Yeah.... this gal signed the dotted line to "fight for human rights and the safety of my country", went to Iraq in 2007. Did she not read the news about the things that were going on over there?

I have no sympathy for this lady, no one forced her to join and she chose to dishonor the oath she swore. Enjoy your time in the brig, and I hope your four children learn not to follow in your footsteps.

Butch:

I think she should get those five years in prison and pay back ALL money she received while in the military and if she cant pay them leave her ass in jail. She took an Oath to serve this Country and to OBEY ALL orders of the Commander and Chief without question. I guess she liked all the benefits that came with joining the military though.

Creek, what death sentence?

This was a voluntary committment. Did she think she was going on a trip to Disney World? Lock her A up so she can know what losing your freedom is all about.

I am sure that the military will take good care of her, once she is returned to them.

Now it is just a matter of time before we find out just what charges will be filed against her. The U.C.M.J. is very specific on punishment for desertion . The dishonorable discharge is a no brain-er. The military could look upon her desertion as having taken place during a time of war. If so, that usually means life without parole or a firing squad. No matter how you look at her case she is toast period.

Creek--well over a million servicemembers have deployed to Iraq since 2003; the 4500 KIA represent less than 1% of all who have served. As a female, she would have been in a combat support role, and her chances of being killed or wounded were minuscule. She didn't go AWOL because she feared death, she did it because she disagreed with U.S. policy. So much for a "death sentence". When you volunteer to serve, you take an oath to obey orders--ALL orders. You don't get to pick and choose. And when she deserted, someone else had to take her place. She shirked her responsibility under her oath of service; if she believes she made a moral choice in deserting, she should at least take responsibility for her actions and take her punishment.

She doesn't get to change her mind to become a conscientious objector just because she didn't want to go back after a tour. Obviously deserted, but not in the face of the enemy. Forfeit pay, short prison - probably less than a year and DD.

Creek Dog

Most people commenting how wrong she is are correct however, most also never been in the US military and condemn her actions but, throwing her under the bus is unwarranted. She made her bed and has to sleep in it.

She threw herself under the bus. And yes, I have been in the military.

When people enlist, it all sounds great and seems like it's going to be a great experience but, when they get over there, reality sinks in and they realize that they're not cut out for this.

Reality sinks in long before troops are deployed overseas. Those Army ads showing people rappelling out of helicopters to a martial tune, while the announcer says, "We do more before dawn than most people do all day" are a great recruiting tool. Too bad they don't show a line of privates picking up cigarette butts on a parade ground at 0530 while a pot-bellied E-5 stands behind them shouting, "This is all you can be."

Cowardice knows no gender. This gal knew what she was siging up for, just like a lot of the rest of that have served did. I have no compassion or sympathy for her. She turned and ran while others had to carry on! She is neither special nor deserving of any special treatment, especially because she is female. I agree with Butch's comment above. I pity her children for the shame she has brought on them and for her and family.

I don't know. My recruiter told me in January 1969 that with my scores, if I signed today, I would probably become a clerk and be stationed in Germany. I found out the Green Machine lies. I was saying on the bus to Tigerland, that there must be some mistake.

Did that fact that they own you fly over your head like a frisbee?

If you joined, no one twisted your arm. So stop your moaning.

The key word Yank in your statement about the recruiter is "PROBABLY". The recruiter did not promise you the desk job.

This is a no Brainer she is a deserter. I don't care what her reasons were she joined the military freely and she can't pick and choose when and where she wants to go. At a minimum she should get 20 to 30 years with at least 15 of it mandatory behind bars.

At least she had a back up plan - look at her, she is in no shape to be deployed!

I hope Leavenworth still has that "rockin" fitness program they used to threaten us with.

I'm not even sure (based on this story) how she "witnessed" these supposed atrocities? What was her MOS? She couldn't have been infantry, so she wouldn't been on the patrols she describes. It isn't like supply trucks follow around the infantry guys just in case they need a drink of water. She was probably not in much of a position to have anyone's back.

My guess is that she got over there and it was a hot, scary, miserable desert. She was far away from her family, she was lonely, and objecting to a war that she signed up for became a convenient excuse to be a coward. My brother has been to Iraq three times. My husband has been to Afghanistan three times. It sucks. A lot. But you finish your commitment and then say, "This isn't for me", get out, take your GI Bill, and go to college to learn how to do something else. But you finish your freaking commitment.

ihate - I concur. People don't seem to realize the "death sentence" statement made above. Yes DESERTING in the military is punishable by a DEATH SENTENCE. Everyone knows this who served. ESPECIALLY during a time of war. Will she get shot? No not with the amount of crybaby P@#$! this country has become. Obama won't allow it. Should she get 20 years for it? Absolutely... "conscientious objector" Really?? My arse....

It's one thing to join, go to MEPS, basic, AIT, and any other schooling - then hear that you're going to a sham war and decide to exit in a nonstandard way. It's a whole different monster to join knowing that we are at war then bi*ch afterward and decide to leave.

I do have to agree with Creek Dog that I'd rather have someone covering my a** that can do the job rather than someone who can't hack it. Should they have the option to leave? Honestly, yes. They're sandbagging the rest of your fire team and putting them at risk. They surely don't intentionally mean to be blue falcons and it's setting you, them, and your squad up for failure. I'm not going to blame or judge another soldier who can honestly admit that they can't do the job. It's shameful enough for them. I'd rather see them leave and let the rest of us do our mission effectively without distractions or needless danger.

Should there be a punishment for breaking the contract that she signed knowing we were at war? Yes, but some of you need to take the leather off your damn necks or loosen it up a bit. 5 years in prison? How does that make you any better than her when you demand that? Are you aware that that's a harsher sentence than rapists and child molesters receive?

Look, I am not defending this girl for going AWOL. I am only mentioning the fact that "some" people signing up, don't know what they're getting into until it's too late. Now they're under contract and she breached her contract.

I agree with you, Creek. Most don't know what they are getting into. The recruiters exaggerate the truth and don't really explain or give you the whole story of what you are getting in to. I think there are people who are born military and those who want to play military. When those who want to play military sign up and get in the "@!$%#" they don't want to play anymore and in turn risk the lives of those that are meant and want to be there. I do think the girl needs to suffer some consequences but I also believe that recruiters should be more honest about whats waiting for the new recruits.

First of all, the U.S. has been in Afghanistan since Bill Clinton was in office, not 2003 as this reporter says. I know because my husband served during that time and was sent there, and my nephew was one of the first ones over there, and he was a member of Special Ops then. It was Clinton that refused to let them shoot Bin Ladin when they had him in their sights 3 different times before 9/11 even happened. It irritates me that the leftist media is still skewing the truth to allow them to blame Bush for it all. Afghanistan is Clinton's War.

I can understand as a Mom how she must have missed her children, but then she shouldn't have signed up in the first place. Her remarks about how our troops treat the people sounds more like something she made up or just wanted to use for her defense. I'll bet the real reason lies in the fact that she saw her children and didn't want to leave them again. Sure the recruiters try to make it sound like its a great career, but you have to be completely stupid to buy that since there are pictures of war all over the place, and we hear about guys getting killed all the time. She didn't live in a bubble and had to have heard about the wars. Sounds to me like she went in and thought that women don't get sent into war zones, and then she got chicken and ran. Personally as a woman...that is why I don't think women should be allowed to go into war zones, because emotionally they can't control themselves...I know I am one...lol. She will have to face the music...dishonorable discharge, maybe some brig time. But don't worry the Supreme Court and this President will allow her to lie about her time in service. She won't have to tell future employers why she was dishonorably discharged. She can always take on the story of a real soldiers and lie, making herself sound like she was the bravest, strongest, and most medaled soldier ever. She is a disgrace to all the men and women who didn't run away and show themselves to be cowards.

Chicken @!$%# period.....end of Story.

Creek Dog

Denver,

Reality sinks in when you hear the bullets whizzing by your head along with the ricochets and explosions. Not to mention picking up your comrades body parts. "Not" before you're deployed.

I too had the opportunity to pull wounded brothers from shell holes. And I have vivid recollection of what the term "traumatic amputation" means. I would never denigrate another brother's service experience. I guess it just took you a little longer than me to figure out that the reality of service life was not the same as the expectation.

People who have never been in the military don't really understand what it's like. And people who have never been in combat have no idea what it's like and have no right to judge others who have been under fire. (note: being in combat, and being in a combat zone are two totally different things. One means you personally are being shot at, the other means people in the general area are getting shot at)

I enlisted in '87, back when the Russians were the big bad wolf. i saw combat in Desert Storm and also Somalia. Did I want to go? No, not really. But when I enlisted, I was told flat out that if there was combat, being a Marine, I would most likely be in it. None of us really wanted to go and get shot at, but we did our jobs. (ok...a couple of rabid nut-jobs thought it would be fun).

We trained every day for combat. We were prepared, (or so we thought), for it. We woke up every day wondering if the world was going to go to heck that day and send us off to war. When it did, it was in a place none of us expected. We had prepared for Russians storming the Fulda Gap. We got Iraq invading Kuwait.

Even though we weren't specifically trained for it, we went. We did our jobs.

A couple of years later, the alert came again, and we were off to some place called Mogadishu. Most of us had no idea where it was. But we went, and we did our jobs.

This woman enlisted durring a time of war. What did she expect would happen? No surprise she would be deployed to one of the two wars going on. Oh, war wasn't what she thought it was? Too bad soldier. Suck it up and do your job. You don't have to enjoy it. You don't have to agree with it. But you volunteered for it, so you have to do it.

The military has a process for chickening out of combat. She would have been deployed, but kept out of daily operations until her case was settled. But no. She showed her true colors and ran away as soon as she had the chance.

A true contentious objector doesn't run. They stay and fight their moral fight. She's just a coward trying to claim CO status to get out of trouble.

She disgusts me.

Those deserters who turn themselves in usually get 30 days jail-time, reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay, and an "other than honorable" discharge. Those who don't turn themselves in get a good deal worse, but rarely the max.

I'm very anti-war, and not a fan of what our country has been doing militarily. That said, this woman deserves her punishment. She volunteered. Should have done more research before you joined the army. The time to object is beforehand, not after.

So, I'm guessing she grew up in a small town that places soldiers one level below God (not to disrespect our troops, I am a veteran myself, but I viewed it as a job I signed up for). She probably had unrealistic fantasies about what it would be like and I wouldn't be surprised if she and her family were arm-chair warriors with dad reminiscing about Vietnam and granddad reminiscing about WWII. I bet she figured that as a female, she wouldn't have to do any of the dirty work, which I had seen a lot of in my time and really felt sorry for the female soldiers who took their job seriously. So, she signs up and *gasp* actually has to go to war...I was amazed at how many E-5's and E-6's whined when we were deployed to Iraq. But the sad thing is that she didn't have to desert, after her first tour she could have told her superiors that she wanted to leave, she could have said she was gay back in '07 if needed. In today's army it is much easier to quit, even in time of war, than it used to be...no draft and all volunteer. True they can still keep you in against your will, but that rarely happens. But since she was stupid enough to desert, she will have to suffer the consequences. And, although the death penalty is still an option, as far as I know, I seriously doubt the Army would even persue it.

This woman is no conscientious objector, she is a whiner who joined up voluntarily and then decided she did not like being deployed and the conditions under which she had to live and serve. Desertion in time of war is normally punishable by death!!! I realize that there is no way that this woman is going to be put to death, but maybe a nice 25 year prison sentence at hard labor in Leavenworth will teach her that you do not go back on your commitments to the military and run away in a time of war.

Denver,

Yup...

Guess that makes you a better man than me.

Have a nice weekend...

Death sentence? She was most likely a FOBBIT. Her conscientious objections are severely unfounded and Ill tell you why - half the moral issue soldiers had that DID NOT have a combat MOS was based on hearsay and little more. Rumors and innuendo make it around the FOB because of BOREDOM. Her issues are irrelevant and quite simply an EXCUSE to get out of sentencing.

She signed up, knew the commitment required and then turned tail and ran when she had to return. No sympathy while others honored their commitment regardless of hardship.

So when do we get paid back for supporting her and her kids for 5 years? Also, can you come and get the other ones that deserted? There are plenty more just like her in Canada, whining for rights and support. We will kick them out too I hope.

she is a diserter. all of us veterans didn't like some of the jobs we were given but we did them anyway. no one broke her arm to join the service she volunteered and took the oath to protect our country. i don't have any respect for her at all. i did four years and would not think of doing what she did.

Wow when Canada a mostly liberal progressive country says GET OUT you must be some kind of loser.

I thought Cananda was just a suburb of the US anyway. I am sure we give your govt. money, just use that.

Jym Allen - No weapons of mass destruction ? Perhaps you should learn your ABC's as in Atomic, Biological, and Chemical weapons which are all weapons of mass destruction. Review history and recall that Saddam used chemical weapons on the Kurds killing thousands, so there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that he had and had used weapons of mass destruction. Now as far as nuclear weapons, no we did not find any of those, but we did find stores of chemical weapons and possibly biological weapons. Just because we found no nukes does not mean we didn't find weapons of mass destruction.

Throw the book at this woman. She did desert in time of war. My son graduated Infantry school in '06 and they graduated in BDU's rather than class A's because we were at war. I don't believe she deserves a firing squad, but she deserves much more than time gone and off the hook. This has to have some sting to it. My son did a tour in Iraq and one in A'stan. Was it fun ? no. Was it comfy ? no. But he proudly did his duty with honor and courage just like most of our troops do. To give this woman a slap on the wrist symbolically takes away from the sacrifice, honor, and courage our troops that do their duty have rightfully earned.

I hope that they all get to come home and soon. Iraq is over and A'stan is simply a waste of time, money, and lives. Six months after we're gone it will be right back to what it was in 2000 under Taliban rule. Get our troops and our cash out of there now, and never, never, ever go back unless they directly attack us or our embassy. If either of those happens go back with the gloves off and act like you really want to win the war, not hearts and minds.

I agree with most of the posts here on that she volunteered to serve and fight against terrorisum, but still the one thing that is a fact and that is the war started for no just cause. WMD in Iraq, BS to that statement of GWB... Now to fight the religious fanatic the blows up the stupid terrorist and innocent people in the name of their God, Yes we must fight.

Morale of this story - Time for bootcamp to get more difficult to weed out people like this.

I guess I would call her a disillusioned objector. I just don't see the conscientious objector status applying anymore as we have no draft.

However, I can somewhat see her side. Years ago when we had a draft, those who were approaching draft age did a lot of thinking about the implications long before they were called to serve. Most true conscientious objectors were about rejecting the concept of war and/or killing in the name of war. A person such as this could never possibly volunteer. No doubt, some may have claimed conscientious objector to get out of serving, but they were often given the benefit of the doubt by Canada when they allowed them asylum. Today is different.

