After reading the media coverage of the American deserter Jeremy Hinzman, I am angered by the blatant misrepresentations being perpetrated against both Americans and Canadians by the lies and half truths of a deserter, as reported in the media coverage of the story in both countries. Aside from the misrepresented belief in the individual choice of a soldier to determine his obligation of service and the rhetorical innuendoes being utilized in Jeremy Hinzman's defense, there exist no realistic defense or explanation for his crime of desertion.
Any intelligent person with common sense and an ounce of informed reasoning in either country recognizes that conscientious objector status exist only in the realm of conscriptive military service. The status is declared prior to not after the fact. Jeremy Hinzman was not drafted and he was made acutely aware of conscientious objector status provisions, before he (voluntarily) enlisted in the United States Army. He also signed an enlistment contract acknowledging his awareness of his responsibility for service, and in recognition of the fact that any potential claims conscientious objector status would be indefensible based upon his signed contract surrendering that right. He also took an oath to defend the US Constitution, to defend his country and to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief and those in his chain of command in the US Army.
Having intentionally deserted from the US Army during a time of war, he is now the focus of international media attention and he is desperately seeking any leverage that will aid his ability to escape punishment for his crime. His allegations of war crimes are not unique in the defense of a deserter and are relevant to his defense only as examples of the reprehensible whining of a coward seeking to justify his desertion.
It is a certainty that no war has ever been waged where innocent non combatants have escaped becoming victims and the war in Iraq is not unique to that reoccurrence of fact. However, Jeremy Hinzman's defense, by refusal to participate in an "unfair war" (in his opinion) is no more than a contrived ploy and attempt to play upon the media's desire to find any and all fault with American war policy in Iraq, while affording deserters the aura of a plausible defense from the consequences of their actions.
By his own testimony thus far, Jeremy Hinzman has openly admitted his guilt and he is now utilizing the complicity of others in defense of his crime of desertion, to support his theoretical belief that he as an individual soldier can determine the authority of the President of the United States and the US Congress and the US Army to require him to perform his oath and duty as an American soldier.
While he may believe his own delusional and metaphorical misrepresentations of fact and he may believe his own choice of creative definition of terminology, his individual assessments concerning war crimes, violence, fairness, atrocities and the morality of war, do not alter or diminish his guilt or accountability for his willful desertion from the US Army during a time of war.
While Jeremy Hinzman would like Americans and Canadians to believe that he is facing American military justice for simply acting upon his political beliefs, in reality he is facing punishment for his failure to hold allegiance to his oath and obligation to the Constitution of the United States, the US Army and to the American people. An oath where he swore or affirmed to defend, protect and serve the Constitution and the Untied States, against all enemies foreign and domestic and to follow the orders and directions of his superiors while enlisted as an American soldier. Once he took that oath, he willingly surrendered his individual ability to reflect upon the politics of war or refuse to obey the lawful orders of the US Army. He also surrendered any individual right of determination concerning America's enemies or his ability to choose his duty assignment or agreement or non agreement with national policy. As a Vietnam veteran, I am quite familiar with his ilk and whether he is identified by the media as merely a shirker, dissenter or conscientious objector is irrelevant to me. As one that has honorably served and defended his country during a far more contentious time in American history than this, I recognize Jeremy Hinzman for what he is. A deserter, a coward and one that should be punished for desertion and violation of his oath as an American soldier. © trickworm 2004
No comments:
Post a Comment