NationStates Jolt Archive

I've heard the Sweden put out a call for deserters
and awols to seek refuge there.
http://www.militaryproject.org/

ANYONE else got word to verify this?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iMusPYq83g
song above about the soldier who took a stand against the illegal
invasion of Vietnam.


below,
trailer for documentary on Vietnam war protesters - they were the soldiers.
something pretty much wiped from our collective memory with such things as the myth of Rambo. (i've heard that first Rambo movie was based on a book that was anti-war. but then it got turned hollywood with a good & bad guy)


Not Your Soldier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUO3fL4vfMA

I've heard the Sweden put out a call for deserters and awols to seek refuge there.

are you thinking of Canada?

Not Your Soldier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUO3fL4vfMA

ugh I won't even bother with that video

ugh I won't even bother with that video

I thought it was kind of funny. Then I realized they wer srs, liek hal turner blowin up peru.
DONT LET YOUR HOMIES JOIN THE HATE MACHINE.

DONT LET YOUR HOMIES JOIN THE HATE MACHINE.

pledge and get a free ringtone!

I do have to ask about this military sponsorship of video games though, seems kind of silly

pledge and get a free ringtone!

I do have to ask about this military sponsorship of video games though, seems kind of silly

America's Army.
I've heard that some films get support from the army/navy/air force if theyre pro-that-branch-of-service, usually in the form of equipment or letting them film military exercizes and such.
Which doesnt mean a lot. The police, fire department, corporations, other countries, etc. all do the same thing.
*shrug*

I wish Canada could take in military deserters from the United States, but at the moment, our government has agreed to send them back. I can't wait until we get those idiots out of office.

I wish Canada could take in military deserters from the United States, but at the moment, our government has agreed to send them back. I can't wait until we get those idiots out of office.

breach of contract is breach of contract imho

breach of contract is breach of contract imho

Only in the country of origin. Apply to a different country as a refuge, and you should be out of those silly things. And accepting military deserters is a good thing; it sends a message that your country is against the war that the country of origin is waging.

Only in the country of origin. Apply to a different country as a refuge, and you should be out of those silly things.

then you become a criminal on the run really

And accepting military deserters is a good thing; it sends a message that your country is against the war that the country of origin is waging.

no it sends the message that your soldiers can AWOL anytime they feel like (usually the time when they get called up to actually do what their trained to do oddly)

Sweden owns.

pledge and get a free ringtone!

I do have to ask about this military sponsorship of video games though, seems kind of silly

yeah, but the amount of money the put into making it didn't really produce all that many enlistees (i think Chalmers Johnson said that in his "Sorrows of Empire"). i.e. it was a bad investment. a waste of our tax dollars trying to propagandize the youth into thinking warring is cool like a video game.

yeah, but the amount of money the put into making it didn't really produce all that many enlistees (i think Chalmers Johnson said that in his "Sorrows of Empire"). i.e. it was a bad investment. a waste of our tax dollars trying to propagandize the youth into thinking warring is cool like a video game.

so what is there a secret pact with command and conquer that nobody knows about?

I want examples!

breach of contract is breach of contract imho

But a contract is void and unenforcable if it is illegal to perform the contract in the first place. Combine this with the Nuremburg trials which showed that if a soldier believes they are being ordered to perform an illegal act it is their duty to disobey.

But a contract is void and unenforcable if it is illegal to perform the contract in the first place.

too bad the current peacekeeping in Iraq and Afghan isn't illegal then, whatever flimsy justification it provided during the Iraq invasion is now gone

then again I could easily point out the outdated oaths sworn or the fact that desertion is affectively stabbing your best mates in the back when they need you (which is how there is an odd connection of when troops AWOL to their deployments coming through)

Combine this with the Nuremburg trials which showed that if a soldier believes they are being ordered to perform an illegal act it is their duty to disobey.

again I could point to peacekeeping or the fact that Nuremberg never prosecuted allied soldiers leaving its point fairly empty

breach of contract is breach of contract imho
What if this contract orders you to put civilians into a gas chamber?

He, if a soldiers goes AWOL to Sweden with psychical problems from Iraq, at least he won't be screwed out of medical care.