The problem is volunteering knowing full well you were going to participate in war and killing, and then to decide later that you object to it, is hard to swallow. That said, the difference between today and years ago when we had a draft are real. Back then it was something you thought about for a long time. Today, it is entirely possible that many who joined did so under a much more impulsive decision. Little doubt that many were indeed disillusioned. However, does that mean you can just arbitrarily cancel your contract? I don't think so.

Maybe, in this age of an all volunteer military, there should be another avenue for people like her other than desertion. It might include a list of predetermined penalties. Maybe, forfeit of all benefits and repayment of any compensation, completion of your term in a non combat support role or in confinement, dishonorable discharge and maybe a few other severe penalties. Maybe you could file for such a "separation status" knowing full well what your penalties would be. Kind of like in a civil contract where escape clauses exist, with predetermined penalties. The penalties need to be severe enough that it isn't something you take lightly.

The only reason I see there being a logical reason for such an avenue of escape is because the nature of the volunteer situation means that some could be caught up in the moment and volunteer when they clearly should not have done so. As was pointed out, such individuals as this woman could be a real danger in a combat situation not only putting her life in danger but also the lives of her comrades. I don't think that is desirable.

On thing this would do too, if this were an option, is it would put a bit more responsibility on recruiters to not just sell someone into joining with deceptive claims. Maybe too when during a war, if many were choosing this highly punitive option, the military leaders might just reconsider some of their tactics. Maybe it could actually serve as somewhat of a "check and balance" that might ultimately make sure we don't abuse our troops and/or put them in inappropriate positions. Maybe it would make us stay a bit truer to our ideals.

Without a doubt, this woman should be facing some severe penalties for her decision. I am not sure that the traditional, to the fullest extent, penalties are in order under today's circumstances. We need some reform in this area.

I have seen a number of young people considering joining the military without really fully considering the consequences. They get pumped up and excited about getting into something they have a very false impression of. And it seems the true nature of their decision isn't pointed out to them before they sign. In fact it sounds like often the illusion they have is just reinforced in an effort to get their commitment. That is wrong. You would hope that young people considering this really examined it closely before committing, but I'm sure many don't. It was different when you were about to be forced into a commitment. You thought about it it much more closely and gave it far more consideration even though you really didn't have much choice.

One correction for all these idiots who keep frothing about execution being the penalty for desertion. Since the Civil War, exactly one soldier has been executed for desertion. It was Eddie Slovik, a private who refused to fight (and ditched the Army for awhile, taking up with a Canadian squad I think) after facing his first firefight in Europe. Interestingly, the officers who sentenced him, including on appeals, all assumed he would not really be executed but would instead serve prison time.

When you join the service, you give up a certain amount of decision making for the most part. You are drilled to obey orders unless the order is deemed illegal. Now one can certainly question whether they believe an order is legal or not, however, one cannot unillaterally decide that it is or not based on their own deductions and then act in a way that is unbecoming or counter productive to the mission. The problem is soldiers like this and PFC manning who believe it is their mission to right the wrongs as they see fit. WRONG. You do what your told and if not, you suffer the consequences. If you choose to disobey and your actions are judged correct by those in a position to make that decision, then it becomes Ok. In this case, she chose to desert and was found guilty of such based on her information not being legally accepted. She deserves whatever punishment she receives.

if she wanted to be conscious objector then she should have stayed in US and apply for that exemption through legal means like Mohammed Ali, but once you leave the country, you are a deserter.

I really do empathize with her and feel bad for her, but the reality is that you CAN'T have a military where you allow people all of a sudden to decide that they want to leave. Otherwise everyone would leave. This is not working at McDonalds. This is the Army. I do have to wonder why a mother with that many children decided to go into the military anyway, knowing she could and probably would be separated from them for long periods of time. Seems like she set herself up for problems from the beginning.

Barlow - Once you sign the dotted line, your opinion on whether or not a war is right ceases to matter. It's up to the politicians to keep us out of worthless wars like this, the troops DO NOT have the option to "quit", and as such there must be severe punishments for those that try. This war had no draft, this women CHOSE to join the military during a time of war and then deserted when she got sent to said war. Throw the book at her.

Under the UCMJ she'll get 30 days in the brig and a bad conduct discharge, not dishoroable. Life goes on.

She appears to be a leftist loonie. SHE HAS FOUR KIDS! There is no mention of a husband. So she ups and leaves four children to assist in a war?

You know that old question? "WHAT DID YOU DO IN THE WAR DADDY?" Well now she has to answer to her four children......"WHAT DID YOU DO IN THE WAR MOMMY AND WHY DID YOU DESERT US AND THE ARMY?"

So does anyone else get the impression that this woman considered her military service to be like just another form of welfare? She is 30 with four kids, the last two were born in Canada and are currently in the US would be interesting to know how that works out with immigration...the first two were apporoximately 5 and three at the point when she ensisted for a second time and served her first tour in Iraq. So in 2001 she reported for basic and was unsuccessful at that because she was pregnant and was given a discharge. Oh well here is a link to her story..

http://www.couragetoresist.org/kimberly-rivera/541-kimberly-rivera-chooses-canada-over-unjust-war.html

From the article listed above.

She thought about the military again. The Army offered job security, sign-on bonuses, a food and clothing allowance, medical benefits, housing allowance, "Everything I needed, they had. It's the best form of socialism" she thought.

Wow the best form of socialism? What she got wrong there was even in a socialits society there is an expectation of work to provide for the common good. How sad is it that people who marginalize themselves have no concept if honor or duty. She enlisted knowing she had two young children at home and by her own admission she could not afford two children. As she didn't wish to keep her commitment to the US government she self-imports to Canada, a country that is more to her liking complete with socialized benefit...but wait she is an American and has no work visa and would have no access to the benefits that Canada offers their citizens. How stupid must she have been to enlist without considering the downside of being deployed?

She has FOUR kids??? Before she enlisted, or after?

Her story of a late awakening to conscientious objection seems contrived, but perhaps it's only her ability in articulation when she tells about it. Who can know someone else's actions, and reactions, in being confronted with the many unexpected and unpleasant aspects of how humans deal with conflicts and each other?

However, she did QUIT, no matter how altuistic she thinks her reasons. She's a quitter and a deserter, leaving her fellow soldiers behind. Whatever was she thinking? That she'd hide for the next 60 years??? Really? Just cause houses were put on lockdown and she didn't agree with it? She was a 30 year old PRIVATE, were they suppose to keep her informed, or get approval from her first?

I agree with everyone who says she's wrong for deserting and she should get the book thrown at her. However, she will hire a civilian lawyer, a good public relations company, a publisher, write a book and offer them all a cut. She will get out with just a slap on the hand.

Just sign me "Drafted in 69 and did my duty"

Here's my perspective from someone who didnt serve: Its a soldiers duty to follow orders and fulfill their committment. Its a CITIZENS (like me) duty to make sure those in Washington dont use the military for the wrong reasons. We let our servicemen down everytime the military is used for the wrong reason and those responsible arent held accountable.

She won't be getting the death penalty for desertion during a time of war. First off we are not really at war. For this nation to be at war the president needs to go before congress and ask for a declaration of war. That was not done. Yes congress authorized what was done but they did not declare war. Secondly the Army has a few soldier/criminals that are on death row right now and no president has been willing to execute the death warrant and have them executed. No soldier has been executed for a really long time. Bush signed a warrant and then backed off. That guy is currently in prison in Terre Haute, In. Third the Army can't even seem to get the trial of that Muslim @sshole that actually killed 13 and wounded 32 soldiers as a active Al-Qada while on duty at Fort Hood finished. She deserted after 3 months in Iraq. My father spent one month behind enemy lines fighting with the 507 th PIR. His company saw combat and did things this b!tch can't even imagine. So BOO HOO b!tch you joined willingly now you go to jail. 6 years in prison would be appropriate. Not a six year sentence but a sentence that means she actually serves six years in jail. Fourth she did not desert while in Iraq but while home on leave so it was not desertion in the face of the enemy. So actually serving 6 years HARD TIME in MILITARY PRISON is warranted dishonorable discharge goes without saying of course.

odb2 et alia,

Since I deployed twice twice to Iraq and Afghanistan, I can claim to have "been in her shoes" (when did that ever become a requirement for knowing right from wrong?) and can pass judgement on her. She didn't sign up to fight terrorism; that is not in any contract. She signed up to serve her country. There are not conditions or clauses to this. The Army is only in breach of contract, if they promise (in writing) certain monetary incentives or the opportunity to train for a certain MOS. WMD or no WMD is not an arguable point in a court of law. When I first signed on the dotted line to become an Infantryman (Military Mountaineer), I was told that I would be re-trained as a Cook, should I wash out of school. Thankfully, I passed. Later in my career I transferred to Military Intelligence and took the language test. I was really hoping to become a Serbo-Croatian linguist. Although I did well on the test and had a slavic language background as well as a record of cold weather training, Mountain Warfare training, and our forces were involved in Bosnia; the Army decided in 1995 that I should become an Arabic linguist. Well, gee, that didn't make sense to me; and I disagreed strongly with the Army's decision to not utilize me in what I saw to be a natural fit. I still became an Arabic linguist, because that is the promise that I had made. I worked in that capacity until 2000, when the Army suddenly thought that it had too many Arabic linguists and had a shortage of Serbo-Croatian ones. Since I had fulfilled my latest enlistment commitment, I re-enlisted to go back and do the Serbo-Croatian training. I got the training, passed the school and thought I was going to be the most kick-butt Serbo-Croatian linguist around....until 9/11. The Army changed my job description right back to Arabic. After 9/11 and with the impending invasion of Iraq, the Army was scrambling to get linguists to units, as they were assets. I volunteered to go Airborne (Airborne School at 35 is less fun than at age 18!) and join an organization that needed both Infantry and Intelligence skills, because I was needed. My thinking was that I might as well go to the field where I could do my thing. If it is going to suck, then you might as well go "all in" and make it really suck. Why go all the way there, if you might end up sitting on a FOB? I was in the Gulf long before the war, participated in the invasion, went back for Ar-Ramadi and Fallujah etc etc. I went to Afghanistan a year after that, and between those three longer deployments I was on a short deployment to Africa. Did I like being away from home constantly and being subjected to all kinds of deprivation in an environment pretty foreign from my New England upbringing? Hell no.

So now we have a Private from the "me" generation, who wasn't even in the Army long enough to form an opinion and who got the majority of her information regarding raids and the conduct of the war from second hand observations from the comfort of a FOB, claim that she has "seen the elephant". She was needed for whatever job they had her doing, and she wanted out of the desert. It's not like she hadn't seen the papers or watched the news for 4 years. I guess she missed the fact that there were "controversial" events occurring in Iraq. She wasn't drafted. She didn't go into Iraq on Day 1 and then see that things were a bit hectic.

So why am I slightly peeved by her actions? Had she suddenly developed a reason to question the war after being deployed, then she should have consulted a Chaplain or her Chain of Command. Yes, there have been COs (Conscientious Objectors); there were quite a few who applied for that status when they realized that they were going to war back in 2003. There were over 20 Arabic linguists after the invasion of Iraq get themselves kicked out of the Army, because they didn't want to deploy. She fell victim to civilians who have never served who work for these anti-war groups. They and the cyber-community convinced her that she didn't need to honor her commitments or to even do the honorable thing and do it by the book. They are still stuck in a 1960s mindset of draftees and a "green machine" that crushes people; That is the biggest load of horse poop. Many of these people who assist deserters have less concern for the question of right and wrong than they do in making a statement against the United States Army and this country. They are the perpetual "chip on their shoulder", liberal intellectuals (I'm a Middlebury grad so I know this world all to well) who demonstrate their ignorance of how much the Army has evolved since 1973 by trying to re-live the war resistance movement of their youths.

There have been so many pregnant Soldiers and Soldiers with medical issues who have remained behind in the rear detachments that it would make your head spin. The media, however, just latches on to people like this who have spun their moral weakness, cowardice, laziness and absence of conscience into some kind of positve attributes. The more I read of her, the more I see someone who thought that she signed up for the "Army welfare program" and got caught. She ran at the age of 25. She wasn't a kid; she was a grown woman. Now she has 4 kids and partner, so she must have spent some time not hiding out.

"She appears to be a leftist loonie. SHE HAS FOUR KIDS! There is no mention of a husband. So she ups and leaves four children to assist in a war?"

Your idiocy is showing. "Anyone who makes bad decisions must be a part of that "Other" group that I don't belong to."

There are plenty of loonies on both sides, my friend. There are also plenty of people who make really bad decisions on both sides.

All the morons who don't have sympathy for this girl can shove that sympathy up theirs because they clearly failed to read:

“Citizens were being put on random lockdowns. We used city patrols, checkpoints and violence and intimidation against innocent civilians,” she told The Star. “We raided their houses without cause. I saw mothers and fathers and grandparents and children come to us asking for compensation for their dead loved ones. There was no good reason for their pain and suffering.”

The paper said she described becoming a conscientious objector as “the most positive thing I’ve done.”

It is YOU who are coward and deserter of human values which are far bigger than any kind of nationalism. And yes - YOU all also missed a simple inconvenient FACT - that the entire damn war was based on lies.

Jason she had to have had them after she deserted. You cant enlist with 4 dependents.

Wait, she has a "partner"... Is she gay? If so, shame she didn't just say she was gay, she'd have gotten the boot without having to cross the border.

Not the brightest bulb.

Personally I'd waive a magic wand and send her over there during the draw-down so someone with honor can come home sooner. Let her serve her time over there now.

PJ-1795048

All the morons who don't have sympathy for this girl can shove that sympathy up theirs because they clearly failed to read:

“Citizens were being put on random lockdowns. We used city patrols, checkpoints and violence and intimidation against innocent civilians,” she told The Star. “We raided their houses without cause. I saw mothers and fathers and grandparents and children come to us asking for compensation for their dead loved ones. There was no good reason for their pain and suffering.”

NO I didnt FAIL to read that, I FAILED TO BELIEVE IT. This woman DID NOT have a combat MOS so clearly her understanding of these events is hearsay.

Checkpoints and patrols are a security measure in case you dont realize this. Without them our troops would get overrun, ambush or assaulted on base. I was in Ramadhi with the Corp and these were necessary to stay alive. This woman was probably on a FOB guarding a supply or fuel depot or in the TOC writing reports maybe if she was lucky MotorT transport kitchenware. This is a joke, she has NO true idea of what those with a combat MOS when through.

The paper said she described becoming a conscientious objector as “the most positive thing I’ve done.”

It is YOU who are coward and deserter of human values which are far bigger than any kind of nationalism. And yes - YOU all also missed a simple inconvenient FACT - that the entire damn war was based on lies.

