As someone who enlisted in 2002, and went to Iraq less than three months after graduating AIT, who has deployed to Iraq twice, and is serving my first trip through Afghanistan, I have this to say to those deserters:

You didn’t think you were getting paid to do nothing, did you? The purpose of the military is to go to war, fight and destroy all enemies of the Constitution in close combat. Plain and simple. You shouldn’t have been lying to yourself by thinking it otherwise when you enlisted.

Spc Steve on May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM

Quite a difference between draft dodging and desertion. Good for Canada.

originalpechanga on May 22, 2008 at 7:42 AM

Hard to feel sorry for people who oppose war yet chose en employer whose main function is to wage war.

Dave Rywall on May 22, 2008 at 7:46 AM

As Robert DeNiro must have said at least once: “Boo Friggin’ Hoo.”

Cue the violins.

…then a rousing chorus of “Blame Canada.”

Captain Scarlet on May 22, 2008 at 7:52 AM

Since Canada has its own citizens serving in a war zone in Afghanistan, I can see why it decided to deport these guys. Fairly simple decision I would think. But hey, there’s always Mexico!

Bennett on May 22, 2008 at 7:54 AM

Desertion in a time of war should carry the death penalty.

I suggest the panty wastes head for Cuba or No. Korea.

TheSitRep on May 22, 2008 at 8:04 AM

Yay for Canada. If this weenie wants asylum, I hear Berkely is nice this time of year.

FishFearMe on May 22, 2008 at 8:13 AM

Canada comes to its senses. Well, at least in this matter, anyway.

I hope C-Span covers Glass’s desertion trial.

Bigfoot on May 22, 2008 at 8:35 AM

Come on, guys. They’re not “deserters,” they’re “duty challenged” employees of the DoD.

argos on May 22, 2008 at 8:37 AM

Canada didn’t recognize draft dodging as a civil crime, but desertion was another matter.

Uh, it’s either civil or criminal. It can’t be both. Muhammad Ali did five years in prison and it wasn’t because he was uncivil.

platypus on May 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM

Spc Steve on May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM

Thank you!

rbj on May 22, 2008 at 8:40 AM

Canada’s got the guts to deport criminals southward.

Are we going to man up and do the same?

MadisonConservative on May 22, 2008 at 8:49 AM

Perhaps now that Canada has their own heroes serving in Afghanistan, they have less patience for cowards.

The Opinionator on May 22, 2008 at 8:54 AM

I’m going to get a 2-4 and a poverty pack of Elsinore to celebrate “America’s Hat.”

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 22, 2008 at 9:12 AM

Slavery is a heinous institution, and Canada was right to help those who fled it. Viet Nam soldiers were drafted, so you could make a case for helping those whose true pacifist convictions caused them to flee to Canada, I think most of them were just scared though, personally. This current crop of DESERTERS from an ALL VOLUNTEER military deserve no such deference from Canada, or anywhere else they might run. If they go to Mexico the citizens there may use their constitutional right to apprehend and detain illegal immigrants before turning them over to the “authorities”. Oh that we had that right here in the states!! Let them flee like cowards to Tehran; or maybe they could share a cave with UBL somewhere.

Lunkinator on May 22, 2008 at 9:22 AM

Happy Birthday to Aunt Julie in London, Ontario, and three cheers for an increasingly rational and conservative government in Ottawa.

Rather than just claim support for my own position, I would like to know if I am right: my liberal friends, and lots of public American leftists, have claimed throughout the Bush presidency that our reputation abroad has suffered immeasurably. I have long claimed that they are all full of shit, and have no clue how we are viewed outside of their own political echo-chamber.

But now we have had more conservative and more U.S.-friendly leaders elected in Germany, France, Canada, and now this reversal in London (which I don’t claim to fully understand, but applaud). Spain went the other direction, but under unusual circumstances, I think. And in UK, obviously Blair was swimming upstream for the duration.

So, which is it? I claim that, whatever else our allies may think of Bush, they have moved toward us and clearly see that Bush was right in the WoT and has largely achieved our objectives, at enormous cost.

