Deserter Claims To Have Witnessed Abuses

[Aaron]

CNN

SAVANNAH, Georgia (AP) -- A U.S. soldier who left his unit in Iraq rather than fight for what he called an "oil-driven war" faces a court-martial Wednesday on a desertion charge.

Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia, 28, of Miami Beach, Florida, could go to prison for a year and receive a bad conduct discharge if convicted by a military jury at Fort Stewart.

The Florida National Guardsman left his unit in Iraq in October on a two-week furlough to the United States. He was gone for five months before turning himself in to the Army in March.

He said his war experience made him decide to seek conscientious objector status.

The infantryman said he believes the war is unjust because it is about control of oil supplies. He also said he was upset over the death of civilians.

He said he was particularly upset over an incident in which his unit was ambushed and civilians were hit in the ensuing gunfire, and another in which he said an Iraqi boy died after confusion over which military doctor should treat him.

He also claimed he saw Iraqi prisoners treated "with great cruelty" when he was put in charge of processing detainees a year ago at al-Assad, an Iraqi air base occupied by U.S. forces.

Mejia filed the statements March 16, before the Iraqi prisoner scandal at the Abu Ghraib prison became public. Fort Stewart officials said they have forwarded his account to the Army.

In his objector application, Mejia said detainees were kept blindfolded and troops were ordered to use sleep-deprivation tactics to aid with interrogations.

He said prisoners were kept awake for up to 48 hours at a time, often by yelling at them or having them sit and stand for several minutes.

"When these techniques failed, we would bang on the wall with a huge sledgehammer ... or load a 9 mm pistol next to their ear," Mejia wrote.

"The way we treated these men was hard even for the soldiers, especially after realizing that many of these `combatants' were no more than shepherds."

Two things:

1. Why was this man in the military in the first place if he objects to war?

2. Instead of deserting, why didn't he finish his tour and then get out of the military?

[neoolong]

He was in the National Guard. He might have thought he would never be called upon to fight in an actual war.

[Aaron]

He was in the National Guard. He might have thought he would never be called upon to fight in an actual war.

That's just stupid. There is always the possibility of a call-up. If he objects to war he shouldn't be in the National Guard or the Army. If he only started to object to the war after he started his tour, then he should have finished it and then got out of the military. Deserting is just going to hurt his chances for employment down the road, after they give him a dishonourable discharge.

[neoolong]

He was in the National Guard. He might have thought he would never be called upon to fight in an actual war.

That's just stupid. There is always the possibility of a call-up.

What's your point? He might not have thought that it was likely. He could have joined when war with anyone wasn't really likely.

There is always the possibility of getting into an accident if you drive. Doesn't mean you still aren't going to do it.

[Aaron]

He was in the National Guard. He might have thought he would never be called upon to fight in an actual war.

That's just stupid. There is always the possibility of a call-up.

What's your point? He might not have thought that it was likely. He could have joined when war with anyone wasn't really likely.

There is always the possibility of getting into an accident if you drive. Doesn't mean you still aren't going to do it.

My point is that if you object to war than you shouldn't be in the military, regardless of when he joined and whether war is likely or not. The military's primary purpose is war, and he was only fooling himself if he believed that he could get away without serving in a warzone if a conflict breaks out. Especially the US military which has troops in over 30 different countries.

[neoolong]

Actually he didn't say he was against war. He said he was against this war because it "is unjust because it is about control of oil supplies."

Also, "he said his war experience made him decide to seek conscientious objector status." In other words, he wasn't anti-war until he had already served some.

[Aaron]

Actually he didn't say he was against war. He said he was against this war because it "is unjust because it is about control of oil supplies."

Also, "he said his war experience made him decide to seek conscientious objector status." In other words, he wasn't anti-war until he had already served some.

Well that leads us to my #2 question, instead of deserting, why didn't he finish his tour and then get out of the military?

[Thinkmarble]

Well that leads us to my #2 question, instead of deserting, why didn't he finish his tour and then get out of the military?

*sigh*
Because he did decide that breaking the contract he had with the american government was less "evil" then furthering a war he sees as unjust ?

[Aaron]

*sigh*
Because he did decide that breaking the contract he had with the american government was less "evil" then furthering a war he sees as unjust ?

While I applaud his courage to take a stand against the war, he has severely fucked his life up and if he has a family, theirs as well. If he is convicted and dishourably discharged he will be in a world of hurt job wise. He will never be able to get a government job again and I believe that most American companies will not hire him. So was taking a "stand" worth it? There were better and less dramatic options open to him.