WHAT LIES? That we went there for oil? Yeah, uh we didnt. The Chinese and Russian oil companies have ALL the drilling and shipping rights, look it up.

WHAT OTHER LIES? That there wasnt Weapons Of Mass Destruction? There were, Iraq killed hundreds of thousands of Kurds with chemical weapons and had warheads designed to carry these agents into Israel. Look it up and get a clue.

PJ, please tell us have you ever served in the U.S. Military and/or in a combat zone? Somehow, I sincerely doubt it and if you did serve it more than likely stateside or a rear echelon area! You really appear to have little or no clue.

This is NOT about a coward...she, like so many others, signed up to fight for a good cause...NOT to get shot at by people you are supposed to train and NOT waste your life to make war-monger corporations rich who pay off our idiot congress. Good for her..hope she get soff..........

I dont feel bad for this woman at all. If you read her wiki page, she was a Wal-mart cashier before deciding to enlist for the sign-on bonus. She got 8k. She signed on in January '06 and deserted in early '07. SHE ONLY SERVED ONE YEAR!!!! To me, that says it all. She needs to pay the money back and go back to Wal-mart. Its her best bet.

Barlow please tell me this excerpt from Hunter S. Thompson is not the proof you are using to justify what she did and push your anti- Bush agenda. What you fail to grasp is that she did in fact sign a binding legal agreement stating that if call upon she would deploy, no matter where. Now as a veteran I remember reading a rule where you were allowed to protest a deployment but in order to do so without breaking the contract, you had to follow the proper procedures. Going on leave in the middle of deployment and just deciding not to come back is not one of them. I think her actions showed that she missed her family and aslo didn't like the work she had to do. Another thing worth mentioning is that she should have known that there is always a possibility in the armed forces that you will have to deploy to a war zone, no matter what branch or MOS. Its in the contract you sign. Finally if she had a change of heart thats fine, the military is not for everyone. No harm in quitting, it is after all a personal choice. Bottom line here is that she in fact broke the law and must face the consequences of her actions. Honor, Courage, Commitment, and Integrity. These are not just words but what people in the military must live by. Well Im done for now. Have a nice day. SK2 (SW) 97-05

As A Former 11B 11C & 11H And Honorably Discharged As A Senior NCO I Have To Honestly Ask Myself Would I Have Refused To Obey An Patiently Unlawful Order To Deploy To Iraq In A Non Declared War As Resigned As A Conscientious Objector?

Probably! Say What You Will A Lot Of Americans Even Today Felt That Iraq Is / Was An Illegal & Immoral War! This Is Not World War II We Are Talking About (though It Still May End Up Being WWIII)!

Which Is The Exact Same Thing I Would Do If Ordered To Attack American Citizens Peacefully Exercising Their Constitution Rights...(Well Actually I Would Summarily Arrest The Issuing Officer And Let The Chips Fall Where They May)!

BTW I Believe The Actual Charge Would Have To Be AWOL And Not Desertion As She Was On Authorized Leave When She Fled To Canada.

Dishonorable Discharge And Out She Goes..........

Alan...I think it is a story about a coward. She signed up and took a signing bonus because she wanted her family to have the benefits offered by the military. She tried once before and was released because she was pregnant. She signed up again because she couldn't afford the family on a Wal-Mart salary. So she enlisted knowing that she had two kids and a partner depending on her. After serving one tour she realized that being a woman didn't offer her the easy duty she thought it would. So she collected her family and headed to Canada where she had two more children and no more sympathy than what was afforded her at home for dodging the responsibility she signed up for and received several thousand dollars upon signing her agreement. She abused the public trust.

That young woman raised her hand and took the oath; went through Basic, AIT, and moved out to Iraq. She WILL pay back Uncle Sam everything she owes. She'll do whatever time her sentence dictates--and that will break her down. It will be bad and she'll wish every day of her stay in that military prison, that she had returned to her unit in Iraq. She let her Brothers and Sisters in Arms down. I don't know what her job was, but it doesn't matter; she chose AWOL over mission.

I don't feel sorry for her. Many have gone before her...SOME didn't make it back, not alive, and for THAT very reason she owned it to those who paid the ultimate price, to return to her unit and honor her contract. And to honor those who are no longer able to serve.

She just blew the best thing she had going for her--an Iraq Veteran with an Honorable Discharge, college benefits and so much more. Her loss.

She didn't want her children to see her arrested? No, better to have her kids know Mama was a deserter.

All the morons who don't have sympathy for this girl can shove that sympathy up theirs because they clearly failed to read:

“Citizens were being put on random lockdowns. We used city patrols, checkpoints and violence and intimidation against innocent civilians,” she told The Star. “We raided their houses without cause. I saw mothers and fathers and grandparents and children come to us asking for compensation for their dead loved ones. There was no good reason for their pain and suffering.”

To which I say ... all you had to do was some research to find out what things were really like in Iraq before you signed up. She obviously didn't bother to do that.

They should take her to gitmo and water-board her hunh righties?

btw is there any circumstance where it's ok to desert? What if you were stationed at say Abu Grahib and asked to do things you know you shouldn't? How about if you are ordered to cover something up?

Not saying that is nessicarily the case here but you never know. She may have just been a coward. I'd rather a coward quit then stay in an inept position.

I do have some sympathy for her. So many naive kids with no money for college sign up for the military only to find out what a f... disgrace it is to be a part of these two totally useless wars we are currently waging. I have talked to plenty of young people like that. Most just grin and bear it, but some simply can't. Maybe she is one of such kids.

RTyp0......Personally If I Had Been The Abu Ghraib NCOIC And A CIA "Man In Black" Showed Up Wanting My Troopers To "Soften Up" Their Prisoners It Would Have Taken A Written Order From The Judge Advocate General Of The US Army To Have Obtained His Release From MY JAIL!

Instead The US Army NCOIC Ivan Frederick Was Imprisoned But No One Higher Was Ever Punished Even Though GWB / Rumsfeld Admitted they Ordered The Torture!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse

Remember It Was Another NCO Who Obeyed His Oath To The Constitution Of The United States That Resulted In These War Crimes Being Reported In The First Place!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Darby

Active Duty Military & Reserves NCO'S & Enlisted Men & Women Obey Your Oath To The Constitution, The UCMJ And The American People First & Foremost Because All of These Lying Politicians Will ALWAYS Save Themselves At YOUR Expense!

Lesson Learned once Again............

PS.....And Had I Been The NCOIC Pvt Lynndie England Would Have Been On Prisoner KP Scrubbing Pots & Pans For Months!

This Kind Of Crimes Is What Happens When NCO'S Fail In Their Duty To US!

GI stands for Government Issue. When you enlist in the United States military, you take an oath. And when you take that oath, you better take it seriously. Once the United States taxpayers are paying for your training and your pay, you belong to them. It doesn't matter whether or not you agree or disagree with the politics of why you are being sent overseas, you are being paid to do a job that the American taxpayers are paying you to do and you swore that you would do it. I was in the military for 8 years and served in the first Gulf War, and whether or not I believed in why we were there, I was there and I did what I was trained to do.

I suppose she inserted a clause on her enlistment papers that stated she could opt out of any duty she found objectionable. Of not, she needs to be in Leavenworth for a long while.

As an 8-year vet, I have no trouble with conscientious objectors if that is what they truly believe (some have legitimately changed after seeing the horrors of war), HOWEVER, you come back, and state your case to the military, and then they rule. Maybe you end up staying in, but in a non-combat role, maybe you get out, maybe not, but you DO NOT desert.

All that said, I think she is full of it, and not really a CO.

Now, I would say put her in prison for 20 years. It is essentially war time, so she is lucky that she is not being sentenced to death.

Of course this woman shouldn't have deserted. Nor should she have enlisted when she had four kids.

That being said....

I believe her descriptions of what happened in Iraq. Also, the more times you go back, the more likely you are to come back and have a totally f'd up life with little to no support from the American government. There are so many stories of people coming back with brain trauma, memory loss, unable to hold jobs, getting almost no support from the military? And a lot of these stories are about women who weren't on the front lines.

Also, I know somebody in the Canadian forces who went to Afghanistan and he was given a weapon and told it was to defend himself from the American troops. He was also told not to enter the American section of the base after a certain time. Basically, they turned their section into some sort of dangerous ghetto.

Many of the people enlisting have no money, no education, no options and they enlist because there is little else to do. And growing up poor, likely in a ghetto or poor area filled with crime, lacking education means all they do is re-create the same conditions when they are sent overseas. But now they have easy access to weapons and are given power over civilians - a dangerous combination.

So think about that before you judge this woman....

Because she is female, it's highly unlikely that she knows what happened on raids. Afterall women are not in combat battalions unless it is a support position so her comments seem like a misguided attempt to justify her bad decision making. Seems like she just didn't want to go back. She should not have joined in the first place, that's the thing with the Army, they sometimes send you to combat zones. Who knew?

The only way she could recieve the death penalty is if we were at a state of war, and if she deserted then. She deserted, yes, but five years ago we were not, offically, at a state of war, and there was no emergency, therefore she doesn't qualify for the death penalty, unlike... saw... Private Manning, who does. That's beside the point. Nobody forced her to join the military, and therefore, she is eligible for time spent in the brig (military prison).

Allen-2635884

This is NOT about a coward...she, like so many others, signed up to fight for a good cause...

She, like so many others, signed up to serve her country. Military personnel don't get to decide what is or is not a good cause. That is the responsibility of the President and Congress. (More is the pity)

Many think the military is just a "Jobs Program!" Since she volunteered and took our money, lock it up!

westerner8933..

A good jail cell at Leavenworth will do her some good. She'll get three hots and a squat each day and time to think about what an idiot she's been.

Not to mention it might just solve that little birth control problem she has. Can't afford two kids so go have a couple more.

Max..

I do have some sympathy for her. So many naive kids with no money for college sign up for the military only to find out what a f... disgrace it is to be a part of these two totally useless wars we are currently waging.

Do you honestly think this woman ever had a shot at going to college? The first time she enlisted it seems she was pregnant, probably though the Army would pick up the maternity tab. Apparently, and well shame on me, wiki is my source....but the decision to join the service rested on the fact that she lost weight faster than her husband to meet the requirements. They were both obese and neither would have met the requirements. That is just marginally worse decision process than flipping a coin.

All this woman seems to have been shooting for is someone to take care of her: a husband who apparently couldn't manage skills to care for his family, the military who discharged her because she joined while pregnant, Wal-mart didn't pay the bills, so in between pregnancies she was allowed to enlist, oops didn't get knocked up fast enough because she was off to Iraq where she had to actually do stuff for her pay, then sneaking off to Canada half way through her commitment after having received an $8,000 signing bonus....;oh yes Canada would certainly take care of her....two children later she is in deep water.

Note to the US Military -
Obama detests You!

The latest Liberal lame proposal is the
“Military Medal for Courageous Restraint”. It is a medal that service members
can earn for doing nothing. I should have a closet full of those medals!
Courageous restraint is where a soldier chooses not to use their weapon against
a terrorist with his AK-47 ablaze, to save the life of a civilian. In summary -
don’t fire until fired upon and terrorist get a free hit when civilians are
present. A good terrorist never goes into battle without civilians as a human
shield. These terrorist are cowards hiding behind woman and children. To a
certain extent, the military became an equal opportunity jobs program complete
with affirmative action, and political correctness. Progressives disgusted by
the thought of a righteous military took revenge upon the ranks. They pushed
feminism, homosexuality, and the unfit into the military. If their people could
not achieve the established physical, mental and moral standards, then the
standards must be lowered or eliminated. Progressives openly professed how
“they loathed the military”. This Progressive dogma tainted many Generals and
subordinates. Thank God that Afghanistan is the last major foreign military
adventure of the United States of America. Recent murderous riots of Taliban
supporters in Afghanistan demonstrate our only way to fight these devils is
with high altitude carpet bombing. Why waste a bomb that is smarter than the
enemy? Slowly but surely, the majority of Americans realize a Moslem is not
worth our treasure and blood. We are slow learners, but after ten long and
torturous years accomplishing nothing in Afghanistan, the American People see
the Moslems there for who they are.

Note - Please give the incompetent Wesley Clark another star! I forgot, thank
god he is retired.

How not to wage a war with Islamic
Terrorist (Friends of Barack)

1.
Courageous Restraint - Don’t return fire until you are killed.

2. Don’t fire unless fired upon

3. If Muslim civilians are present,
commit suicide.

4.
US Military -Muslim meals on treads

5. Nation Building while they are
killing US.

6. A mosque is a free American killing
Zone

7. Feminize all your soldiers

8. Homos in the open

9.
Progressive civilian and military leadership

10. Affirmative action job program.

11. Never piss towards Mecca

12. No Bibles in a war zone or Walter
Reed.

13. Never ever fly the American Flag
while fighting abroad.

14. Build mosques, schools, hospitals,
roads for your enemy.

15. Never make your enemy
“Uncomfortable.”

16. While in the field of action, never
ever piss towards Mecca.

17. Never pee on dead Muslim Terrorist that just murdered your best friend.

18. Feed captured Islamic terrorist kosher meals and give prayer rugs.

19. Let NBC report on the war to
highlight our every mistake.

20. Put Liberals and Moderates in
Charge.

21. Never burn a Muslim Unholy book.

22. Barack always apologizes to
murderers of our soldiers and ambassador.

23. Obama gave the Muslims a US Postage Stamp

24. Barry’s releases captured Islamic Terrorist to Kill US Again.

25. .Ceremoniously give
AK-47"s to Afghan terrorist who immediately murder our soldiers.

26. When Muslims attack our embassies, force the Marines to “Stand

Down,” watch our embassy burn and Americans murdered.

Lady...there hasn't been a draft for military duty since early 1970's..you joined on your own free will..why join if you're not going to obey orders????

Throw her AZZ in prison for a few years.

Wars and battles have been romanticized. At the beginning of the Civil War, people would have picnics on the battle fronts. Then they found that war isn't romantic.

It sounds like this woman found war to be romantic. Once she found out it's not, she thought she'd just leave in the middle of the movie. No matter how close she feels connected to fairy tales, she deserted.

If she's 30 years old and a Private, this war was going on when she enlisted and so she knew when she was sworn in that the possibility of her being sent to Afghanistan was pretty darn good.

What a waste of time and money this b@$#&* caused. Put the screws to her.

This bit about her being a conscientious objector is only a excuse. Something she has had ample time to dream up and rehearse probably with the help of legal counsel. She thought she was signing up for an extended paid cub scout trip and found out it just wasn't so. She couldn't ethically do the job she swore she would do. I wonder, has it ever crossed her mind that because she was unwilling to fulfill her obligation that someone else had to fill the void she left. Maybe that someone isn't making it home to their family now. And the people that claim she was right for not following an illegal order, please explain how a private in the Army is going to have such expert knowledge of what is or isn't a legal action at the executive level of the Military. She was only deployed for 3 months before she came to this major life epiphany. There is no honor in her actions at all by claiming as on objector but in truth being nothing more then a coward. No sympathy but life in Fort Leavenworth is more suitable to this then death. Only 2 options that fit this crime.