I claim that our prestige is going up daily. What say you?

Jaibones on May 22, 2008 at 9:27 AM

Guess these guys will now just have to go the other direction and head to Mexico.

pilamaye on May 22, 2008 at 7:41 AM

That won’t work, as Mexico deals very harshly with illegal immigrants there. Their blatant hypocrisy on this issue has always been mind-blowing.

AZCoyote on May 22, 2008 at 9:29 AM

I’d have some respect for a person who refused to serve if they stood firm in their convictions and faced the consequences of their refusal to serve instead of running up here to Canada like a whiny, little b*tch.

Get these pussies out of my country.

Mistahtibbs on May 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM

Mr. T, great comment.

As for recrimination, I’m all for it. 2 years of service in VA hospitals, fulfilling the spirit of your commitment, followed by a dishonorable discharge and loss of military benefits. I’ll be damned if I am writing VA mortgages for some pansy who ran off to Canada and left his former brothers to fend for themselves in Mosul.

Jaibones on May 22, 2008 at 9:33 AM

“Good for Canada, now if they’ll stop letting in all the muslims…
4shoes on May 22, 2008 at 7:57 AM”

Muslims are welcome in Canada. Racists like you are not.

Dave Rywall on May 22, 2008 at 9:29 AM

Your retort is both incorrect, and very short-sighted.

‘Muslim’ is not a race. But, given sufficient time, they will take your country over.

OldEnglish on May 22, 2008 at 9:49 AM

I feel bad specifically for all the soldiers that joined right after 9/11 to get Bin Laden and ended up in Iraq. Really if a CinC is going to mislead and lie then we should offer some kind of opt out. Many joined expecting war, just war that helps America, not war that drags down our economy through deficit spending, hurt our geopolitical position in the world, and overstretches our forces and hinders our ability to deal with real imminent threats that may arise.

LevStrauss on May 22, 2008 at 9:48 AM

There’s another thread regarding that which might be informative,

Terrorism on the decline and the surge is working: UN

Yakko77 on May 22, 2008 at 9:58 AM

But now we have had more conservative and more U.S.-friendly leaders elected in Germany, France, Canada, and now this reversal in London (which I don’t claim to fully understand, but applaud). Spain went the other direction, but under unusual circumstances, I think. And in UK, obviously Blair was swimming upstream for the duration.

So, which is it? I claim that, whatever else our allies may think of Bush, they have moved toward us and clearly see that Bush was right in the WoT and has largely achieved our objectives, at enormous cost.

I claim that our prestige is going up daily. What say you?

Jaibones on May 22, 2008 at 9:27 AM

Islam has been revealed for the misogynist and somewhat backwards theology it is, and moderate Muslims are beginning to take steps to bring it more in line with civilization today. Before Iraq, the trend was the other way. The radicals have been exposed for the evil bastards they are to their entire religion. Their tenets of faith and the extreme behavior they espouse is being discredited daily. The rest of the world sees that America was correct, stood mostly alone against the tide, and will not succumb to the thuggishness of Wahhabi Islam in our activities, support of moderates, and determination to pursue Justice and Peace.

None of this would have been possible without someone in America leading the country in opposition to bin Hidin’s theological treatises. That someone was the President. No one else stepped forward to push America down this road. No foreign governments stood up to be first to oppose Islamic terrorists who hadn’t hit them first, but WOULD hit them later.

I laugh every time some Dhimmi says why Iraq?, when there were others who deserved it more? I reply that the list is long and much less than distinguished. We are working our way up the list. Opposing any and every regime on the list of our enemies one at a time or all together, is a must. Recognizing evil intentions of groups and states because of their language AND behavior is required to combat that Evil. Only the American President did so, at first.

I am grateful to all those countries who eventually listened to the arguments and assisted us in opposing radical Islam, and allowing space to be gained for moderate Muslims to undergo their Reformation (which I believe is still just getting underway). But without our better example of how to live and oppose the terrorists, it is doubtful they would have had the wherewithal and the intestinal fortitude to oppose Islamic Terror wherever it reared its head. And that Islamic alligator would certainly have gotten around to eating them all as it worked its way up its own “enemies list”.

