Plenty of former officers have criticized the Iraq War, but there's only been one active duty career soldier who's not only come out against the War but also refused to go and fight in it. (He said he would go to Afghanistan instead, but that the Iraq war is "illegal"). That soldier is Lt. Ehren Watada, 30, a junior Army officer from Hawaii who's become a poster child for the anti-war movement. He's also become persona non grata within the military and is facing a possible sentence of six years in prison.
Our friend Tara McKelvey is the first journalist who has gotten close to him in more than a year. She's written an amazing story for The American Prospect about Watada, who's now in legal limbo and being subtly punished at a desk job.
Watada's critique of the Iraq War's legality is boosted by the recent release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on prewar Iraq intel. And his commitment to doing what he thinks is right is impressive. He told McKelvey:
"I realized we had been lied to. I was standing out in the middle of the desert, and I had a deep sense of betrayal. I had joined an army, and I thought it was noble. And to think we had engaged in something that had caused so much carnage and destruction and then to find out it was unnecessary. There I was in uniform, and I felt ashamed of what I was being asked to do. I think there's no bigger crime than taking your country into a war based on lies."
At the same time, someone else is just going to go in his place, and so members of the military are understandably angry at him for refusing to get on the plane. (They're even madder about his very public statements opposing the War.) Paul D. Eaton, a retired Army major general who was one of the retired generals who in 2006 called for Rumsfeld's resignation said, "Watada is an active-duty soldier, and he has failed to obey the orders of the officers over him. He does not have the right."
Read the article here. What do you think, is Watada a hero or a criminal?
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 7)
31. I thought there was an "out" for military personnel to not obey orders they believed to be unlawful. Since more and more evidence is coming out that the war in Iraq is unlawful (as any war based on lies would be) That being the case, Watada is a hero in my book. He is standing by what he believes.
Rebecca Diem at 4:13PM on Jun 11th 2008
32. I don't see what the problem is with going to Iraq now, the war is over and we won. We are there helping the Iraq people form their new government and teaching them how to defend themselves. I repeat, there is no war in Iraq, it is over. We won
Sam at 5:44AM on Jun 12th 2008
33. Ehren is NOT a CO, he never even thought of applying for this status.
Please read the OFFICER'S military oath:
I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.
Our Constitution is bound by international treaty to the Nuremberg Principles. Ehren's duty as well as ALL officer's duties is to the CONSTITUTION. Is that so hard for anyone to understand here? One's duty is NOT to your commanding officers!
BUT, once again, Ehren's case NOW is one of double jeopardy.
Did the judge in his court martial mishandle the case when declaring a mistrial thus depriving him of his right to a fair and speedy trial of his peers? (BTW-in the military, the jury does NOT consist of your peers, but rather of those above you, so in his case, the jury which had been seated outranked him)
Would a retrial violate his Constitutional rights under double jeopardy?
At this point there is NO OTHER question even worth asking concerning Ehren's rights because it is NOT THE ISSUE at this point in time! The fact that the military can drag it's feet and not allow him his due process is what SHOULD be alarming.
Robin at 4:24PM on Jun 11th 2008
34.
Why didn't they just send him to Afghanistan and be done with it?
Could have avoided all this crap.
Anon at 4:50PM on Jun 11th 2008
35. please - this is a voluntary army - adn that does not mean you volunteer for what you want. He is an officer - he has to obey orders. What would happen if we got attacked adn he was in the front line of defense and felt that blonde hair blue eye people should not be attacked back?
ghm at 5:06PM on Jun 11th 2008
36. "Too many times people enlist for the money not realizing they may actually have to serve."
Ehren was a college graduate with a degree in business with many connections in Hawaii through his own standing and his father's who had retired as the state Campaign Spending Commission executive director for Hawaii. You want to know where Ehren got his values from? It was from his parents,his mother is a high school guidance counselor and read about Bob here.
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?79b10837-
8e7f-427e-bd34-c95e5aabb4eb
So your conjecture that he enlisted for the money is TOTALLY off the mark. He enlisted because he is patriotic to the core, but "patriotism" does NOT mean blindly following orders. At the time he enlisted he did so before his college graduation and BEFORE the lies about Iraq had started leaking. Let me ask you, do you honestly think CONTRARY to the military oath that Ehren took that his duty was to his commanding officers and not to the Constitution?
Because if you do, you are SORELY mistaken!
This statement made goes to the SAME mistaken belief: "Once he signs up he is then consenting to any war he may be sent into on behalf of the United States of America"
The United States of America is BOUND BY INTERNATIONAL TREATY to the Nuremberg Principles.
This was his defense which was not allowed at trial time. Since then even more information has come out about the lies which led to this war.
Ehren WILL be vindicated, but again, that is NOT the point at this time.