B.L.777, perhaps you can't control yourself emotionally, but please don't speak for the rest of us. It's "women" like you who set the rest of us back from the struggle for equality we've been fighting for decades. Just because you choose to be helpless, it doesn't mean all the rest of us do too.

Although my initial, knee jerk, reaction was hang her! but reality sinks in quickly and I say she wanted in she's in, she wants out she's out. Complicating things like using prison only increases the tax burden for poor decisions. General Discharge with Other than Honorable conditions to not get vet benefits. All she had to do was smoke some weed or better yet say she was gay! She needs to not be rewarded for irresponsible behavior thinking she can live off of Canada instead? Wow. The clothing allowance is for uniforms but her statement seems like she can buy her kids clothes with it or something?

To imprison or do more than just shame her will make her a tax burden here. Discharge and forget the white trash she is acting as though she is. The reality is someone must have told her you can just live it up in Canada. At least from her statements that's what it seems. I agree that military life is nice stateside but we sign up for the job not for the basic life needs to be met here (since the jobs are hopefully all over there). To back out after the training can be expensive... well at least it was just a truck driver :-) cut our losses.

I looked around and it says she had a husband so two more kids I'd have to assume she didn't abandon the husband in Canada for a chick there, but who knows :-)) I don't quite understand why the partner statement unless the writer of this article intended to stir up trouble or ?

Anyway, this is a volunteer military no drafts unfortunately. The draft needs to used any time we intend to increase troop strengths so wars are not forgotten as these were. Perhaps the woman forgot we were at war? I don't know, but further attention to her needs removed and reduction of the tax burden for her choice to not do something she chose to start should not be impacted. I'm sure the UCMJ action, unless politically motivated, will agree with that too. If a draft this would be a different conversation entirely w/ many more objections. I can't judge her only she and those that know this private know her intentions and the actual situation, but it all looks really bad on the surface.

First I would like to point out to those who say she wasn't hurting anyone, you have never truly served.she was hurting that new private that had to leave their family early to back fill the empty slot she left and two she hurt the integrity of her unit letting all her fellow Soldiers down.

Riley when were you in Ramadhi. I used to fly in there daily 06-07 across from blue diamond if there was two things I could count on is that your steel beach was going to be loose and we were going to be shot at a few times.

I'm not standing in defense of the young woman, but we were required to do illegal things in the military. In the USN, in 1972, I participated in dumping 100's of 55 gallon drums of red lead and blue lead paints within US waters. You did what you were told. You had no way to object. We dumped new tax payer purchased equipment--just so the Department of the Navy could keep the funds flowing in the upcoming budget.

The entire world knows that Bush/Cheney created the cause for war with yellow cake lies. I have no problem with treating her as a deserter as long as they try Cheney/Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld at the same time--for crimes against humanity.

Alcohol is the only reason I can think that this girl could get knocked up 4 times.

Draft doggers were nothing but cowards. If a man has principles, he'll respectful decline to be in the military and go to jail.

to all unless your in her shoes how can you pass judgement- she did what she did and it caused no one any harm

Hmm, well there are thousands over there who ARE in her "shoes" and they didn't take the cowards route out. She did what she did? Huh? What the hell else would she do?! What she should have done is act like the tough woman she thought she was and stick with what she started in the first place. Nobody forced her in.

The entire world knows that Bush/Cheney created the cause for war with yellow cake lies.

the Bush/Cheney lies that your talking about (set aside they found it in 2008) was from Clinton Intel. Clinton signed paper work to invade Iraq when he was in office.

JymAllen,

We may not have been treated honestly when Iraq was invaded, yes Bush and his men lied about who attacked us, but don't think for a minute that there weren't WMDs. There most definitely were and probably still are just hidden far better than we realized or given to someone else to use.

Hussein used them on his own people, he slaughtered entire villages of whom he considered oppositional to his reign, and his religion. Mustard gas and nerve agents used against forty different villages of Kurdish people because they did not agree with him. Oh he had WMD's we just didn't find them.

Menoseeno

Draft doggers were nothing but cowards. If a man has principles, he'll respectful decline to be in the military and go to jail.

When people deserted the military from Cuba or Russia during the Cold War Era, they were heroes. Time in history, place in history, etc has all bearing. You said, "if a man has principles", but does that include a mother of four? Not defending her gender, just wanted clarification.

There will come a time that the Military Industrialists beat the war drum and everyone says, "F off!"

soldiers dad you do realize that those wmd's where found and destroyed by UN investigators after desert storm. I was one of the US military members that was providing escort and security for them. yes he did have them and yes we did find them and destroy them. you cant tell me that bush didnt know his daddy did this. when i saw that we where going into iraq because of wmd's i laughed so hard i almost fell out of my chair. told my wife well guess i will pack my bags, going to get a call to report for duty to not find anything over there. guess what i was right! on a side note she didnt need to desert, most times just say you cant hack it and they let you out now. so she needs to pay the penalty for it.

This woman did not sign up to fight for her country. She signed up for what she thought was easy money and benefits. This was not a draft - she VOLUNTEERED.

Unfortunately, this woman represents what I think is wrong with so many (NOTE: I did not write all) of the younger people these days. A committment means nothing. A contract means nothing. Giving your word means nothing. They possess a petulant attitude and do not honor promises -- mainly because they never had to. They never have suffered real consequences for failure to do what they agreed to do. Bad behavior has always been excused and they've been given passes, which I think this woman fully expects to happen to her. Hard work and responsibility for your actions are foreign concepts to her.

Short and sweet, she is a deserter. She failed to fulfill her committment. Throw the book at her and make her pay back all benefits she has received.

Jason Fischer Yes she is a leftist loonie as not only did she desert but she started an anti war campaign campaign in Canada. She deserted when she had two kids, is married to a man and had two more children while hiding out in Canada No anchor baby for her helped her. Also had she kept her mouth shut and not started and participated in her private anti U.S. anti war campaign, she could have petitioned to reverse her enlistment in the armed forces and as have happened in 94% of the cases she would have gotten an administration deenlistment, probably dishonorable and that would have been it, with no prison time. She wanted to shoot off her mouth and now she got all the publicity she wanted.

Check rabble.ca for all the details. Definitely she is a radical and radicals like her are leftists and of course she is a loonie as she knew what she was getting into and could have quietly got herself out of it.

Next time Jason Fischer, big mouth, do your investigation of the facts before you need a doctor to remove your foot from your mouth.

Typical liberal hype from Sandtrich, who if you ask me, never served a combat MOS and never had boots on ground in any conflict zone of magnitude. The Bush/Cheney lies are the same BS served up by Obama/Biden its just your myopic naivete that lets you believe otherwise. If youre going to drink that Kool Aid you might want to keep it to yourself.

You take the discipline out of the military, the adherence to duty and you break the entire system down. Why have a military? I had friends in non-combat MOS in the Navy and Air Force whose privates pull the stress cards for simple duties like latrine and KPO. People have no integrity anymore, want hand outs and freebies and simply to get paid to play XBOX. A fine establishment will have then.....might as well let Iran walk in and tell us how to live because of a severe lack of spine all around.

Sandtrich f* off. I am sure that Cuba, Iran, North Korea has a nice room for you. Another apologetic leftist loonie.

I don't know. My recruiter told me in January 1969 that with my scores, if I signed today, I would probably become a clerk and be stationed in Germany. I found out the Green Machine lies. I was saying on the bus to Tigerland, that there must be some mistake.

Did you ever hear the cadence call during basic that goes: "Recruit, Recruit - Don't feel blue, my recruiter @!$%#ed me too...."?

I had a good friend of mine who served during Vietnam and was a conscientious objector. He hated war on account of his religious beliefs. When drafted into the Navy he stated his objector status but still wanted to serve his country. He became a Chaplain's Assistant and voluntarily made many trips out to the bush with the Marines of the unit he was assigned to even though he knew he did not have to. One day his platoon was involved in a heavy duty firefight with a company of North Vietnamese regular troops and were pinned down. My friend refused to pick up a weapon, instead assisting the Navy Corpsman treat the wounded. In several instances he placed his body over or in front of the wounded in order to protect them and the Corpsman while he treated his patients, all the while praying for the souls of those poor kids that were shot to pieces. He was severely injured as a result. This man was later awarded the Silver Star for heroism under fire. This objector and hero did his duty to his fellow man and to his country while maintaining his religious beliefs. The reason I know this is that I was that Navy Hospital Corpsman treating the wounded that day! He saved my life a couple of times over as well as several of the wounded that day. I was just doing my job. He went above and beyond the call doing what he did! This man I respect with every fibre of my being and he is still my good friend to this day. As for Private Rivera? Not even in my friend's league. Coward, opportunist, and deserter? Most definitely!

@ American Socialist -

Brokinarrow....

Owww....everyone check out the big bad military man!!

How many civilians have you killed??

Jason Fischervia...

A leftist loony because she has kids?? oh please elaborate

Well, I was a network specialist in the Marines, so I've never even been in combat, which is something I am thankful for. I had two high school classmates that were both infantry and saw combat, both wounded. Just because we're military, doesn't mean we don't have minds. But thanks for stereotyping me anyway.

Barlow-1919963

They need to let this woman go. She did nothing wrong. The Iraq war was one big lie. The Iraqis had nothing to with 9/11. As a US Navy Submariner vet., I believe the Viet Nam War was the also a lie. The Viet Nam war and the Iraq War was fought for the sole purpose of, and a benefit to the Military Industrial Complex and it's blackhearted components.

Thank you so much, you are my new hero. It was so refreshing to read your voice of reason. It was a big relief to hear someone; an intelligent person, who did not buy into the lies and brainwashing about the illegal invasion of Iraq.

@ed Nav - so if somebody support Conscientious observers then they must be either Not Serverd in Military OR Are Clueless by definition? I can NOT agree to that.

@riley - you perhaps didn't believe in Napalm bombings either. By your logic and standards - these things don't exist. That's a twisted way of "see no evil".

@edNav and others who think that a CO could continue to serve in non-combat role, if Osama's driver can be charged with terrorism then looking from a neutral perspective why shouldn't the same standard apply for any non-combat roles on whatever side of the war and/or conflict?

A CO naturally feels that the war effort is against basic human values and so why should he support that war effort in any way shape or form?

PJ, the incident I referred to occurred during Vietnam when CO's were often drafted into the regular forces. As for OBL's driver, I think you are just blowing smoke to cover your lack of being able to back up your statements. That has nothing to do with the current discussion. My friends particular belief was that he himself was against the taking of human life! So, by your statement above are you answering my question to you above about whether you have ever served. I still assume the answer is no. Makes no difference whether you agree or disagree. If you have not served, especially in a combat zone, you have not the proper frame of reference to make a reasonable judgement or rationalization of her actions or my friend, therefore you still have no clue about what it is like to be in a war zone or the military in general.

My friend had what is obviously a different set of values that you and Pvt Rivera do not share. He believes in love of God and country. He felt it important to minister to those doing the fighting and the dying without doing any killing himself. If you cannot comprehend that and only want to judge him by your own narrow minded criteria, then that is your problem.

@Ed Nav - I don't give a @!$%# about your friend. If someone feels the war effort is against their values then they should have a right to not be accessory to it.

You seem to have "served" and are probably just trying to justify your own deeds - whatever they might be. Good luck achieving peace with them.

The problem is that you don't appear to give a @!$%# about anybody but yourself and your own severly narrow minded and hateful views. My friend is many times over more a man and a better person than you could ever hope to be. So good luck with that!

You're damn right I served and I am extremeny proud of it and that is something that people like you can never take away or comprehend! (That must stick in your craw)! I was in the medical field genius. My job was to save and preserve life, not take it. I took that job very seriously then and I take it seriously today. I don't have to justify my deeds to you or anyone else as they speak for themselves. You are just incapable of comprehending them. I'm curious as to why you hate the military so much. Did you get refused entry because you were unfit, or did you get kicked out as a misfit? Would not surprise me either way. Most likely, just never had the cajones to even try. For your info, I am plenty at peace with them, but thanks anyway.

Well, we've each had our say, so I'd say this conversation is over. It is waste of time replying to your ridiculous and hateful rants so I'll no longer bother answering to any more of your childish comments on this thread! I would tell you to go away, but you have the right to voice your comments just as much as I do. Too bad you can't recognize the people who have served, fought , and died to help preserve that right for all of us.

@ Siobhan-2863563 - Whether or not the war was legal, the troops don't have the option to CHOOSE where they go. This lady joined DURING A TIME OF WAR and then chose to run away from the oath she swore and the responsibilities that follow it. If let every soldier that didn't agree with a particular conflict op out, we wouldn't have much of a military left.

@ed Nav Doc - you are damn right. This is a wasteful conversation. I am not hateful of military. I pity those who are not man enough to admit that they are being used in the wrong way.

Jim Laee

It was her choice, but let me go out on a limb here. It was someone elses fault.

paragus

Aaah see if you kept reading..Bush lied about the weapon of mass destruction

Too easy. Of course it was Bush's fault she deserted.

550 metric tons of yellow cake found in Iraq 2008 reported by CNN. The Iraqi cetriguges that manufactured that material were transferred to Syria prior to the invasion which led direcly to the development of their nuclear reactor.

Every intel agency on the planet did not get it wrong, niether did these democrats.

The facts are hurt as more and more information come in from Syrian defectors and rebels.

The history books are going to have to re-written.

Over 80 democrats voted for the war.

And here's the quotes from all those democrats, with the same intelligence the republicans had, that believed Sadaam had WMD:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Publius, how dare you publish the facts that the liberal Democrats don't want to hear? You've destroyed their fantasy land where everything is Bush's and the Republicans fault. All is not lost though, only a few will see your post before it's collapsed. No lasting damage will be done since the facts don't exist in their world once put out of view and denied.

The yellow cake Uranium story was proven to be falsified intelligence. A CIA agent was outted because her husband published a story about it. Holding on to a lie till the bitter end doesn't make it true.

Look it up on the google. It will take about 10 seconds. Try Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries#Origin_-_who_forged_the_documents.3F

A few are bring W into this. Much to my dismay, BO was elected CIC in 2008. Why didn't she come back then? Things are so much better now in the Middle East with BO leading from (his) behind....

Wikipedia is a not a good source of any information. Some may be true and some may be false. Wikepedia is open for editing by any joe schmoe from idaho or wherever else. So for you to use that as a source is really laughable.

And CNN?

The material was manufactured in Iraq. The cetrifuges were transferred to Syria.

If you do not believe that, then how did Sryia suddendly develop and bring their reactor on-line in a short time after 2003?