Our prestige continues to rise, and it was always higher than the prestige given to al Qaida, to the Palestinians, to the pacifists, and to those who idly stand by while innocent people are killed and oppressed, and claim that no offense was perpetrated upon their people, so they need not get involved in opposing evil conduct elsewhere. Our prestige rises except to those who will perpetually hate America and everything she stands for, and any journalist working to propagandize that only their ideas of Peace and Perfection have merit. Their cowardice is the root of the problem.

A Coward Dies a Thousand Deaths. The Valiant Die But Once.

We are winning. Islam is changing. This struggle (Jihad, if you wish, because this is the true struggle for the future of Islam and 1.4 billion Muslims) will not be over in 20 years or even 50 years. This war is not the End. It is not even the Beginning of the End. But, perhaps, it is the End of the Beginning.

To quit now means to give up on the sacrifices of thousands of American soldiers and citizens, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Afghans and Muslims, and the possible peaceful future of billions of Westerners and Muslims in the world today. Defeat is assured if we stop this path. Remember that when you hear someone say the war is too costly and too bloody. Because, if we don’t do this now, the cost in blood will be many times larger in the future.

And we can all thank the American Soldier with an M-16 in one hand, and candy in the other for providing this sterling example, when Everyone Else (and I mean EVERYONE) in America and the rest of the World thought it was impossible to bring Peace to Iraq.

We aren’t worth their spit.

Subsunk

Subsunk on May 22, 2008 at 10:04 AM

You should buy our beer anyway. I have yet to find a good American brew.

Also, the Harper government gets it when it comes to this sort of thing. The difference between desertion and draft dodging is huge.

Krydor on May 22, 2008 at 8:47 AM

Sam Adams.

Spirit of 1776 on May 22, 2008 at 10:08 AM

Muslims are welcome in Canada. Racists like you are not.

Dave Rywall on May 22, 2008 at 9:29 AM

It would be religious bigot, if you wanted to be pejorative. It’s a serious distinction. It’s not unlike calling a spherical celestial object a star when you really mean a planet.

And since Canada is the country with the Star Chamber problem, I’d wouldn’t be laughing that much. Your press has been muzzled…it’s been censored.

I doubt Canada will be ‘taken over’ by any particular religious group. But if it does happen, you won’t read about it in your own press.

Asher on May 22, 2008 at 10:15 AM

OldEbglish - Thanks for that amazingly valuable advice! I’m sure the invasion/insididious takeover plans are described in detail on page 347. I can’t wait.

Dave Rywall on May 22, 2008 at 10:25 AM

Dave Rywall

Read up Mark Steyn and the lawsuit against him.. Islam doesn’t have to take over… Canada is summiting just fine

DaveC on May 22, 2008 at 10:29 AM

Bells Oberon Ale.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 22, 2008 at 10:11 AM

Feh…it’s ‘oberrated,’ and mostly consumed by frat boys from WMU who think they’re drinking a dark beer because it doesn’t look pale.

My favorite is Blue Moon, but I’ll also take a Leinie’s Sunset Wheat over Oberon any day of the week.

James on May 22, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Muslims are welcome in Canada. Racists like you are not.

Dave Rywall on May 22, 2008 at 9:29 AM

Is their a real difference? Between a hard core Muslim and a racist?

right2bright on May 22, 2008 at 10:35 AM

Dave Rywall

Read up Mark Steyn and the lawsuit against him.. Islam doesn’t have to take over… Canada is summiting just fine

DaveC on May 22, 2008 at 10:29 AM

Robert Spencer is also a good read (and listen).

Glynn on May 22, 2008 at 10:40 AM

Pardon my ignorant fellow Canadian Mr. Rywall, he obviously votes NDP or Liberal and never took a course in Assfrom Elbowing. Dave, you are arguing from ignorance, you know nothing of Islam and sound like a petulant fool.