What if this contract orders you to put civilians into a gas chamber?

I never knew gas chambers are being used in Iraq!

also yes its still breach of contract to refuse and you should happily go to jail for it should it come up, however this is like using the "well thats what Hitler though" excuse which is a tad "lets take this to the extreme using emotional scenarios"

He, if a soldiers goes AWOL to Sweden with psychical problems from Iraq, at least he won't be screwed out of medical care.

transatlantic flights are still very pricey these days though, whats the point if they can't actually reach the place?

too bad the current peacekeeping in Iraq and Afghan isn't illegal then, whatever flimsy justification it provided during the Iraq invasion is now gone

Wether its legal or not is usually only established after it has taken place. In the mean time, a soldier can only act on what they suspect is right or wrong.

again I could point to peacekeeping or the fact that Nuremberg never prosecuted allied soldiers leaving its point fairly empty

Nuremburg set a precedent that 'I was only obeying orders' is not a valid reason for committing illegal acts while a soldier, requiring anyone who suspects that what they are being asked to is illegal to refuse to do it.

a soldier can only act on what they suspect is right or wrong.

which would usually involves fulfilling what they have sworn to do, or at the very least thinking of the poor sod who either has a guy missing or takes your place

Nuremburg set a precedent that 'I was only obeying orders' is not a valid reason for committing illegal acts while a soldier, requiring anyone who suspects that what they are being asked to is illegal to refuse to do it.

again I point out the lack of any Allied or Soviet trials, Nuremburg just showed that when you lose a war bad things happen and the victors get to rape your land with no consequence

I've heard the Sweden put out a call for deserters
and awols to seek refuge there.
http://www.militaryproject.org/

ANYONE else got word to verify this?
hmmm....I wouldn't be surprised if Fass hasn't got something to do with this. I bet he's into the whole gay army-man fetish.

Not Your Soldier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUO3fL4vfMA
I was going to watch it, but when I read the tagline:
"a bombastic new anti-war Flash animation called "Not Your Soldier." It's packed with mind-bending images, scary-ass facts, and a hot new song from The Coup. Bleeding edge technologies..."
it put me off so much I just could not bring myself to click the 'play' button. Someone needs to tell those people there is a limit to hyperbole and use of adjectives in a sentence.

I never knew gas chambers are being used in Iraq!Difficult question. The initial invasion was in violation of international law, and if the US didn't stop the international community from prosecuting those who participated, they would be tried, and presumably be found to be guilty of war crimes.

The American army even teaches as much to its personnel. Only, US legislation makes it possible to give their military personnel illegal orders, prosecute and punishing them, if they do their duty and refuse to carry them out. Either way, they end up being criminals.

That most then chose to obey orders, in practise makes them no different from some git hiding from AWOL charges in Sweden. They're every bit as much criminals, and every bit as much hiding where they can't be prosecuted.

But on topic: I don't see the problem. From an ethical standpoint, the only thing I can think of that is worse than prosecuting people for changing their minds about wanting to kill and be killed, is drafting them into doing it in the first place. Why not simply have the flipfloppers pay restitution for breach of contract?

which would usually involves fulfilling what they have sworn to do, or at the very least thinking of the poor sod who either has a guy missing or takes your place

I thought that soldiers swear to uphold the values their country stands for, not to follow it blindly just because it tells them to.

again I point out the lack of any Allied or Soviet trials, Nuremburg just showed that when you lose a war bad things happen and the victors get to rape your land with no consequence

Regardless of your personal opinions on the validity of the Nuremberg trials, the International Law Commission continues to uphold the Nuremberg Principles, making them international law.

Good for Sweden.

Resist militarism.

then you become a criminal on the run really

Just because it is against the law does not make it wrong.

no it sends the message that your soldiers can AWOL anytime they feel like (usually the time when they get called up to actually do what their trained to do oddly)

Better than nothing.

Difficult question. The initial invasion was in violation of international law, and if the US didn't stop the international community from prosecuting those who participated, they would be tried, and presumably be found to be guilty of war crimes.