What source would you accept? Fox News? Just Google it, there are about 100 more sources and dozens of news articles that proved the yellow cake stories were falsified intel. College types always say wikipedia is inaccurate, most of the time it is, though. It makes college easy, that's where the myth of it not being accurate enough. It's as accurate as most newspapers. Check the sources. Find your own. The information is out there. I just gave one example. What about the NY times article? What about Valerie Plame?

Nothing gets through the bubble does it?

The CNN story was about old NON WEAPONS GRADE uranium that had been in sealed containers since the 80's. Not the the Nigerian Yellow Cake weapons grade stuff they used as an excuse for the invasion.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/08/uranium-in-iraq/

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-07/us/iraq.uranium_1_yellowcake-uranium-cameco?_s=PM:US

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with what you are stating I am just saying if you want others to believe or not discredit what you are saying, then don't use Wikepedia. Lol @ college types. You don't have to go to college to know that anyone can edit Wikepedia. And as far as the media and newspapers go, that's not the best statement of FACTS as they are tainted by opinions of the liberal media. I like concrete proof. But hey that's just me. You could be 100% right but I'm not inclined to even follow what you are saying when you start citing Wikepedia. Just saying if you want to back up your story go with hard evidence not just whatever popped up on google.

Ah Randy! How dare you publish the facts that the conservative Republicans don't want to hear? You've destroyed their fantasy land where everything is Obama's and the Democrat's fault.

Yellow cake WAS proved false--what do you think the outing of Valerie Plume by Bush admin. over Plame's husband's proving there was no yellow cake was all about? With respect, Publius--you need to get your facts straight--volume of words do NOT make falsehoods true.

Suppose Iraq did have WMD. Yes there was a possiblity that some terrorist could get a hold of it and use it against US, EU or Israel. Or Saddam could have used it against any of the three, igniting WWIII. Or they could have used it against one of their closer, natural enemies that they have fought their two previous wars with....IRAN! So, since W. took out the natural counterweight to Iran, now we have to deal with them, and Syria and everyone else who is saying....'Hey, lets stop fighting each other, look imperialistic US/Israel are unilaterally invading our coutries to steal our resources and force Islam out' And the US response - 'Let's shoot a few more drone missles at them to change this narrative'. But hey, at least the Republicans will get the RAHOWA they have been jonesing for, for the last 20+ years. Unfortunately, we will all suffer for it.

I'm so tired of hearing that there was 'no justification for Bush to go into Iraq" Really? Please review the following intel available to both Clinton and Bush (after 911) and tell me that you would not have done the same thing? It's a lot of detail, but if you want the complete picture, read it!

Iraq and a History of Terrorism

On December 3, 1976, the New York Times reported that radical Palestinians have gathered in Iraq to mount a terrorist campaign against "moderate" arab governments. The group referred to in the article was known as Black June and they were led by the terrorist Abu Nidal. On August 5, 1978, the New York Times reported that this Palestinian group was linked to Iraq's intelligence service. Abu Nidal was a ruthless terrorist who planned the 1973 assault on an American passenger plane in Rome that resulted in 34 deaths and the 1974 bombing of TWA 841 which resulted in 88 deaths.

On April 24, 1977, the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) was reorgainized under the leadership of the terrorist Abu Abbas. According to an October 13, 1985 article in the New York Times, the group was organized with money and help from the Iraqi government.

In December 1977, Carlos the Jackal (a.k.a. Ilich Ramirez Sanchez) a "terrorist for hire" met with Saddam Hussein. Carlos was openly supported by the Iraqi government.

On July 15, 1978, the LA Times reported that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had formally asked the government of Iraq to hand over the terrorist Abu Nidal "so he would get what he deserves." The article reported Iraq had given support to Abu Nidal and even provided him with his own radio station which he called "the voice of the Palestinian revolution." Among other things, the radio station had launched virulent attacks on two Palestinian leaders shortly before they were assassinated earlier that year.

In 1979, Congress passed legislation (Export Administration Act of 1979) which required the executive branch to create and maintain a list of countries deemed to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. In December 1979, the Carter Administration declared four countries as state sponsors of terrorism including: Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Southern Yemen.

On August 30, 1980, the New York Times reported in an article titled "U.S. Forbids Sale of Jetliners to Iraq" that the Carter Administration decided to block the sale of five Boeing jets due to Iraq's involvement in recent terrorist activities. The article reported that, within the previous few months, Iraqi diplomats were involved in attempted bomb attacks in Vienna and West Berlin.

On November 9, 1982, the Los Angeles Times reported in an article titled "Top Arab Terrorist Back in Baghdad" that Abu Nidal had recently moved back to Iraq after being expelled from the country four years earlier. His presence in Iraq was confirmed by President Saddam Hussein.

Abu Abbas was the mastermind of the October 1985 Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacking. Leon Klinghoffer, a 69-year-old Manhattan retiree, was rolled by Abbas's men, wheelchair and all, into the Mediterranean. After holding some 400 passengers hostage for 44 hours, the hijackers surrendered to Egyptian authorities in exchange for safe passage to Tunisia aboard an Egypt Air jet. The airliner, however, was forced by U.S. fighter planes to land at a NATO base in Sicily. Italian officials took the hijackers into custody but Abu Abbas possessed a get-out-of-jail card: an Iraqi diplomatic passport. Seeing that this terrorist traveled as a credentialed Iraqi diplomat, the Italian authorities let Abbas flee to Yugoslavia.

On January 21, 1986 the Associated Press reported the May 15 Organization is an Iraqi-based terrorist group headed by a Palestinian who goes by the name of Abu Ibrahim. The article quoted an Israeli military officer who said the group "specializes in blowing up planes in the air. They operate with the active support of Iraqi intelligence." The May 15 Organization was responsible for five attacks on American and Israeli airliners between 1982 and 1983 including the August 11, 1982 bombing of Pan Am flight 830 over Honolulu which killed one teenager and injured 15 other passengers. Members of the group are also suspected in the April 2, 1986 bombing of TWA flight 840 which killed four Americans near Athens.

On May 13, 1986, the New York Times reported that the French Interior Ministry had received confessions for three terrorist bombings including the Marks & Spencer department stores in Paris and London. According to reports, the terrorist in custody had received his orders from a "contact in Baghdad." That contact was Abu Ibrahim, the leader of a radical Palestinian organization called the "Arab Organization of May 15." This group, which received Iraqi government support, was known for its use of sophisticated explosive devices in the form of plastic explosives and suitcase bombs.

On March 20, 1990, four months prior to the invasion of Kuwait, the Chicago Tribune asked, "Why is Bush gentle with the Butcher of Baghdad?" The newspaper was upset a British journalist had been recently hanged in Iraq as a spy. Saddam had also declared a school holiday to swell the crowds ordered to demonstrate in front of the British embassy. The Iraqi propaganda minister declared, "Mrs. Thatcher wanted him alive, we gave her the body."

On March 31, 1990, months prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY) reported that five people were indicted for illegally exporting nuclear warhead triggering devices to Iraq. The article reported, "Hussein is one of the world's foremost sponsors of terrorism. Numbered among his clients are a varied assortment of highjackers, bombers and kidnappers around the world."

On January 16, 1991 President George H.W. Bush announced that twenty eight countries with forces in the Gulf began military operations to remove Saddam Hussein's army from Kuwait. "Some may ask: Why act now? Why not wait? The answer is clear: The world could wait no longer. Sanctions, though having some effect, showed no signs of accomplishing their objective. Sanctions were tried for well over 5 months, and we and our allies concluded that sanctions alone would not force Saddam from Kuwait. While the world waited, Saddam Hussein systematically raped, pillaged, and plundered a tiny nation, no threat to his own. He subjected the people of Kuwait to unspeakable atrocities -- and among those maimed and murdered, innocent children."

During the first Gulf War, on February 4, 1991, the Washington Times wrote an article titled, "Terrorist Camps Deserted in Iraq." The article reported that several terrorist camps inside Iraq were abandoned shortly after the start of the allied bombing campaign. One camp in the western desert was operated by the terrorist Abu Nidal for weapons and explosives training. A terrorist camp near Bagdad was operated by Abu Ibrahim, leader of the Arab Organization May 15. And another terrorist camp near Bagdad was occupied by terrorists of unknown affiliation. Later, after the war, the Washington Times wrote another article dated November 24, 1992 reporting that terrorists were once again training at a camp near Bagdad in violation of the cease-fire terms that ended the Gulf War.

On February 4, 1992, The Canadian Press reported, "A Palestinian ex-businessman said Tuesday he was sent on a bombing mission to Europe in 1982 by an Iraqi-based guerrilla group whose leader had close connections with the Baghdad government. Adnan Awad told a U.S. Senate hearing he took a sophisticated briefcase bomb to Switzerland where he was to blow up either an Israeli or an American installation but could not bring himself to do it." Awad said the leader of the group, Abu Ibrahim, had an "open and clear" relationship with the Iraqi government and enjoyed special privileges "like any big officer in Iraq."

On June 6, 1992, the Associated Press reported that, "U.S. officials knew Palestinian terrorists were finding a safe haven in Baghdad, but for eight years the Reagan and Bush administrations rejected congressional attempts to punish Iraq, newly declassified documents show." A July 1, 1986 memo to then-Secretary of State George Shultz said, "The Iraqis initially endeavored to preserve their terrorist assets, resorting to subterfuge to divert attention from their continued support for terrorist groups." The memo was declassified by the State Department at the request of Rep. Sam Gejdenson, D-Conn.

During the 1992 presidential campaign, Al Gore criticized the first Bush administration for its "blatant disregard" of Iraq's ties to terrorism. On September 29, 1992 Al Gore said, "The Reagan-Bush administration was also prepared to overlook the fact that the terrorists who masterminded the attack on the Achille Lauro and the savage murder of American Leon Klinghoffer, fled with Iraqi assistance. Nor did it seem to matter that the team of terrorists who set out to blow up the Rome airport came directly from Baghdad with suitcase bombs." Al Gore went on to say, "There might have been a moment's pause for reflection when Iraqi aircraft intentionally attacked the USS Stark in May of 1987 killing 37 sailors, but the administration smoothed it over very fast."

Former President George H.W. Bush visited Kuwait between April 14 and April 16, 1993, to commemorate the allied victory in the Persian Gulf War. In late-April 1993, the United States learned that terrorists had attempted to assassinate Bush during his visit to Kuwait and evidence indicated that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) was behind the assassination attempt. The Kuwaiti authorities arrested 17 persons suspected in the plot to kill Bush using explosives hidden in a Toyota Landcruiser. On June 26, 1993, the United States launched a cruise missile attack against a building housing the Iraqi Intelligence Service in Baghdad in retaliation for the assassination attempt on former President Bush.

On June 27, 1994 ABC News reported that Abdul Rahman Yasin (indicted for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) was known to be living in Iraq. A reporter working for ABC News and Newsweek spotted Abdul Yasin at his father's house in Baghdad. Newsweek reported that, according to neighbors, Yasin was "working for the Iraqi government." At the time, the U.S. government was offering a $2 million reward for information leading to his capture. Yasin was never brought to justice and still remains at large today. The reward for his capture has since increased to $5 million.

On October 12, 1994, the Los Angeles Times reported that the Pentagon had placed 155,000 additional ground troops on alert in response to the recent build-up of Iraqi forces near the Kuwait border. These soldiers were in addition to the 36,000 already being sent to the Persian Gulf. "For the next several hours, we're going to watch and see what Iraq is going to do," one official said. "Meanwhile, we are getting ourselves prepared in case the worst comes to pass."

Throughout the 1990's the U.S. Department of State listed Iraq as a country known to sponsor international terrorism. The Department of State's 1994 Patterns of Global Terrorism report stated, "Since 1991, in violation of UN Security Council resolutions, the Government of Iraq has obstructed the international community's provision of humanitarian assistance. We believe that Iraq is responsible for more than 100 attacks on relief personnel and aid convoys over the past four years. Moreover, the Government of Iraq has offered monetary 'bounties' to anyone who assassinates UN and other international relief workers."

On January 17, 1995 the Boston Globe reported possible Iraqi involvement in the World Trade Center bombing. "I believe the totality of the evidence points toward Iraqi involvement," said James Fox, former special agent in charge of the FBI's New York office and the man credited with solving the bombing case. "I should say, I arrived at that conclusion after not believing it at first," he added. Fox explained that an eight-page State Department analysis that was classified but made available to him suggested that Iraqi sponsorship of the World Trade Center bombing was the "most likely scenario."

The U.S. Department of State's 1995 Patterns of Global Terrorism report stated, "Iraq continues to provide haven and training facilities for several terrorist clients. Abu Abbas' Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) maintains its headquarters in Baghdad. The Abu Nidal organization (ANO) continues to have an office in Baghdad. The Arab Liberation Front (ALF), headquartered in Baghdad, continues to receive funding from Saddam's regime. Iraq also continues to host the former head of the now-defunct 15 May organization, Abu Ibrahim, who masterminded several bombings of US aircraft."

On September 4, 1996, Newsday reported the United States had launched a cruise missile strike the prior day against Saddam Hussein to make him "pay a price" for unleashing his army against the northern Kurds. Over a two day period the United States launched a total of 44 cruise missiles into Iraq. President Clinton said, "Our objectives are limited but clear: To make Saddam pay a price for the latest act of brutality, reducing his ability to threaten his neighbors and America's interests."

On September 12, 1996, National Public Radio interviewed a former CIA chief of counter-terrorism who said Iraq might have been a state sponsor behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. NPR pointed out that Ramzi Ahmed Yousef came to the United States with an Iraqi passport and also reported that indicted co-conspirator Abdul Rahman Yasin was currently living in Baghdad.

On March 2, 1998, U.S. News & World Report wrote that Saddam Hussein had dispatched some 30 terrorist teams around the world to strike U.S. interests prior to the first Gulf War. Disaster was averted, the article reported, by a combination of U.S. intelligence and Iraqi incompetence. Iraq had shipped automatic weapons and explosives to embassies overseas but most of the Iraqi agents were amateurish and easily detected. Two men who did get through accidentally blew themselves up in the Philippines before they could bomb a U.S. cultural center in Manila.

On January 27, 1999 an article in the New York Times titled "A Much-Shunned Terrorist Is Said to Find Haven in Iraq" stated that "Abu Nidal, one of the world's most infamous terrorists, moved to Baghdad late last year and obtained the protection of President Saddam Hussein, according to intelligence reports received by United States and Middle Eastern government officials." The article quoted a counterterrorism expert who said that, regarding Abu Nidal, "Osama bin Laden is a student by comparison."