[Sarevok]

Perhaps he prefers moral highground over personal gain.

[Aaron]

Perhaps he prefers moral highground over personal gain.

I hope that is of comfort to him when he's living on he street because he can't get a job.

[Uraniun235]

Not every job runs a background check, so he could just not list his military experience on his resume.

[jegs2]

Not every job runs a background check, so he could just not list his military experience on his resume.

Most jobs of any significant value do. However, he may be able to land employment at a Piggly Wiggly or Burger King.

[Knife]

SAVANNAH, Georgia (AP) -- A U.S. soldier who left his unit in Iraq rather than fight for what he called an "oil-driven war" faces a court-martial Wednesday on a desertion charge.

Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia, 28, of Miami Beach, Florida, could go to prison for a year and receive a bad conduct discharge if convicted by a military jury at Fort Stewart.

The Florida National Guardsman left his unit in Iraq in October on a two-week furlough to the United States. He was gone for five months before turning himself in to the Army in March.

He said his war experience made him decide to seek conscientious objector status.

Well, at least he tried for the CO status. Seems it wasn't given. I find it some what curious that he waited until his furlough to suddenly get firm in his 'beliefs' and take a stand.

The infantryman said he believes the war is unjust because it is about control of oil supplies. He also said he was upset over the death of civilians.

Thats the stupidest thing I've heard in a while. One of the major tenents of going to war, historicly, is over resources. Even if it were true, then thats a hell of a good reason to go to war in Iraq instead of an excuse to desert.

He said he was particularly upset over an incident in which his unit was ambushed and civilians were hit in the ensuing gunfire, and another in which he said an Iraqi boy died after confusion over which military doctor should treat him.

Well, he should be upset, but he should also pick up a history book. Civillians get caught in the middle of military conflict. It just happens. Its sad but it happens.

He also claimed he saw Iraqi prisoners treated "with great cruelty" when he was put in charge of processing detainees a year ago at al-Assad, an Iraqi air base occupied by U.S. forces.

Mejia filed the statements March 16, before the Iraqi prisoner scandal at the Abu Ghraib prison became public. Fort Stewart officials said they have forwarded his account to the Army.

In his objector application, Mejia said detainees were kept blindfolded and troops were ordered to use sleep-deprivation tactics to aid with interrogations.

He said prisoners were kept awake for up to 48 hours at a time, often by yelling at them or having them sit and stand for several minutes.

Thats fucking stupid. His god damn Drill Instructors did the same thing to him in Basic. (Perhaps not 48 hours but).

"When these techniques failed, we would bang on the wall with a huge sledgehammer ... or load a 9 mm pistol next to their ear," Mejia wrote.

"The way we treated these men was hard even for the soldiers, especially after realizing that many of these `combatants' were no more than shepherds."

Meh, the gun thing disturbs me.

Just another asshat trying desperately to justify being a coward. He will deserve his BCD or DD. If he had any specilized training or used any of his school benifits, the goverment should get its money back.

Get it through your head, boys and girls, if you sign up for the Army (in all its forms) even if its for school money, YOU COULD BE SENT TO WAR.

You don't get to decide the war, that choice is given to you when you decide to sign up, that and your vote.

[SecondStorm]

Thats fucking stupid. His god damn Drill Instructors did the same thing to him in Basic. (Perhaps not 48 hours but).

Nitpick:
It is not exactly the same is it?.
In Basic he should have been able to say stop and the DIs would stop. Doing so would have consequences but *he* would be in control of his own situation.

The Iraqi prisoners had no such option.

Its a question of being in a situation voluntarily or not.

[Thinkmarble]

Thats the stupidest thing I've heard in a while. One of the major tenents of going to war, historicly, is over resources. Even if it were true, then thats a hell of a good reason to go to war in Iraq instead of an excuse to desert.

Under german law any person supporting, preparing or partiscipating in a war of agression is to be sent to prison for 15 years to 25 years, that is pretty much the same amount a murderer will sent to prison for.
A war for ressources will under most circumstances be a war of agression.

Get it through your head, boys and girls, if you sign up for the Army (in all its forms) even if its for school money, YOU COULD BE SENT TO WAR.

You don't get to decide the war, that choice is given to you when you decide to sign up, that and your vote.

But you should be ready to object if a war is unjust, in fact you have a duty to disobey orders when a war is unjust, out of the very same reasons you have a duty to object if you are ordered to murder someone.

