Lifestyle > Train of Thought

40,000 US troops have diserted since 2000

<< < (2/2)

Don Rizzle:
THE BRITONS WHO ARE SAYING NO

It's not just Americans: hundreds of our own troops have ‘retreated' from Iraq. Philip Jacobson reports

Over 2,000 members of Britain's armed forces have gone long-term Awol since the war in Iraq started, and most are still missing. Before the fighting began, about 375 absconders a year were at large for any length of time, and were dismissed; that figure rose to 720 last year. About 740 men are thought to be on the run still, but have not yet been disciplined.

While the MoD denies that this trend reflects growing opposition to the war, lawyers specialising in court martials report a continuing increase in requests for advice from personnel desperate to avoid being posted to Iraq. Although the overall number of Awol cases has been fairly stable for a few years (about 2,500 annually), there is growing concern in the military about the "Iraq factor". Before, most absconders were Awol for a relatively short time, typically owing to family or financial problems, or bullying, and either went back to their units voluntarily or were arrested quickly. Most were disciplined by their commanding officers; punishments ranged from demotion to "jankers", a spell in a military jail.

But it seems that a growing number are ready to risk a charge of desertion — a far more serious offence than going Awol, with penalties to match. According to Gilbert Blades, an expert on military law, the MoD is playing down the true extent of the problem. "It is absolutely clear to me," he says, "that the crucial factor in driving up Awol levels has been what more and more service people consider to be an illegal conflict." As Blades sees it, the tightening of the legal definition of desertion in new legislation going through parliament is intended to deter potential absconders. Under the new Armed Forces Bill, people refusing active-service duty in a foreign country could be jailed for life. "It seems obvious this is a direct response to the situation that has developed as the war has intensified," he says.

Two cases this year have highlighted the issue of morally motivated "refuseniks" in the forces. Ben Griffin, an SAS soldier stationed in Baghdad, told his commanding officer that he was no longer willing to fight alongside "gung-ho and trigger-happy" US troops. Griffin fully expected his eight-year career to end in a court martial and imprisonment, but he was allowed to leave and was given a glowing testimonial to his "strength of character". Flight Lieutenant Malcolm Kendall-Smith, an RAF doctor, received eight months in prison for rejecting orders to report for a third tour of duty in Basra on the grounds that the occupation was illegal. He was later freed, but spent the rest of his sentence under house arrest.

An MoD spokeswoman told The Sunday Times Magazine that claims that the level of desertions was rocketing were untrue. "There is a good deal of confusion about this, because people often don't understand the distinction between deserting and going absent without leave. Only 21 cases of desertion have been recorded over the past five years, and just one person has been convicted of that offence since 1989." She also said criticism of the new legislation was "misguided and sometimes malicious". Under the present military legal system, she explained, each arm of the forces administers its own discipline. This no longer reflects an era in which combined operations are becoming common. "It makes sense in the circumstances to have a single law addressing matters of military discipline for all service personnel." But Blades argues that the clause providing for life sentences in the event of refusal to serve in a foreign combat zone "was driven through solely by the defence establishment to provide a drastic legal remedy to the problem of conscientious objection". It remains to be seen whether the courts, if pushed, will hand down such a stiff sentence.

WestCoasta:
man it ain't worth it.... they need to just go


hell, I think the war is wrong but I would stll go rather than facing ass-rape in a federal prison

Dubz:
shooting someone who is unarmed is in the top 5 most cowardly things anyone can do. same goes for killing children. these troops have got to wake up. everyone's got the "support our troops" boo-boo-boo-yadda stickers on their cars, but i dont see any reason to support them. true, there are legitimate, good-intending troops, but there are also so many havoc-wreaking ones that are dignified terrorists. showing support for them only gives more leverage for our leaders to use in keeping them in the middle east. i feel horribly for the innocent troops, no one in the world deserves to be in their situation. george bush is easily worst leader in the history of the modern world and if it keeps going like this, the iraq war wont be far behind the armenian gonocide and other unreasonable, unmerited, unwarranted fights in that class as the most brutally unjust "war" in the past 100 years.

westkoastanostra:
war is stupid....thats all i'ma say

Mr. O:
us army is getting lot weaker these days...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page