On January 12, 2001 The Miami Herald reported that the Navy changed the status of Lt. Commander Michael Scott Speicher from killed in action to missing. Speicher was listed as the first casualty of the Gulf War when his F/A-18 Hornet was shot down on January 17, 1991. This change in status also makes him the last to be still unaccounted for. President Clinton said information about the case "makes us believe that at least he survived his crash... and that he might be alive." Clinton said U.S. officials have begun trying to determine whether Speicher is alive, and "if he is, where he is and how we can get him out."

After the Gulf War in 1991, no-fly zones were established in northern and southern Iraq to protect the Iraqi Kurds and Shiites from Saddam's forces. The U.S. military enforced these no-fly zones up until the second Iraq war in March 2003. Iraq considered this an affront to its sovereignty and in December 1998 began shooting at American aircraft patrolling these zones. On March 28, 2001, General Tommy Franks reported to the House Armed Services Committee that during the prior year alone, coalition forces had flown nearly 10,000 sorties inside Iraqi airspace and those aircraft were engaged by surface-to-air missiles or anti-aircraft fire more than 500 times. Franks reported that during the prior year, naval forces had intercepted 610 ships while enforcing U.N. sanctions designed to limit Saddam Hussein's ability to smuggle oil out of Iraq. On any given day, U.S. Central Command operated in the region with some 30 naval vessels, 175-200 military aircraft, and between 18,000 and 25,000 Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines.

On October 14, 2001, a former Iraqi army captain named Sabah Khodada granted an interview to the PBS television program "Frontline" in which he talked about a terrorist training camp in Iraq called Salman Pak. During this interview Khodada stated, "This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world."

Saddam Hussein paid $25,000 bonuses to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers. "President Saddam Hussein has recently told the head of the Palestinian political office, Faroq al-Kaddoumi, his decision to raise the sum granted to each family of the martyrs of the Palestinian uprising to $25,000 instead of $10,000," Iraq's deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz declared on March 11, 2002. Mahmoud Besharat, who dispensed these funds across the West Bank, gratefully said: "You would have to ask President Saddam why he is being so generous. But he is a revolutionary and he wants this distinguished struggle, the intifada, to continue."

Before the rise of Usama bin Laden, Abu Nidal was widely regarded as the world's most ruthless terrorist. The Associated Press reported on August 22, 2002 that Nidal entered Iraq during the late 1990's "with the full knowledge and preparations of the Iraqi authorities." He lived there until August, 2002 when he died of between one and four gunshot wounds. It is believed by many that Abu Nidal was killed on the orders of Saddam Hussein although the Iraqi government claimed that Nidal had committed suicide.

On February 13, 2003, the Philippine government expelled Iraqi diplomat Hisham al Hussein, the second secretary at Iraq's Manila embassy. Cell phone records indicated that the Iraqi diplomat had spoken with Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Sali, leaders of Abu Sayyaf, just before and just after this Al-Qaeda allied Islamic militant group conducted an attack in Zamboanga City. Abu Sayyaf's nail filled bomb exploded on October 2, 2002, injuring 23 individuals and killing two Filipinos plus killing U.S. Special Forces Sergeant First Class Mark Wayne Jackson, age 40.

After the fall of Saddam's government, coalition forces found and destroyed a terrorist training camp located near Baghdad called Salman Pak. This terrorist training camp featured an airplane fuselage where Iraqi defectors had earlier reported foreign terrorists were being trained in hijacking aircraft.

On April 7, 2003, Agence France Presse reported that US Marines discovered a terrorist training camp operated by the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF). The complex featured bomb-making facilities and pictures of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and PLF faction leader Abu Abbas. Other pictures included the terrorist leader Abu Abbas posing with a Republican Guard brigadier general inside the camp.

On April 14, 2003, Abu Abbas was captured by U.S. Special Forces during a raid near Baghdad. Abbas had lived in Baghdad since 1994, where he was living under protection of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Khala Khadr al-Salahat, accused of designing the bomb that destroyed Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988 (259 killed on board, 11 dead on the ground), also lived in Iraq. He surrendered to U.S. Marines in Baghdad on April 18, 2003. http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=208308" target="_blank">

On September 18, 2003, USA Today ran an article with the headline "U.S. says Iraq sheltered suspect in '93 WTC attack." The article reported that U.S. authorities have evidence Saddam Hussein's regime gave money and housing to Abdul Rahman Yasin, a suspect in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. Military, intelligence and law enforcement officials reported finding a large cache of Arabic-language documents in Tikrit, Saddam's political stronghold. Some analysts have concluded that the documents show Saddam's government provided monthly payments and a home for Yasin.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on June 18, 2004, "I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received ... information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations."

In March 2006, a captured Iraqi document was revealed outlining a May 1999 plan for training terrorists. Under the code name "Blessed July" the top ten graduates of a terrorist training camp were to be sent to London for European operations. Other graduates of this terrorist training camp were to be sent to Iran or the Kurdish areas in northern Iraq. The Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) was to provide logistical support for their missions and selection of targets.

On November 29, 2009 a Czech TV station revealed that Iraqi intelligence agents working for Saddam Hussein had plotted an attack on the Prague headquarters of Radio Free Europe. TV Nova aired an exclusive report with information that in 1999 Saddam Hussein ordered a terrorist attack on the US-financed radio station from where programs criticizing his regime were broadcast around the world. In 2003, Czech intelligence officers discovered the plot and confiscated the weapons that Iraqi agents had stockpiled including automatic weapons and a rocket propelled grenade.

Connections between Iraq and Al-Qaeda

On August 20, 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against a chemical weapons factory in Sudan. The cruise missle strike was in retaliation for the August 7, 1998 truck bomb attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya which killed more than 200 people and wounded more than 5,000 others. The chemical weapons factory in Sudan was funded, in part, by Osama bin Laden who the U.S. believed responsible for the embassy bombings. Richard Clarke, a national security advisor to President Clinton, told the Washington Post in a January 23, 1999 article that the U.S. government was "sure" that Iraqi nerve gas experts had produced a powdered substance at that plant for use in making VX nerve gas.

On August 25, 1998 the Fort Worth Star-telegram reported a link between Iraq and the Sudanese chemical weapons factory destroyed by the United States in a cruise missile attack. The chemical weapons factory was hit because of links to Osama bin Laden who the U.S. believed responsible for the recent embassy bombings. A senior intelligence official said one of the leaders of Iraq's chemical weapons program, Emad al-Ani, had close ties with senior Sudanese officials at the factory. The intelligence official also said a number of Iraqi scientists working with al-Ani attended the grand opening of the factory two years earlier. Emad Husayn Abdullah al-Ani surrendered to U.S. military forces on April 18, 2003.

On November 5, 1998 a Federal grand jury in Manhattan returned a 238-count indictment charging Osama bin Laden in the bombings of two United States Embassies in Africa and with conspiring to commit other acts of terrorism against Americans abroad. The grand jury indictment also charged that Al-Qaeda had reached an arrangement with President Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq whereby the group said that it would not work against Iraq, and that the two parties agreed to cooperate in the development of weapons.

On January 11, 1999, Newsweek magazine ran the headline "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The subheadline declared, "It would be a marriage made in hell. And America's two enemies are courting." The article points out that Saddam has a long history ofsupporting terrorism. The article also mentions that, in the prior week, several surface-to-air missiles were fired at U.S. and British planes patrolling the no-fly zones and that Saddam is now fighting for his life now that the United States has made his removal from office a national objective.

On January 14, 1999, ABC News reported, "Saddam Hussein has a long history of harboring terrorists. Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, the most notorious terrorists of their era, all found shelter and support at one time in Baghdad. Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction."

On February 13, 1999, CNN reported, "Osama bin Laden, the Saudi millionaire accused by the United States of plotting bomb attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa, has left Afghanistan, Afghan sources said Saturday. Bin Laden's whereabouts were not known....." The article reports, "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden....."

On February 14, 1999, an article in the Aberdeen American News claimed U.S. intelligence officials were worried about an alliance between Osama bin Laden and Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The article said bin Laden had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan in late December 1998 and that "there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world." Vincent Cannistraro, former head of counterterrorism at the Central Intelligence Agency said, "It's clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq." The article said that in addition to Abu Nidal, another Palestinian terrorist by the name of Abu Ibrahim was also believed to be in Iraq.

On February 18, 1999, National Public Radio (NPR) reported, "There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi, sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq." NPR reported that Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when Farouk Hijazi met with bin Laden when he lived in Sudan.

On February 28, 1999, an article was written in The Kansas City Star which said, "He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States....."

On December 28, 1999, an article appeared in The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland) titled, "Iraq tempts bin Laden to attack West." The article starts, "The world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq....." The article quotes a U.S. counter-terrorism source who said, "Now we are also facing the prospect of an unholy alliance between bin Laden and Saddam. The implications are terrifying."

On April 8, 2001, an informant for Czech counter-intelligence observed an Iraqi intelligence official named al-Ani meeting with an Arab man in his 20s at a restaurant outside Prague. Following the 9/11 attacks, the Czech informant who observed the meeting saw Mohammed Atta’s picture in the papers and identified Mohammed Atta as the man who met with the Iraqi intelligence official.

On July 21, 2001 [less than two months prior to 911] the Iraqi state-controlled newspaper "Al-Nasiriya" predicted that bin Laden would attack the U.S. "with the seriousness of the Bedouin of the desert about the way he will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House." The same state-approved column also insisted that bin Laden "will strike America on the arm that is already hurting," and that the U.S. "will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs" - an apparent reference to the Sinatra classic, "New York, New York."

After the 9/11 attacks, Saddam became the only world leader to offer praise for bin Laden, even as other terrorist leaders, like Yassir Arafat, went out of their way to make a show of sympathy to the U.S. by donating blood to 9/11 victims on camera. Saddam later pays tribute to 9/11 by having a mural painted depicting the World Trade Center attack at an Iraqi military base in Nasariyah.

On December 3, 2001 USA Today reported that the CIA had convincing evidence from the mid-1990s Saddam Hussein's regime was funneling money through Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network to the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) in Algeria and other terrorist organizations. Stanley Bedlington, a senior analyst in the CIA's counterterrorism center until his retirement in 1994, said "We were convinced that money from Iraq was going to bin Laden, who was then sending it to places that Iraq wanted it to go."

On March 15, 2002 the Christian Science Monitor reported that a Taliban-style group known as Ansar al-Islam was threatening stability in the Kurdish northern region of Iraq. Prior to the start of the Iraq War in 2003, Colin Powell addressed the United Nations and pointed out that both Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida had links with the Ansar al-Islam terrorist group. Saddam had provided arms and funding for this terrorist group waging a jihadist war against the Kurds. One month prior to the formation of Ansar al-Islam, leaders from several Kurdish Islamist factions had visited the al-Qaida leadership in Afghanistan. Ansar al-Islam announced their formation on September 1, 2001 just days prior to the September 11 attacks in the United States.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a director of an al Qaeda training base in Afghanistan, fled to Iraq after being injured as the Taliban fell (prior to the U.S./Iraq war). He received medical care and convalesced for two months in Baghdad. He then opened a terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan.

CIA director George Tenet (appointed by President Bill Clinton July 11, 1997) wrote in a letter to Senator Bob Graham dated October 7, 2002. "We have solid reporting of senior level contact between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade. Credible information exists that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression. . . . We have credible reporting that al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities."

On October 16, 2002, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was signed into law. Theauthorization (Public law 107-243) had passed the House by a vote of 296-133, and the Senate by a vote of 77-23. This resolution stated, "Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;" and "Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens."

Babil, an official newspaper of Saddam Hussein's government, run by his oldest son Uday, published information that appeared to confirm U.S. allegations of the links between the Iraqi regime and al Qaeda. In its November 16, 2002 edition, Babil identified one Abd-al-Karim Muhammad Aswad as an "intelligence officer," describing him as the "official in charge of regime's contacts with Osama bin Laden's group and currently the regime's representative in Pakistan."

In December 2002 the House and Senate intelligence committees issued a report on the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. CIA director George Tenet testified (page 137) that, “Atta may also have traveled outside of the U.S. in early April 2001 to meet an Iraqi intelligence officer, although we are still working to corroborate this.” This report also noted (page 211) that, "In February 1999, the Intelligence Community obtained information that Iraq had formed a suicide pilot unit that it planned to use against British and U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf. The CIA commented that this was highly unlikely and probably disinformation."

On April 25, 2003 CNN reported that Farouk Hijazi had been captured by U.S. forces. Farouk Hijazi was a former intelligence official who may have plotted the attempted assassination of George H.W. Bush in 1993. He was also a contact between Saddam Hussein's regime and Osama bin Laden. Farouk met with bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998 and is also believed to have met with bin Laden in Sudan in the early 1990's.

While sifting through the Iraqi Intelligence Service's [Mukhabarat] bombed ruins on April 26, 2003 the Toronto Star's Mitch Potter, the London Daily Telegraph's Inigo Gilmore and their translator discovered a memo in the intelligence service's accounting department. Dated February 19, 1998 and marked "Top Secret and Urgent," it said the agency would pay "all the travel and hotel expenses inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."

On May 7, 2003, a federal judge in New York awarded damages against the government of Iraq after ruling that the families of two victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide hijackings had shown that Iraq had provided material support to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. Judge Harold Baer ruled that the two families were entitled to $104 million compensation from Iraq, bin Laden, al-Qaida, the Taliban movement and their government of Afghanistan. "Plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, 'by evidence satisfactory to the court' that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al-Qaida."

The 9/11 Commission Report (pages 228 - 229) provides details of what is known about Mohamed Atta's alleged April 9, 2001 11:00 A.M. meeting with an Iraqi Intelligence agent in Prague. According to the FBI, Mohamed Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 4 and in Florida on April 11. Atta's cell phone records indicate calls were made from Florida during this period but they cannot confirm whether he placed those calls. The report mentions, however, that Czech intelligence has stated publicly they believe there was a 70 percent probability that the meeting took place. The Czech Interior Minister made several statements to the press about his belief that the meeting had occurred. Atta is known to have been in Prague on at least two occasions: once in December 1994 and again in June 2000.

On September 13, 2006, a deputy prime minister of Iraq by the name of Barham Salih gave a speech in which he said, "The alliance between the Baathists and jihadists which sustains Al Qaeda in Iraq is not new, contrary to what you may have been told." He went on to say, "I know this at first hand. Some of my friends were murdered by jihadists, by Al Qaeda-affiliated operatives who had been sheltered and assisted by Saddam's regime."

On March 20, 2008 the Pentagon declassified results of their investigation into captured Iraqi documents. The report entitled "Iraqi Perspectives Project -- Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents" stated, "While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."

In June 2008 the Senate released their report "Whether Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were Substantiated By Intelligence Information." Among the conclusions (page 71), it reported that public statements by government officials that Iraq (prior to the war) provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other al-Qaida related terrorist members was substantiated by intelligence assessments.

