so we're not coming in for support since all we have are cobra gunships with outdated missle detection and avoidance gear'.

I certainly empathize with the group and would probably have done the same thing, but I am doubtful if the military courts will uphold their action.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Mutiny isn't limited to the navy - anyone can do it. If you're going to be a pedant, be an accurate pedant...

Either way this wasn't a mutiny. There was no forceable resistance against a commanding officer. They just up and decided not to the job.

 

[Che]

You're happy about this? Wonderful.
These people signed up of their own free will to be pawns. They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

So if I sign a contract with my goverment to be a pawn, the goverment has the right to kill me or send me on suicide missions (it's practically the same)? I didn't know that. Plus many of them are young and stupid and are being deceived by the army and their fake promises.

 

[DarienA]

I certainly empathize with the group and would probably have done the same thing, but I am doubtful if the military courts will uphold their action.

Oh I definitely agree military courts don't always side with what necessarily is the 'right' morale thing to do vs. following the letter of the law... now is such a delicate time though with so much IMO discontent forming on the public side as well as the military side(plus it looks like the state rep is getting involved as well) that it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out, hopefully someone will follow this and post as new news articles come up?

So if I sign a contract with my goverment to be a pawn, the goverment has the right to kill me or send me on suicide missions (it's practically the same)? I didn't know that. Plus many of them are young and stupid and are being deceived by the army and their fake promises.

Well in this case the Sgt had been in for 24 years... I think he knew the deal.

 

[Spike Spiegel]

You're happy about this? Wonderful.
These people signed up of their own free will to be pawns. They knew the worst that could happen and they still signed up.

A lot of people here seem eager to jump on every negative sign or story, just for the chance to throw more stank on the current administration. Regardless of the potential ramifications.

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Since you can only mutiny on a ship I would say you are wrong.

mu·ti·ny Pronounciation Key (myoot'n-e)
n. pl. mu·ti·nies

Open rebellion against constituted authority, especially rebellion of sailors against superior officers.




Edit: damn, should have read the rest of the thread. lol

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Well this story just hit NPR. Let's see what happens after this.