Jump to content

Troops Refuse Orders in Irag

This topic is 6622 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

WIth the Iraq war turning to shambles, the Bush team faced a new challenge recently when as many as 17 troops refused orders to protect a military convoy because it was too dangerous and their equipment was lacking.


Army Probes Whether G.I.'s Refused a Mission in Iraq



Published: October 15, 2004



Filed at 4:21 p.m. ET


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army is investigating reports that several members of a reservist supply unit in Iraq refused to go on a convoy mission, the military said Friday. Relatives of the soldiers said the troops considered the mission too dangerous.


The reservists are from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, which is based in Rock Hill, S.C. The unit delivers food and water in combat zones.


According to The Clarion-Ledger newspaper in Jackson, Miss., a platoon of 17 soldiers refused to go on a fuel supply mission Wednesday because their vehicles were in poor shape and they did not have a capable armed escort.


The paper cited interviews with family members of some of the soldiers, who said the soldiers had been confined after their refusals. The mission was carried out by other soldiers from the 343rd, which has at least 120 soldiers, the military said.


Convoys in Iraq are frequently subject to ambushes and roadside bombings.


A whole unit refusing to go on a mission in a war zone would be a significant breach of military discipline. A statement from the military's press center in Baghdad called the incident ``isolated.''


``The investigating team is currently in Tallil taking statements and interviewing those involved. This is an isolated incident and it is far too early in the investigation to speculate as to what happened, why it happened or any action that might be taken,'' the coalition press information center said in the statement, sent to The Associated Press in Washington.


In the statement, U.S. military officials said the commanding general of the 13th Corps Support Command had appointed his deputy commander to investigate the incident.


The statement did not confirm several aspects of the relatives' stories, including the number of soldiers involved and the reason they refused the mission.


The soldiers refused an order on Wednesday to go to Taji, Iraq -- north of Baghdad -- because their vehicles were considered extremely unsafe, Patricia McCook of Jackson, Miss., told The Clarion-Ledger. Her husband, Sgt. Larry O. McCook, was among those detained, she said, saying her husband had telephoned her from Iraq.


The platoon being held has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina, said Teresa Hill of Dothan, Ala., who told the newspaper her daughter Amber McClenny is among those being detained.


Patricia McCook said her husband told her he did not feel comfortable taking his soldiers on another trip.


``He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were 'deadlines' ... not safe to go in a hotbed like that,'' she said, according to the newspaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soldiers refusing to follow basic orders in a combat zone, which has always been a court martiable offense, and even punishable by execution, should be praised and excused? Soldiers, i.e. Abu Grhaib guards, following such orders should be scorned, court martialed and imprisoned?


Damned if you do, damned if you don't. :-(


But of course, it appears to be only the far left wing liberals (who feel they have the sole right to set American policy because damn it, they are so much more intelligent, and it is their duty to guide the clueless conservatives), that are doing all the damning.


What should the policy be?? Well it should be flip on Monday and flop on Tuesday! Or was that flop on Monday and flip on Tuesday? Damn conservatives, especially the Republican kind, how dumb can they possibly be????


JABBERWOCKY! It's so easy to perceive!


"Twas brillig, and the slithy toves"

"Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:"

"All mimsy were the borogoves,"

"And the mome raths outgrabe"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says the behavior should be excused or praised? I don't see that anywhere. What it is is a reflection on the Bush war. Soldiers refusing duty because they don't have the equipment to protect them. It is yet another sign of the poor planning that went into this war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Swifties are upset with Kerry because they believe his opposition to war 35 years ago demoralized the prisoners of war held by the North Vietnamese.


In Iraq, the other side is holding 140,000 troops as prisoners of war. At least Kerry is pushing for more funds in the Veterans Administration budget, to give medical care for their physical and emotional wounds that we will be dealing with for the next 70 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...