On June 18, 2008 the Iraqi newspaper Kurdistani Nwe published a 2002 letter from the Iraqi presidency that it said proved there was cooperation between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al-Qaeda. The letter, which appeared on the paper's front page, was written by Iraqi intelligence and discussed an intention to meet with Ayman Al-Zawahiri in order to examine a plan drawn up by the Iraqi presidency to carry out a "revenge operation" in Saudi Arabia.

How about the original sources? You can make your own summations.

President George W. Bush, “ State of the Union ,” 28 January 2003.

Chairman Lord Butler of Brockwell, “Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction,” 14 July 2004.

“Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq,” Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate, 7 July 2004.

Walter Pincus, “ CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report Of Uranium Bid ,” Washington Post, 12 June 2003.

Mohamed ElBaradei, “ The Status of Nuclear Inspections in Iraq: An Update ,” Statement to the United Nations Security Council by International Atomic Energy Agency Director General, 7 March 2003.

Joseph Wilson, “What I Didn’t Find in Africa,” New York Times, 6 July 2003.

Joseph Wilson,The Official Kerry-Edwards BLOG: "Transcript of Chat with Ambassador Joe Wilson," 29 Oct 2003.

Michael Kinsley, "...Or More Lies From The Usual Suspects?," Washington Post, 16 July 2003: A23.

Ari Fleischer, “ Press Gaggle ,” 7 July 2003.

Ari Fleischer and Dr. Condoleeza Rice, “ Press Gaggle ,” 11 July 2003.

George Tenet, "Statement by George J. Tenet Director of Central Intelligence," Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), 11 July 2003.

Randy...just google www.reasons for war with Iraq and you will have your sources!!

Is it sad that half of this country won't listen to reason or believe the facts because of there die hard belief in their political parties propaganda? Nothing gets in the bubble. It's a lot like cult brainwashing in a way. Nothing will get through it. If you want to be a sucker that's your right but don't expect me to agree with what I know to be false.

Randy, what exactly in the post we're discussing is 'false'? The points come from various news sources and quotes. How is this 'brainwashing'. How is this 'political party propaganda'? Just curious!

Paragus,

I didn't agree with BUSH too, but I never desert, if she had problem with it, then she should have applied for exemption as conscious objector through legal means, but running is deserting, there no merit in her actions.

Wikipedia is a perfectly good source. Its peer reviewed and requires the author to cite all sources. We used it in COLLEGE to find a plethora of sources. Never did I come across a topic that didnt have accurately cited sources which were linked properly. To claim that one internet source is superior to another is laughable.

Wikipedia is a perfectly good source. Its peer reviewed and requires the author to cite all sources. We used it in COLLEGE to find a plethora of sources. Never did I come across a topic that didnt have accurately cited sources which were linked properly. To claim that one internet source is superior to another is laughable

And when was that? It is not allowed to use Wikepedia for ANY college paper... or should I say any legitimate college. Wikipedia is peer reviewed? By who random every day people? Get real.

No you cannot cite wikipedia as a source. You USE it to FIND sources. Like I said every topic has cited valid sources. There are moderators that are responsible for ensuring that sources are cited. Learn a little about what youre talking about instead of talking like a pissed off Literature professor who's afraid of new technology.

For instance. Go to Wikipedia and type in "Washington Monument." Scroll to the bottom and you will see 67 cited valid sources for the article. Try walking into the library and see how long it will take you to find 67 sources. Its all laid out for you on wiki. All you have to do is click.

lol a pissed off Literature professor? Randy was citing Wikepedia that would be why I said Wikepedia should not be cited. So maybe you should learn to read the conversation before you go off acting like some guy that thinks he knows it all. That's fantastic that there are cited sources, but not all of them are accurate. That is the problem with the accuracy of Wikepedia. As I said before some of the information is correct BUT NOT ALL!!! Did you get that last part? Not all of it is. Before your moderator gets to it to correct some possible misinformation someone could quote it and be wrong.

Uh huh. Because journals and other online news agencies never post incorrect information. Nor do they have sections for editorial corrections. ;)

I hate to point out the obvious, but Saddam did gas the Kurds and kill tens of thousands of them. Poisonous gas which is indeed a WMD.

NJ John...what a complete waste of time that was...did you really think anyone would bother to read all that crap you posted.

As far as the story...sorry, but she knew full well what she was getting into when she signed up. I feel absolutely no sympathy for her. I think she should get the maximum penalty that any deserter would get durring war time.

All I have to say to her is....whaaaaaaa

Uh huh. Because journals and other online news agencies never post incorrect information. Nor do they have sections for editorial corrections. ;)

Oh no they definitely do. I'm not saying news agencies are always correct. I don't believe most of what I hear or read. Or at least I don't take it at whole value unless there is video or photographic proof.

Anothr lame liberal that thinks orders are not for them. In any situation the President has adivsors telling what is going on, just as Bush did, hell look at O just sayiing the Libya thing was just a riot...found out wrong from advisors later...what would have any President done after 9/11? Taken out TV ads explaining it was bad but somehow if must have been our fault? All you people are so santicmonious especially in hindsight. If you hate this country leave it. We have 10's of thousands of dead soldiers to thank for our freedom of speech, religion etc..don't crap on them for your pathetic whinings.

I believe I recall Sadam sending a missile (WMD) to a Kuwaiti shopping mall. I think I also recall his comment to the effect that "missiles? everybody's got missles!"

But don't let me interrupt the cross-party rant over a topic which has nothing to do with the article.

Hilarious.

Randy-2190191 Randy you want to come again? The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans. (Search Iraq and yellow cake)

In 2012, Britain will help the Iraqi government dispose of what is left of Saddam's chemical weapons. The teams will work to safely destroy remnants of munitions and chemical warfare agents left over from Saddam's regime.^{[19](search iraq and weapons of mass destruction.)}

Best to keep mouth shut and let people believe you a fool, than open mouth and prove it.

thatguydownsouth Wikipedia is good to START an investigation, but as often I have seen, it is changed. Especially on political facts. When I used it a few years ago on Obama, and today on Obama, the hard copies I created are incredibly different.

Every day there are changes and contradictions. THAT IS WHAT WORRIES ME MORE THAN WHAT THE SOURCES SAY.

NJ John- Thanks for the thorough post. Normally I would not have, however, I to am getting sick and tired of the blame game and accusing Bush of lying about WMD, so I read it all.

Dudefedup-That was in reference to the story for another excuse for her to not return to Iraq. But also responding to people continually saying Bush lied. His post along with my own research proved alliance between Saddam and OBL with WMD.

Some have mentioned they would not want her to have their backs. I couldn't agree more. My husband did two stints in Iraq and that was his biggest fear. To have an American soldier who could not hack it or disagreed with the war (which I must say most people do not want war nor fight one) can get more soldiers killed.

She needs to be punished to the fullest extent the military can do. Simple as that. She is a disgrace to women in the military and soldiers who have fought for her freedom.

Yes, she is a deserter.

Deciding after the fact that she doesn't like the war is just too damn bad. The military is not like civilian jobs where you can just quit and find another one. She should have sucked it up and performed her job as required to do.

As a former PO2 in the Navy, no one put a gun to my head to enlist. She's what we would call a s^itbird.

Time to face the music, darlin'. You are a Deserter. Your oath was a joke. Your children should see what kind of mother they have, one not worth a damn.

It gives me great pride when my boys call me up on Veteran's Day and say thanks Mom for your service.

This is a recruited military. The term "volunteer" is a misnomer.

JD, yes, it is a recruited military, but it is not a conscripted military. There is no force, such as there is with the draft. Every person who signs the enlistment contract has voluntarily chosen to enlist. Recruiting is no different than sales advertisements - they want you to buy their product, but you still have a choice.

JD--Really? SERIOUSLY?? Semantics aside, joining the military is a choice. During WWII, just over 11% of the U.S. population served in the military, and a large percentage were conscripts. Even during an unquestionably moral world changing event like that we depended on draftees to fill out our ranks. During Viet Nam, only 4.5% served, with an even larger percentage of them being conscripts. Since we changed to a completely volunteer military, less than 1% of the U.S. population have served in the Middle East since 2003, 0.45% to be exact. I presume you're among the 99.55% who chose not to serve but instead stand on the sidelines and judge those of us who have. She took an oath, she violated that oath, and there are consequences for doing it.

JD-276988

This is a recruited military. The term "volunteer" is a misnomer.

"Recruit" means to strengthen by enlistment. "Volunteer" means to (in this context) enlist willingly. Unless someone forces you to sign on the dotted line, that is not a misnomer. If you really believe that then, by your logic, the term "volunteer" should never apply to football players who are recruited.

JD might try looking up the word volunteer ina dictionary then JD wouldn't feel the need to post something 100% incorrect.

First I am about as anti-war as a reasonable person can be, that being said we have a volunteer military and there is no semantic argument around that. So what if there are recruiters, colleges have recruiters, companies have recruiters, no matter how you argue it recruitment is not the same thing as the draft. This person signed up of there own free will and in doing so made a commitment which included giving up some of her personal liberties, most importantly the freedom to go where you want when you want. If she had some revelation and really didn't want to be there she could have punched a superior or something and been put in the brig(sp?) but she didn't she deserted and should face harsh punishment. What about all the other service members over there who may be just as disillusioned or scared as her, yet they don't run away at the first oppurtunity not because they believe in the politics but because they believe in honor. Thankyou Canada for returning this dishonorable miscreant.

.

The goverent lie again...They did it with Iraq. 4500 dead for a lie..How would you feel if it was your son or daughter..now we have it in Afgan. all those dead and for what so we can cut and run....We should never ever fight a war unless we go in and win it in a year or two.....these people over there don't care about us .They neeed to go live in caves. Their relgions its the devil...anyone that covers their face and don't want you to see the uglinss and evil.

The DoJ didn't detain her; the military did. The UCMJ doesn't answer to the DoJ, thank God. She will prosecuted in military court and her sentence, if any, served in a military detention center.

Thats ok, the Canadians where lead to belive one thing and the other thing happened. This just means as time goes on, the Canadian government wont be so willing to just take the US word for it. That in turn will lead to even more trouble deporting the people the US wants deported from Canada.

I.E. The US government has set the ground work for a harder time getting a hold of wanted persons from Canada. Great job guys...

This really reminds me of an episode of South Park.....I can just imagine the court hearing......flapping head Canadians being suckered into handing over the soldier by the sorry lying as dog from the Justice Department.

Huh?

Wow: so you really came up with all this BS and then it was ok for us to invade another country on made up stories....So if we didn't invade..where do you think Iran would be today with it nukes....Just goes to show you these people need a dictator to run them...their relgion doesn't want the freedom we enjoy nor will they except our freedom...So as I say when and if Iran get nukes and after builting and stockpileig them over ten years. What do you think is going to happen...Your going to sitting home in a safe country while the Middle East goes up and we have to go there to protect them from a dictator regime anyways....All I got to say is GOD HELP US ALL.

Jobo..not 'make up stories'! Google 'www.reason-for-war-with-irag.info' and you will find the sources of the comments. Just click on the source and it will display it for you. I happen to agree with you that many of the people in the ME need a dictator to run the government. That being said, the question was the invasion of Iraq was based on a lie. This intel disputes that and gives reasons 'why' both Clinton and Bush were concerned about Iraq and what where it was headed.

Oooohhhh NJ John...you posted a link to a tin foil hat website....now thats different :-/.

What a croc...quit trying to defend a deserter. She knew what she was getting into when she signed up...plain and simple.

Sorry NJ John...somehow I got you confused with someone else.

.

this was a political war.this soldier is a hero and should be recognized as such for standing up to the D. C. mucks mucks and saying HELL NO I WON'T GO.

BS, JD. She willfully enlisted.

It is great to have 20/20 hindsight. The "lies" you speak about were the same lies that the Clinton administration bombed factories in Iraq over. The "lies" line is itself a big lie.

JD

The fact of the matter is SHE WENT OVER THE HILL !!!!!!

The U.C.M.J. does not care about the reason why she did it. It only deals with punishment for having done so. Hope she likes Leavenworth, because she will be spending many long years there.

How was she misled? There was a war going on in Iraq. Did the government tell her that if she enlisted that she wouldn't have to go? I doubt it.

As for your BS about the war being based on lies, you apparently like to buy the lies of the dem party. Some of us are old enough to have seen what brought about the war and know what was said. The short version is that when Sadaam surrendered to Bush 41 (yes, we were the victors!) he signed a surrender agreement and that agreement spelled out weapons that he had and he agreed to destroy them and to allow verification of their destruction. He, in his infinite wisdom, decided to play games with us and kept booting international inspectors out of the country and was refusing them access to places where weapons were believed to be. Although he claimed he had destroyed them, he failed to provide the verification of such destruction and did everything he could to make sure we wouldn't verify. Then there were credible reports that he was seeking materials for WMDs. The administration saw the evidence, the Congress saw the evidence, and Bush, Pelosi, Reid, et. al. decided that based on the evidence that we should do something about it. Contrary to Tutu's assertions, Bush NEVER said there are WMDs in Iraq. He said that there was credible evidence that there were WMDs there. And Sadaam certainly acted like there were. Heck, one didn't even have to have any reports of WMDs to conclude that there was a strong likelihood that there were some there based solely on Sadaam's own actions. Oh, and by the way, contrary to the lies of the media, they did find WMDs in Iraq! They found weapons capable of killing several thousand at a time. In my mind, that's a WMD.

You can look it up on your own, but here is a link to the New York Post article on it. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM

Hi witchrunner,

I see a lot of people spouting off at the mouth in these forums, but few care to provide a link with some facts like you have. I wish more people who posted would do as you have done. It would make others more knowledgeable rather than more opinionated.

Thanks for the great post.

Doug

P.S. I believe I was misled when I signed my mortgage papers... can I skip out on that? hehehe... just joking. She's an oath breaker. She should be punished. Done.

She should be imprisoned and people like you JD is why in the last 20 years America has been on a freefall towards the bottom.

doug: Thanks! Oh, you have my permission to skip out on your mortgage. Of course, I don't think claiming "conscientious objector" will keep you in your house and avoid the damage to your credit rating. Funny thing about life as an adult, decisions and actions have consequences. Of course, they can also have great rewards too.

One thing I've noticed posting here is that way too many people have no real understanding of the subjects they post about. Unfortunately, they vote based on their ignorance. And that does not bode well for the country.

J.D. -

Your posting seems to be getting sillier, but I suspect you're doing it on purpose.

Really?

Apparently NJ John has his Cut & Paste procedures down pat.

R. Scalzo....and that makes the information wrong? Nice try at trying to devert the conversation!

nvm

If she went without punishment this would set a dangerous predendent big time..then anyone could be a coward a get by with it just because they disagree with the elected polticians that run this country...we would be in a worlds of pur chaos for sure.and those on with carreers in the armed services know what I am talking about.

