Yesterday, I read an article on a soldier who refused duty in Iraq by stating he wouldn’t “play a ‘combat role’ in this conflict or ‘protect corporate representatives’…”
It is stated that his superiors in the Army National Guard took this as “violating a direct order” and he is worried about being jailed, or worse.
Good for them. No matter how wrong you or I think the war might be, how illegal the premise may be, or whether or not we believe the National Guard should specifically be involved in the war is NOT the point! He was in the business of America’s military. He chose that job.
We’re all human. We all change our minds and have ethical or moral dilemmas. Eli Israel is no exception. I hope they bring him out of there so he is not only not in danger himself but not endangering anyone else due to his decision to not be involved. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think he should be punished. He took a job that I believe requires you to give up certain freedoms of choice and just isn’t willing to stick to that commitment.
The political statement should not be made via members of our military. It is made by the people. And I think it’s nearing. I hope it’s nearing.
My thought is that say Eli was a police officer or a fire fighter. There are many duties and responsibilities that come with holding such a position. Folks would depend on him to do things and he would depend on other folks to do things for him. He is remunerated for doing things and taking certain risks. One can assume that Eli knew the risks and rewards that would come from being a member of the NG. I would further add that one can surmise that he joined guard voluntarily. Would a fire fighter refuse to work with his firefighting team if had political concerns about where they are fighting a blaze? These are just some thoughts as I don’t want to express my thoughts on the Iraq situation.