BL@KBIRD on May 22, 2008 at 10:46 AM

I feel bad specifically for all the soldiers that joined right after 9/11 to get Bin Laden and ended up in Iraq. Really if a CinC is going to mislead and lie then we should offer some kind of opt out. Many joined expecting war, just war that helps America, not war that drags down our economy through deficit spending, hurt our geopolitical position in the world, and overstretches our forces and hinders our ability to deal with real imminent threats that may arise.

LevStrauss on May 22, 2008 at 9:48 AM

This is really a rather asinine argument in my view considering that we have an all volunteer armed forces. You don’t get to pick your theatre of operation as an enlistee, you serve the US government as a whole and are deployed where needed. What are we gonna do, hire Gallup to poll the soldiers before each potential deployment? I suppose we should pull up stakes and abandon all of our interests in the world if these things poll badly amongst the enlisted, correct?

NotCoach on May 22, 2008 at 10:53 AM

Glass not only VOLUNTEERED, but took extensive training at the expense of the military

He only did for the college money, yo! No one told him the military could actually go somewhere to FIGHT.

tree hugging sister on May 22, 2008 at 11:12 AM

well, looks like someone has to play Devil’s advocate here.

(Imagine if you will, a male, southern-twanged voice)

The case can certainly be made that Canada taking in draft-dodgers is a reasonable thing for that country to allow. Tied into that, one can make the case that being drafted is being enslaved by the State, and as Americans, we consider slavery to be a monsterous scar on our nations history, and an inhuman institution, equal to genocide and eugenics.

Now, say you have an man, who has joined an organization, say, the Army. He joined based on his personal set of beliefs and morals, and has every intent of fulfilling his obligation. Now, say over the course of time, wheather it be five months or ten years, he has come to the decision that his continued service, or his participation in a particular theater of operations, runs in conflict with his set of personal beliefs and morals.

Now, this man has voluntarily signed a contract of service, i cannot argue against the legality of that. Luckily, here in America, we look beyond wheather or not something is legal. you have this man, who has contracted his service to the Army, believing it would be in sync with his ideals. But over time has come to find out different. faced with this situation, he has come to the conclusion that any person with moral courage comes too in this situation, not stand for it.

If the State takes a man, and KEEPS him in servitude against his will, does that not have the faint odor of Slavery? As an active member of my state’s militia (Nat. Guard) and an Iraqi Vet, i was constantly told that i was “federal property”, when the comment is made about service members and freedom of speech, there is commonly a following of laughter.

I would argue that it takes more courage to take action and leave, than stay and serve in an effort that one does not believe in.

Say it were you, you enlisted yes, but now you are being told to serve in an effort that you cannot morally rectify to yourself.

Now i’m not here to argue for, or against the war effort in the middle-east, only the individuals ability to refuse the authority that forces him to serve against his will.

He signed of his own will yes, but the second he finds that his service would be used for reasons he opposes, he in then HELD in service against his will, and faced with imprisionment, and as some here have suggested, even DEATH if he refuses.

I say again, i cannot argue against the legality of his contractual service, but i can argue for his right to stand-up for himself, and say: “I will not be a part of this”.

Ladies and Gentlemen of Hot Air, if the idea of forced servitude, does not bring a foul, un-holy smell to you, than you have no nose.

So if any right-honorable person of Hot Air finds reason to offer me a counter argument, please come forth, such is the purpose of these internet news blogs.

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 11:25 AM

Hang ‘em.
.
Any display contrary to the good order and discipline of the Armed Forces of the United States of America is disciplined, but desertion sets a particularly awful precedent that should be corrected harshly.
.
Regarding deserters signing up for one thing and then having the CinC alter their obligation: grow a pair. We’re expected to be prepared to defend the ideals of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. You don’t know who the enemy will be, and you certainly don’t enlist under the presumption that your obligations are limited. As I said earlier…hang ‘em.

blankminde on May 22, 2008 at 11:44 AM

I can’t wait for the weed-filled hippie vigils with out-of-tune guitars singing John Lennon songs.

AlexB on May 22, 2008 at 12:06 PM

We’ll be waiting to welcome them back.