/me dones flame retardent suit

[Knife]

Thats fucking stupid. His god damn Drill Instructors did the same thing to him in Basic. (Perhaps not 48 hours but).

Nitpick:
It is not exactly the same is it?.
In Basic he should have been able to say stop and the DIs would stop. Doing so would have consequences but *he* would be in control of his own situation.

The Iraqi prisoners had no such option.

Its a question of being in a situation voluntarily or not.

Um, no. I guess in an extreme situation, he'd eventually be processed out of the military with a 'failure to adapt' discharge which is a General other than Honorable Discharge. This does happen in the US military though they are rare.

But that's taken to the extreme. The Basic=prisoner isn't an exact comparison but the actual process or the tactic is the same. Lack of sleep and stressful situations break people down.

[Knife]

Under german law any person supporting, preparing or partiscipating in a war of agression is to be sent to prison for 15 years to 25 years, that is pretty much the same amount a murderer will sent to prison for.
A war for ressources will under most circumstances be a war of agression.

Of course it is, but thats not the point. The point being is that most wars are over resources (historically). One of this guys major objections to the war in Iraq is probably really one of the best reasons to go to war.

If America really needed the oil bad enough to go to war for it (not really the case but...) then faced with the destruction of our culture would serve as a pretty good excuse for a war.

But you should be ready to object if a war is unjust, in fact you have a duty to disobey orders when a war is unjust, out of the very same reasons you have a duty to object if you are ordered to murder someone.

/me dones flame retardent suit

Now he just has to prove that the war is unjust. But really, thats the choice you get before you sign up and before you reenlist. You don't get to pick your wars if you choose to serve. Thats the deal.

[HemlockGrey]

Uh, of course, he chose to go through Basic...whereas the (evidently mostly innocent) prisoners didn't chose to go to prison.

[Thinkmarble]

Of course it is, but thats not the point. The point being is that most wars are over resources (historically). One of this guys major objections to the war in Iraq is probably really one of the best reasons to go to war.

If America really needed the oil bad enough to go to war for it (not really the case but...) then faced with the destruction of our culture would serve as a pretty good excuse for a war.

So if I break into a villa, murder the owner and take everything I can carry I should be accquited if I can show that else I could not sustain the life style I became ascustomed to while I was employed ?

A ressource grab is state organzied thievery and murder, and this does not change if you dress up in fancy clothes and call it war.

But you should be ready to object if a war is unjust, in fact you have a duty to disobey orders when a war is unjust, out of the very same reasons you have a duty to object if you are ordered to murder someone.

/me dones flame retardent suit

Now he just has to prove that the war is unjust. But really, thats the choice you get before you sign up and before you reenlist. You don't get to pick your wars if you choose to serve. Thats the deal.

Sorry, not gonna fly.
If "I just followed orders" is not an excuse for doing illegal and unjust deeds, then how can you demand that one has to follow oders [between renelistments] regardless the circumstances ?
If a soldier is ordered to comitt or assist in war of agression, and a war of agression is murder, he has according to you to follow this order as "you don't get to pick your wars if you choose to serve".

[Aaron]

CBC

FORT STEWART, GA. - A U.S. soldier who left his unit in Iraq to protest against the war was convicted of desertion Friday and sentenced to a year in jail and a bad conduct discharge.

Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia said he had no regrets over his actions and did not fear going to jail for what he said was a matter of principle.

A jury of four officers and four enlisted soldiers took about 20 minutes to decide to give Mejia the maximum sentence.

The 28-year-old Mejia, an infantry squad leader with the Florida National Guard, refused to return to his unit after a two-week furlough in October.

Called war unjust

The said he believes the conflict in Iraq is an unjust war driven by the need for oil.

In March, he turned himself in to the Army and asked for conscientious objector status. That request is being considered separately.

Capt. Tad Warfel, Mejia's commander, said Friday he hoped the verdict would be a warning that deserters would be punished, regardless of their reasons.

In his closing arguments, defence lawyer Louis Font said Mejia made an honest mistake by thinking he did not have to serve in Iraq anymore, once he decided to become a conscientious objector.

Mejia is the son of Nicaragua's leading left-wing singer.

[Knife]

So if I break into a villa, murder the owner and take everything I can carry I should be accquited if I can show that else I could not sustain the life style I became ascustomed to while I was employed ?

A ressource grab is state organzied thievery and murder, and this does not change if you dress up in fancy clothes and call it war.

No, but the pervebial 'steal a loaf of bread when you're staving' comes to mind. A war over resources is one of the oldest reasons groups have gone to war.