I wouldn't say its international law if the action isn't declared illegal by the U.N

sadly the ones in power make up the laws

That most then chose to obey orders, in practise makes them no different from some git hiding from AWOL charges in Sweden. They're every bit as much criminals, and every bit as much hiding where they can't be prosecuted.

ah but only one has committed betrayal

From an ethical standpoint, the only thing I can think of that is worse than prosecuting people for changing their minds about wanting to kill and be killed

because huge amounts of time and money have gone into training, then to have them run away when they actually have to work is just being cheeky

there adults when they signed up, they had plenty of time to think about life in the armed forces throughout the training and they knew full well what would happen if they one day decided to disobey orders

pledge and get a free ringtone!

I do have to ask about this military sponsorship of video games though, seems kind of silly

It was kind of a crappy game too (America's army that is)

I thought that soldiers swear to uphold the values their country stands for, not to follow it blindly just because it tells them to.

soldiers are taught values and standards throughout training (British bias since the U.S probably has different wording)

underlined rules broken by desertion:

Selfless Commitment
Courage
Discipline
Integity
Loyalty
Respect for Others

loyalty would be a big one at least to your regiment

the International Law Commission continues to uphold the Nuremberg Principles

it does?! when did it start doing that then?

Just because it is against the law does not make it wrong.

breach of contract = breaking a promise in morale terms

but you can always go further about the people your deserting

Better than nothing.

not really no, a nation saying "no" would be something

Nuremburg set a precedent that 'I was only obeying orders' is not a valid reason for committing illegal acts while a soldier

Milgram disagrees.

soldiers are taught values and standards throughout training (British bias since the U.S probably has different wording)

underlined rules broken by desertion:

Selfless Commitment
Courage
Discipline
Integity
Loyalty
Respect for Others

loyalty would be a big one at least to your regiment

And several would also be broken by committing an illegal act.

it does?! when did it start doing that then?

Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950.

Milgram disagrees.

I wasn't aware that the Milgram experiment was international law.

And several would also be broken by committing an illegal act.

the most critical standard is loyalty which is meant as standing by your Regiment and your buddies

deciding you won't be a soldier when you are actually called upon isn't just being a coward (and lets face it there would have to be a wondrous excuse here) its betraying the trust of those around you

Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950.

awful lot of enforcement going on there why do you remember when all those Russian conscripts got war crime charges? no? me neither because such laws are a joke

I wasn't aware that the Milgram experiment was international law.

No one said that it was.

breach of contract = breaking a promise in morale terms

but you can always go further about the people your deserting

The problem is that you seem to think that this is somehow wrong. I don't. You're right, it is rather...suspect to join the army then desert upon hearing you've been called into battle. But so what? War itself is wrong, and deserting from the army is better late than never.

not really no, a nation saying "no" would be something

It would be something: something wrong. A nation saying "yes, you can stay here" is something nice to hear.

awful lot of enforcement going on there why do you remember when all those Russian conscripts got war crime charges? no? me neither because such laws are a joke

The laws are enforced when they can be. The hard part is catching the perpetrators when nations are not willing to extradite or put them on trial themselves. Regardless, the law exists and people have and are currently being prosecuted for this and other war crimes, even in countries which haven't even lost the war the crimes took place in.

No one said that it was.

Then it doesn't really matter, does it? I'm not arguing the justifications for such laws, I'm arguing the facts, and the fact is that such laws exist and are enforced.

Then it doesn't really matter, does it? I'm not arguing the justifications for such laws, I'm arguing the facts, and the fact is that such laws exist and are enforced.

Well all right then.
*ruffles feathers*

So there is somewhere to run to if Shrub decides conscription is good for the nation.

So there is somewhere to run to if Shrub decides conscription is good for the nation.Dodging the draft's a bit different from desertion. That's why there's so many Czech and Polish punks in Germany.

Is anyone here Swedish, or can verify this with personal evidence?

If it's true, I'm not sure why Sweden's doing this. Does it mean it no longer has a military? Otherwise, helping people leave the armed services of other countries is hypocritical, and even a little underhanded. But again, I don't know if this is really true.

Is anyone here Swedish, or can verify this with personal evidence?