29Victor on May 22, 2008 at 12:11 PM

*punished him for his betrayal

Cowboy is a compliment on May 22, 2008 at 12:22 PM

But now we have had more conservative and more U.S.-friendly leaders elected in Germany, France, Canada, and now this reversal in London (which I don’t claim to fully understand, but applaud). Spain went the other direction, but under unusual circumstances, I think. And in UK, obviously Blair was swimming upstream for the duration.

Italy went our way recently, but Australia didn’t, though it is not as the lefties anticipated either.

I claim that our prestige is going up daily. What say you?

Jaibones on May 22, 2008 at 9:27 AM

No it’s not going up, but we shouldn’t care. I’d rather be feared and respected, than liked, as the U.S.A.

Entelechy on May 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM

My counter argument is that he should have refused deployment and suffered the consequences, rather than trying to run to another country to escape responsibility for his own decisions. That is the honorable thing to do. The military would have punished him his betrayal then given him some less than honorable discharge. That is not slavery. He will be punished more for desertion, and when he is locked in prison against his will, that is also not slavery. It is punisment for his crime.

Cowboy is a compliment on May 22, 2008 at 12:20 PM

(imagine still, the southern twang)

Now, the right-honorable Cowboy has presented me a honest argument, and I in turn must respond in kind.

I agree that he did break contract, and in doing so, the law, he did commit a crime, punishable by prision internment, which is not equal to slavery, which was not my argument. Now i cannot argue the legality of the ramifacations of his breaking contract, nor can I speculate on the severity of discharge, I am not a J.A.G. officer.

That said, if a man, a soldier for the sake of argument, refuses to to serve in a war he views as immoral or illegal, or whatever reason he deems, why, should he stay, and accept going to prision for it?

If the afore mentioned Soldier decided to desert his contract for reasons of moral limitations, than what sense does it make for that same Soldier of moral standing, to accept his loss of liberty fot it?

I’m not saying he should have gone to Canada, or any other nation, had he the resources, he could have been able to hide here in the U.S.. But my guess being that he did not, why, oh why, would he agree to stay in a country that would put him in jail for multiple years, for refusing orders he believed to be immoral and/or illegal?

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 12:48 PM

Entelechy on May 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM

+1

OldEnglish on May 22, 2008 at 12:48 PM

Spc Steve on May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM

THank you for your service!
THank you for your sacrifice, and working for our freedom here, and for theirs there!

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on May 22, 2008 at 12:50 PM

I would argue that it takes more courage to take action and leave, than stay and serve in an effort that one does not believe in.

Wrong, again. It takes more courage to honor an obligation despite one’s changed feelings.

blink on May 22, 2008 at 12:56 PM

you have this man, who has contracted his service to the Army, believing it would be in sync with his ideals.

WRONG!

He contracted his service with the Army knowing that he would be obligated regardless of whether or not his service would continue to be “in sync with his ideals.”

blink on May 22, 2008 at 12:53 PM

The right-honorable Blink has a good point, every service member knows that the actions of the military or their branch will not always be in-step with their ideals, at which point they compromise, thereore bringing their service within their ideals.

But with this knowledge, Soldier 1 has colcluded that personally, the moral consequences of their service outweighs the legal consequences, and having an ounce of fortitude, decided this is not an issue with which he can compromise. we all compromise, but at times we must also draw the line at which we will not.

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 1:06 PM

blink on May 22, 2008 at 1:03 PM

RMC1618, will you argue for a soldier’s right to stand-up for himself, and say: “I will fight this war because it is the right thing to do according to my morals even if our evil leaders don’t agree with me.”

though that argument pre-supposes that the leaders are evil, if it could be objectivly said that a war effort was rightous, why woulden’t I support Soldier 1’s willingness to fight for what he believes.

Will you stand up for a soldier’s right to start a war that the CinC doesn’t want to wage?????

in such a case, the war would have to be specific, not just “a war”.

If not, then you’d better sit-down because it’s a two way street.

Either our military obeys the constitution or it doesn’t. And I’m pretty sure we all want it to obey.

every person who comprises the system we call “the government” and the Military must obey, uphold, and defend the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Decleration of Independence, as they are the bedrock of the greatest nation the Earth has ever known. And with that we expect our military members to be of the highist moral calliber, I, they, are each individuals.