Nj john all that research does what good, it is complete moot point now..decsisions were made years ago, it's done and you weren't consulted most likely to make the big decisions...right or wrong it was done, decisions based on faulty intellegence at at the time..congressionl aprroval was voted . All the looking in reverse does absolutely nothing at this point in time but try cause serious internal civil unrest...is that what you like to see...war between dems and reps.?

doug4short

P.S. I believe I was misled when I signed my mortgage papers... can I skip out on that? hehehe... just joking. She's an oath breaker. She should be punished. Done.

lets not be to hasty, just think about the precedents this is setting for malpractice cases, now all doctors have to say is they were misled when taking the Hippocratic Oath lol.

Get real wsd.

She wasnt stupid, she could read and knew exactly what she was signing up for. Military means WAR She should face a firing squad

Wrong. 550 metric tons of yellow cake found in Iraq 2008 reported by CNN. The Iraqi cetriguges that manufactured that material were transferred to Syria prior to the invasion which led direcly to the development of their nuclear reactor.

Every intel agency on the planet did not get it wrong, niether did these democrats.

The facts are hurt as more and more information come in from Syrian defectors and rebels.

The history books are going to have to be re-written.

Over 80 democrats voted for the war.

And here's the quotes from all those democrats, with the same intelligence the republicans had, that believed Sadaam had WMD:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Hi Publius,

Looked up the link for the uranium you were talking about;

(forum blocked the link.... sorry. Copy and past to a Google search: "550 metric tons of yellow cake found in Iraq 2008; cnn.com" should be on the first page.)

I never knew this, but I can understand why the government would want to keep such a thing secret. The thing I can't understand is that once this was public knowledge, why did some politicians (continue to) say they were duped by lies??? Politics and politicians.... (shiver) makes me want to go wash my mouth out and scrub myself in scalding water.

Thanks for the post,

Doug

Yup, it gets worse.  There was clear evidense of huge convoy movement in Iraq to the Syrian boarder. 



http: //heavenawaits.wordpress.com/the-syria-wmd-conspiracy/

Doug - The reason they would keep it a secret and rather have people think they completely lied brings up a whole different monster. We (America) sold Saddam the same weapons we invaded and 'looked' for. I really wish I could remember the exact Senate doc that outlines the sale of the weapons. It states (after the original Gulf War) that Iraq is not considered a terrorist regime and that it's cleared for the selling of XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX chemical and biological weapons to them for the amount of some millions of dollars.

Now, how would the people react if the 10 o'clock news flashed images of us finding weapons there with 'U.S.A' stamped on them? Sometimes it's better to be called a liar...

I'll do my best to find the document and post a link here.

Your time-line is off. But, yes we did sell Iraq weapons during their conflict with Iran.

Sure, at the time we wanted to help in any we can to defeat Iran.

But, Russia was far more involved than we were.

I would like to know what kind of job did she find to support herself and 4 kids all this time? Thats crazy in itself. Wow, guess the canadian economy isn't near as bad as ours.

Hi John Doe,

I would appreciate that link. I'm not sure it will change my opinion on this though. We sold Iran military hardware when they were our allies. Things change over time and we need to be able to change too. As one poster said: "20/20 hindsight....."

Don't get me wrong there.... I value anybody's post who backs it up with some reliable facts.

If the U.S. sold them the stuff, then I think your right. The government would probably try to keep it out of the press or at least the spot light.

Thank you for the info,

Doug

Well no link but most senate records are supposed to be public.

Senate Hearing Report 103-900

That's what you're looking for. However, there's plenty more out there.

Publius is correct. The main reason we were selling them is to strengthen Iraq for a fight with Iran. It was yet another staging ground for us to accomplish something without actually doing anything. Like Afghanistan was. Of course there's more than just one or two reasons we went to war in either country also.

Jobo, My son has done 4 tours in Iraq. My husband has been back and forth between Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11.

This just wasn't the "Garden Party" she was expecting. TOO BAD.

She's a deserter. Plain and simple. Put her in jail where she belongs.

The "atomic" weapons sold to Iraq were shells fired from tanks. Its atomic value was not enough to destroy much but managed to cause sickness and birth defects, largely aimed at civilians. ( I was reminded of this recently, watching an old" AUSTRALIA'S GOT TALENT". A young man with no hands and his conjoined brother with equal disfigurements attended. The first sang a powerful version of Alleluia , a contemporary piece. They had been found in a shoebox in Iraq as infants, by an Australian peace worker)

There were many lies told in order to "sell" this war.... The US had been blowing the hell out of Iraq for quite a few years before 9/11 and indeed, there were no Iraqi involved the the 9/11attacks.... they were Saudi for the most part and some Yemeni..... NO !!! Mr Bush wanted " O I L ", access to it and governance over it. The first public works project after the invasion was an oil pipeline designed to run to the Mediterranean by way of Palestine. That's the only reason we went there,,,,, not for our FREEDOM, OR FOR ANYBODY ELSE'S!!!

So, The way I see it, These young men and this young woman were lied to, in a serious way, in order to get them involved over there.... They were and continue to be lied to. It all has to do with $$$ and the oil companies.....

The way I understand the law, Is that if someone is put into a legal position by lies and falsehoods, they are not bound to it by the law. It's what they called being Shanghaied in the OLDEN DAYS.... Hey kid, want to go on a cruise? Good food and big bonus at the 2 weeks on the high seas!!!!! "If you manage to come back alive after 3 years away"!!!!

This woman had every right to bail as soon as she found out what was really going on

I felt the same way about the group of Soldiers that raped and killed an innocent Iraqi girl and slaughtered her entire family.

Actually I did two OIF deployments for a total of 547 days over there. I retired from the US Marine Corps in 2009 after 25 years of service.

Peace and Semper Fidelis...

Don't forget that she had 4 kids and they would get free healthcare.

Ah, but the intel was correct. There were nuclear and WMD programs in Iraq, with Russian help.

At some point the history books will have to be re-written,

Your comment makes the most sense of any that I have read here. Excellent!!

She cant just change her mind. Oopsi I dont like the Military anymore. If everyone that ever had a change of heart after joining were allowed to just get out we wouldnt have a military. Suck up all the training and benefits and when things get hot say see ya later. I think not.

Thank you Keeper for putting it so eloquantly. I am a veteran of the Gulf War, and I totally agree with this girl's position and her decision. I say discharge her and let her live her life in peace.

JD, Keeper and Fral,

If you all served in the military during a war time then how can you defend this person??? How would you have liked it if someone in your unit or platoon decided they no longer wanted to be in the war with you and just let their rifle down and did not stay there to have your back? Didn't she break the law???? I guess you three forgot about BROTHERHOOD!!!! Glad your sorry asses were not a part of my sons platoon.

usa is great - Wow I agree completely. Are these people truly military or just posting bullcrap on a forum. Anyone who served should NEVER feel this way. Seriously its OK for her to just run away and you're all OK with that. Actually pretty pathetic.

She was already in the states and decided not to go back. She didn't leave her guarded post during a drill or something like that. WTF are you talking about. Yes she needs to pay the price but nobody's life was in danger, she was just trying to pertect her own.

Being a Vietnam Veteran and I seen this happen in that war, and a lot of them went to Canada or Sweden.. If she didn't like the war why did sho join DD her and let her find a job in Canada...

Yes, she was already in the US, but she was expected to return and be redepoloyed. That means someone else had to replace her.

Keeper,

Totally wrong. I was in OIF I, II and OEF. I was a field interrogator and occasional "door kicker". I lugged my rifle. When I led my own team in Afghanistan, I understood even more. You're not thinking from a leadership perspective or even that of a team perspective; you're thinking as an individual. If you lose a member of your unit, you know that someone has to fill his/her shoes. That someone might just be a Soldier who has his/her home rotation cut short to fill the gap. That extra twelve hour shift that she vacated was probably made up by Soldiers who lost some of their down time. If people start bugging out during leave, it becomes a cancer which can infect the rest of the unit. She didn't stand up for what was right. Does she have the time, date, place, units which were involved in the so-called crimes which she witnessed? What did she do at the time? Who did she contact or report to? Did she even confide in her Squad Leader or Chaplain? She left and then used her examples as a post facto defense for opting out. She's using the "Manning defense", of one-sided tales of horror which play to what the civilian anti-military crowd want to hear.

I have memories of many things that happened, and I wish that, in hindsight, certain events didn't unfold in the manner that they had or that the outcome was different. I was compassionate when it was called for and firm when necessary. If I screwed up, then that is a cross that I bear and I will answer for at the end.

Seewhat I mean188,

What she did was pretty close to that of leaving her post. You make it sound like it was no worse than a child getting homesick on her first overnight. She was on deployment orders to a combat zone. She was given leave to go home, and she was expected to return. Her place of duty, her unit and her command were downrange. Her gear and her weapon were downrange. She had a duty rotation that she never returned to. It's not like she was on 30 days leave from her station in Germany. Be in a leadership position and have a Soldier go AWOL or desert; it is a big friggin' deal and makes for a lot of extra time and work for other Soldiers.

Keeper, JD, and fral: if you three actually were in the military, you sound like the knuckleheads that I would have Chaptered out. I could say that as a veteran myself, I am surprised at your attitudes... but we used to say "10% of your soldiers will take up 90% of your time". You guys must have been in that bottom 10% that were always a pain in the ass to their leaders and to their fellow platoon members who had to pick up their slack.

Fuzzybearslippers put it well enough about this witless and spineless girl that I don't need to rehash it here. I call her "girl" because I have seen more maturity and committment from a 12-year old.

Anyway, the U.S. military is not going to execute her, so those who are calling for her head can calm down. We haven't shot someone for desertion since 1944, when one private was made an example of during the Battle of the Bulge. IMO, she does need to face some prison time. Back to that "example" thing, or more kids will also think their oath doesn't mean anything and they can desert the next time the air conditioning goes out on their FOB.

I am 99% sure her tales of "atrocities" are pure BS. Yes, a lot of doors were kicked down, but it would not have been any squad of soldiers that she was part of. All 11-series and some 19K's and D's and 13-series MOS that had been turned into Infantry because we didn't use all of our tanks or heavy artillery after the initial invasion. She would not have been in those units. She may have heard some stories while hanging out in the DFAC or MWR tent, but she could not have been a direct witness. Bunch of crap she has whipped up to try and justify her cowardly, selfish, craven behavior.

Hey Keeper of horses!(me to on the horses, in S E LA.... Good call!

I was drafted to Viet Nam at a time everyone already knew it was another one of those get rich quick for the oil companies..... South China Seas ( much in the news these days...Didn't take long for me to loose a lot of blood and a very large part of my digestive tract. The worst part was seeing my buddies fall and die for such BS... A kind of evil that stays with us though. I never took a dime of compensation from The DOD or VA. I had good insurance before I left home..... not so bad off as most others.

This young woman was lied to. Her contract was made not binding by the person that signed her. She had no legal responsibility to follow the orders. If we are going to fight for freedom, Let it be that of other U S citizens who have been wronged.... I hope she sues the DOD while she is at it.... talk about a great "Class Action" !!! AND to TWS 149etc. I take it you don't read much or that you only use FOX for your main source of public information???

et220: Your first comment of you being DRAFTED is all you had to say, because it is clear that you did not want to be a prt of the military but was forced to whereas this POS was not drafted and therefore her signed agreement is a LEGAL binding document that she will NEVER be able to overlook. Hence why all of you who hate the military and was drafted in these wars/conflicts cant sue either because you also took an oath and signed an agreement with the Federal Government. But if you are a lawyer and can help this POS then by all means do a pro-bona case for her since you believe in what she did.

Yes, and no one volunteers to be used for lies and wars not for our national defense. If a person vounteers to be used for anything they want whether illegal in international law since we were not in imminent threat of atttack they they are volunteering to be slaves. This Vietnam all over again yet Bush says we should have stayed fighting. For what exactly, since no communist dominoes feel, and even having lost we are now relating to them well. But we were walking a fien line with nuclear war with the Soviet Union the whole time we were there in addition to all the live losts. Personnel damaged by wars for lies not in the national defense should be able to claim damages. Now Canada is liable too having caved in to the lies.

New evidence confirms that all the intel agencies on the planet did not get it wrong. Iraq did have nuclear and WMD programs supported by Russia.

The history books will have to be re-written at some point.

Bush's Iraq war was unnecessary and immoral.

I guess President Bush should have apologized for the terrorist planes flying into buildings back on 9/11. If you don't stand up to the bully, he'll kick your a$$ on daily basis. President Obama has done nothing but apologize to the Muslim terrorists for killing our people. He thinks that by sending money to the Middle East it will stop the bully from attacking...he's wrong. You can't negotiate with terrorists.

Thank you. Everybody is bringing up all this old sh!t. Bush did that, Clinton did that. She was probably still in junior high school when all this was going on, please. BTW Ban imported hoodies from China. That would cut our crime rate in half. Lord knows we don't make any garments to speak off over here.

Seewhat, the article stated that she is 30. That would make her around 25 when she elisted in 2007. And that would mean she was an adult in 2003.

My speculation as to why she joined is that she needed a job and benefits.

LittlemissV is someone who believes that drugs should be legalized... Read her other comments.

Oh Ann, so the moral of your long story is "women can't take it"?

Been there and done that!

The coward should be tried and hanged because she put her comrades at risk due to her absence.

Should all the other people in her sector have run to Canada also? They saw the same things but sucked it up and did their duty.

"There is much death, rape, torture and abuse of civilians there and it can become too much for someone who has lived a very civilized and sheltered life."

Jeez, you would think that we were no better than Mongol Horde or the Red Army on the march to Berlin with all of the rape and pillage that you seem to believe that the Army and Marines get up to. Stop buying into this Hollywood (post-Apocalypse Now) version of the American military as a bunch of savages. The incidents of abuse are well documented. We don't need to see the list. The list of humanitarian projects through CA and NGOs is much longer. You've taken 10 years of war and atrocities and condensed it to the point where it looks like every patrol was something out of "Platoon."

QUOTE: "We used city patrols, checkpoints and violence and intimidation against innocent civilians,”

This soldier has taken it upon herself to make judgements concerning the guilt or innocence of civilians, some of whom were, quite possibly, not at all innocent. This behaviour cannot be allowed to go unpunished if we wish to maintain a disciplined military... She is a soldier; not a member of some debating society.

The wench joined for the 8000 dollar sign up bonus. Thought it was easy money. Short court session, dishonorable discharge. You pay the money back or you get 8 yrs in jail. She's a loser who couldn't afford her kids and then has more so people would feel sorry for her, especially the canadian gov't, who she thought having her kids there she could get put on the canadian welfare system. Wrong dumbazz!!! You just made more mistakes. Maybe you should go back to school and study this time, so your'e not so stupid!!!