If it's true, I'm not sure why Sweden's doing this. Does it mean it no longer has a military? Otherwise, helping people leave the armed services of other countries is hypocritical, and even a little underhanded. But again, I don't know if this is really true.

Not necessarily ... they are specifically helping people leave armed forces that are committing actions they do not agree with

It would only be hypocritical if their military were also committing those actions
Example (and I am NOT trying to make this comparison just seemed to be the best analogy I could think of right now)

A married friend helping some leave a marriage in which she was being physically abused.
I would not call the person helping hypocritical cause she also happens to be married.

Is anyone here Swedish, or can verify this with personal evidence?

If it's true, I'm not sure why Sweden's doing this. Does it mean it no longer has a military? Otherwise, helping people leave the armed services of other countries is hypocritical, and even a little underhanded. But again, I don't know if this is really true.
We still have a military but I don't know for how long. It's the area that costs the least votes to cut back on so every time politicians need more money somewhere else it's the military budget they take it from.

I haven't heard anything about this but it wouldn't surprise me if deserters who signed up voluntarily where accepted as refugees. That would be hypocritical not because we have a military but because our military unlike the US one doesn't recruit people, they draft people. If the Swedish military wants you then you either sign the contract or get thrown in jail.

While we're talking about hypocrites and Swedish military policies. We have a foreign policy to not sell weapons to nations that will actually use them. So we have a big arms industry for our small size and sell tools of war but that's okay if we only pretend the tools aren't really meant to be used to kill anyone even though thats what they are designed to do.

because huge amounts of time and money have gone into training, then to have them run away when they actually have to work is just being cheeky

there adults when they signed up, they had plenty of time to think about life in the armed forces throughout the training and they knew full well what would happen if they one day decided to disobey orders

Have you ever fought in a war? What gives you the right to judge someone who has lived through one of the most hellish experiences that life can throw at you?

So there is somewhere to run to if Shrub decides conscription is good for the nation.

Drafts and conscriptions are so archaic and disgusting, it's like slavery.

The problem is that you seem to think that this is somehow wrong. I don't.

running away is never justified they could of at least took the medicine of jail time, but seeing as how they didn't (knowing as course their excuses don't hold up in court), you can't even give them sympathy for that

War itself is wrong, and deserting from the army is better late than never.

hmm interesting idea here, do you think maybe they didn't know they where in the armed forces?

the law exists and people have and are currently being prosecuted for this and other war crimes, even in countries which haven't even lost the war the crimes took place in.

I'm sorry Russia is having its veterans arrested when they leave the country now?

Have you ever fought in a war? What gives you the right to judge someone who has lived through one of the most hellish experiences that life can throw at you?

they haven't though thats the problem (not that an operations tour is "hellish" at the moment, maybe you have seen to many Vietnam movies?)

I'm sorry Russia is having its veterans arrested when they leave the country now?

Pehraps if you could furnish the ICC with this list of surviving potential Soviet war criminals which apparently you but no one else in the world has then they could make a start.

If you sign up for it. Don't be a bitch, finish your contract. Its that simple. You know what you're signing up to to before you do it. Think about what might be asked of you and if you don't like the idea don't do it.

If your one of those retards who didn't do much research or only used one source, thats your problem and you need to man up and finish the contract.

If you think an order is unlawful then you can run it up your COC. They will adress the issue, if not request mass.

IMHO I think the shitbags who go UA/AWOL should be punished to the fullest under the UCMJ..... by death.

Also a little side note: If you signed up after the invasion of Iraq YOU knew that you would be doing back to back deployments until your contract was up. I can only speak for my unit on this, I'll most likely do 3 combat deployments in 4 years.

The Swedes are welcome to all the deserters they want. I can't see any good coming from it, but if they want to give sanctuary to a bunch of folks with absolutely no integrity, then by all means let them go.

Let's just pray that we don't have another President that decides to grant amnesty to the bums.

So have we figured out if this is actually happening or not yet?

I've heard the Sweden put out a call for deserters

You heard wrong. By the by, where did you hear this? And, Sweden is not referred to with a definite article.