We don’t have a military of obedient slaves, we have a military of Patriotic Americans. and Americans at times do dissent, the American service member has the right to refuse an order.

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 1:27 PM

LevStrauss on May 22, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Wrong. The wars in Afghan. and Iraq are not weighing down the economy, get your facts straight. The US economy has continued to expand right thru the .com bust, thru 9/11, and even thru the credit market meltdown of the past 9 months (I know this from reading newspapers btw, so it really MUST be true;). I think we’ve come to believe that the Bush Admin. and Congress continue to spend, spend, spend on the military and war effort with zero ROI. Sure, there’s corruption, always will be, but that’s already factored into the budgets just like Wall Street factors in the Fed’s next interest point increase or drop. So get past that and realize that American soldiers, private contractors, for-profit corporations, and non-profit NGO’s are all receiving our tax dollars to support their efforts in the war zones. Their efforts might be defined as eating, sleeping, fighting, building, hiring, bribing, acquiring etc. Soldiers get hazardous duty pay too (correct me if I’m wrong), and that means US families here and abroad have a roof over their head, food in their stomach, and a couple extra bucks for the kid’s college fund. Iraqis are opening new businesses with our tax dollars, which in turn means more people working. As we’ve seen, when you get the unemployed 18-34 yr olds out of the unemployment cycle in the mid-East, they stop working for the bad guys. Contractors are making a LOT of money, sure, but they’re working in WAR ZONES. They’re also sending that money back home to their families/spouses, not throwing it out the window to Iraqi families. And yes, KBR and other large corporations are probably being overpaid to support our troops’ infrastructure in theatre but honestly, if we put that kind of stuff out to bid, we might as well not bother going to war ever again based on how ineffectively our Federal Administration typically runs a bid process, but I digress.

Thanks to Spc. Steve for his service and of course to our Canadian neighbors for booting all these law-breakers out of their country!

Biffstir on May 22, 2008 at 1:33 PM

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Where is the honor of sounding obtruse?

An obligation is a honor to set out and do, since those who join are not made to do it via gun point!

What have you ever done that you can say you feel pride for?

I joined the army at a young age, in which I did my obligation and got out. I decided to re-enlist out of obligation, as quite a few people here have done. My obligation is to my Country, to keep Freedom intact and to let You, say and feel what ever it is your little heart would like.

Maybe my obligations for the civility of Life, Liberty and your persute of Happiness is just a dream. And even though you enjoy those traits… I hope you can still keep them, no matter what you think is right or wrong in “your” mind.

upinak on May 22, 2008 at 1:36 PM

upinak on May 22, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Sounds like you re-enlisted out of desire, not obligation. Big difference! Thanks for your service!

Biffstir on May 22, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Sounds like you re-enlisted out of desire, not obligation. Big difference! Thanks for your service!

Biffstir on May 22, 2008 at 1:57 PM

I did it for many reasons. Personal and other.

Anyone who is in or has re-joined, may say the same.

upinak on May 22, 2008 at 2:03 PM

Don’t get too excited, we don’t know where some 41,000 people with deportation orders are now.

I doubt anybody is going to go out of their way to find your guys.

G-man on May 22, 2008 at 2:08 PM

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 1:55 PM
If you are serving, and being that you are I would say early 20’s, that is great.

But just as a word of caution, don’t play the advocate. We have enough trolls around that already do it. And depending on where you live, you see them in person more then you want too.

upinak on May 22, 2008 at 2:02 PM

Thank you brother(if sister than please forgive me)

I decided to play the Devil’s Advocate, because every time i come here and see everyone going the same way, it disturbes me a little bit. If no one else will attempt a counter argument, then there is no exchange of ideas, and nobody has to use their brain, they just nod and say “yup”. And i don’t like the idea of that at all.

And the lable “troll” is so…, poor. I prefer: rebel, maverick, unorthodox, renegade, iconoclast, something with a little more dignity.

RMC1618 on May 22, 2008 at 2:16 PM