SO put this in context, if the deserting piece of shit is pissed off that this is an 'unjust war' because we're fighting over resources, then historically he's wrong or at least saying almost every conflict since the dawn of time is 'unjust'.

Sorry, not gonna fly.
If "I just followed orders" is not an excuse for doing illegal and unjust deeds, then how can you demand that one has to follow oders [between renelistments] regardless the circumstances ?
If a soldier is ordered to comitt or assist in war of agression, and a war of agression is murder, he has according to you to follow this order as "you don't get to pick your wars if you choose to serve".

Nobody has given them illegal orders yet. (Well, maybe the abuse in the prisons but I've seen little proof yet. Not that I don't believe it, just that I've seen little proof). You are putting legal consequences to political views.

If Bushy had sent the US troops over there to 'wipe them out. All of them." Then yeah, that would be an illegal order and the troops would be obligated to NOT obey it. Thats not what happened. He was given a lawful order to go into combat in Iraq. The President ordered it, the Congress signed off on it, he has little leeway here. Fuck him.

[Thinkmarble]

No, but the pervebial 'steal a loaf of bread when you're staving' comes to mind. A war over resources is one of the oldest reasons groups have gone to war.

SO put this in context, if the deserting piece of shit is pissed off that this is an 'unjust war' because we're fighting over resources, then historically he's wrong or at least saying almost every conflict since the dawn of time is 'unjust'.

So ? Since the inception of the "Völkerbund" it is clear that all these wars were unjust.
The leadership of the 3rd Reich was convicted for crimes against peace, which consisted of a resources grab (aka land grab or invasion of poland and a butt load of other countries).
Check out the principles of the Nuremberg trials

Sorry, not gonna fly.
If "I just followed orders" is not an excuse for doing illegal and unjust deeds, then how can you demand that one has to follow oders [between renelistments] regardless the circumstances ?
If a soldier is ordered to comitt or assist in war of agression, and a war of agression is murder, he has according to you to follow this order as "you don't get to pick your wars if you choose to serve".

Nobody has given them illegal orders yet.

Sure ? Even if this was correct your POV is problematic.

(Well, maybe the abuse in the prisons but I've seen little proof yet. Not that I don't believe it, just that I've seen little proof). You are putting legal consequences to political views.

If Bushy had sent the US troops over there to 'wipe them out. All of them." Then yeah, that would be an illegal order and the troops would be obligated to NOT obey it. Thats not what happened. He was given a lawful order to go into combat in Iraq. The President ordered it, the Congress signed off on it, he has little leeway here. Fuck him.

According to the constitution treaties signed and ratified by president and congress become "supreme law of the land". The UN charter delcaring wars of agression to be illegal was ratified in 1945.
As an result under american law any order pertaining to the invasion of iraq was unjust and illegal. The only defense a soldier partiscipating in the invasion can bring forward against the charge "commiting crimes against the peace" is "hindsight is 20/20" as well as "I was just following orders".
BtW the Veterans for peace are with me in this.


In short the President of the United states, the members of congress as well as any soldiers partiscipating in the invasion are criminals.

[Elfdart]

Exactly what commodities are worthy of war? If oil is an excuse, why not pork bellies? Cattle futures? The notion that attacking another country is justified because they have something you want is the mentality of thieves, rapists and murderers.

I find it amusing that this Army National Guardsman is getting his balls busted for desertion when Dubya deserted from REMF duty in the Air National Guard. Too bad this guy's daddy wasn't a congressman and grandad a senator. Maybe he could someday be President, too!

[Sriad]

No, but the pervebial 'steal a loaf of bread when you're staving' comes to mind. A war over resources is one of the oldest reasons groups have gone to war.

SO put this in context, if the deserting piece of shit is pissed off that this is an 'unjust war' because we're fighting over resources, then historically he's wrong or at least saying almost every conflict since the dawn of time is 'unjust'.

"Steal a loaf of bread when you're STARVING"?!?
Excuse me while I die laughing. First of all, the US ain't starving, we're sitting on our oil reserve, a fat man insisting on eating other people's bread. (although, granted, we're paying for it.) Second, history needs to stop trying to backseat drive on this one. 2a) UN charter, Geneva, etc ad nauseum. 2b) why yes, MOST WARS IN HISTORY WERE UNJUST. What the hell books are you reading? Historically speaking, wars aren't started because the Noble King is riding off to free the enemy nation's people from brutal oppression, they're started because he's actually a Greedy Asshat King out for revenge.

Which (thirdly) is, when you think about it, actually the case here.