Ehren is entitled to DUE PROCESS which he has been denied and is STILL being denied as he has not been allowed to leave the military even though his contract was up LONG AGO.
Everyone needs to stop giving woulda shoulda coulda opinions and stick to the facts at hand!
The point is that the military did NOT allow him his defense which could OR might NOT have landed him in prison. Now they are totally messing with his freedom.
Robin at 5:16PM on Jun 11th 2008
37. So he must be "one" of the soldiers that the "resistance movement" as they call themselves talked to. So how come this blogger could not have reported the thousands of troops that do fulfill their duty? Reporting anything negative about America is these far left fringers agenda. Just look at the blogs and websites.
John B at 5:56PM on Jun 11th 2008
38. No one has mentioned that we were techinquely still at war with Iraq from the Gulf War in 1991. While a truce was declared, no peace treaty was ever signed. Iraq, consistantly violated the peace treaty, as seventeen U.N. Security resolutions attest to, and each one said or implied the consquence could be continuation of hostilities. Bush, in the post 9/11 atmosphere, meant it, unlike Clinton, when that last resolution was past. Congress approved going to war, so where is it illegal?
As for those who keep saying the war was based on lies, and thus illegal prove that Bush's intelligency agencies was telling him different things than they told Clinton, who in 98, made regime change national policy, because it was thought Sadamm was working on nuclear weapons. Every major intelligence agency in the world thought as much. So while the intelligence might have been faulty, that does not make the war based on it illegal. Because Sadamm did not cooperate, foolishly believing we would not attack, he was in violation of the truce. He did not have to have nuclear weapons or be trying to get them to violate it. Poor prosecution does not mean that someone is innocent, I give OJ Simpson as an example.
As to the actual trial, it seems to me, that a military jury or judge cannot find that the war is illegal, if it has not been declared as such by a higher authority. I would think that auhtority would either have to be Congress, or the Supreme Court. And since Congress never has, I doubt the Supreme Court would. I am not an expert, but any military jury or judge is held to the same restrictions about national policy as any other soldier. Given that, and I am admittedly am not a lawyer, even though I made an A in military law in college, I would think that his defense should have been thrown out to begin with. An officer cannot declare a whole war illegal whether it is the defendent, or the judge, even if he thinks it is so, simply because he is not in the position of making national policy decisions.
Also, as for saying I am willing to deploy to Afghanistan and not Iraq, military personnel do not even have the "right" to say where they wish to be deployed in peace time, you go where the military tells you, even though in theory they try to address your preferences.
Gary D at 6:55PM on Jun 11th 2008
39. And we wonder why our taxes are high. Paying to train people to do a job and then have them tell us that they aren't going to do the job. Apparently for those of you who are in favor of this soldier's act, you either lack the knowledge to realize that every day he turns his back on duty is money lost or your parents lacked the ability to raise you with intellect that allows you to reason and logically look at this issue. Do you really think that you would have a job if you refused to do what you were trained and paid to do. this soldier is sucking your hard earned dollars from your very pocket because of his refusal. If he doesn't want to do the job he is being paid for then he needs to apply for another job with another company, as all of you would have to do if you didn't care for the work you were asked to do, he could very easily leave the military and work in the real world, but this guy wants you to pay the bill, cover his medical, send him to school, train him for a better life than most of you will have yourselves and then when all is said and done thumb his nose at you because you are willing to let him do it and back him while he does it. The kids these days are just plain ignorant. I am proud to be an american, I thank God I raised my children who are college age to know the truth and be logical. Your stupidity scares me!!!!!
Cyndi at 7:01PM on Jun 11th 2008
40. No one in the "resistance movement" talked to Ehren before making his decision not to deploy. His commanding officer had told him to read all he could about the war, where he would be leading his men. That is what he did. The lies were at that time becoming apparent.
Again, can't anyone address the facts at hand since Ehren's guilt or innocence is NOT the legal issue at this point in time?
1. Ehren was already tried, it ended in a BOTCHED mistrial which his attorneys objected to, and the prosecution was wrangled in to requesting against THEIR wishes also by Judge Head.
2. Judge Head then refused to recuse himself from the decision to make for another trial! Thus ruling for himself.
3. Ehren's attorneys exhausted all military appeals then appealed through the Federal Court which was deemed to have jurisdiction. That judge, Judge Settles, a former JAG PROSECUTOR issued a temporary injunction which stated Ehren's claim to double jeopardy had merit and that the military was unlikely to prevail. Yet he gave them an unspecified amount of time at that ruling last November to submit their claims as to why retrying Ehren was not in violation of his Constitutional rights under double jeopardy. That was more than seven months ago. SOME movement is expected by this fall as stated by his attorneys. Yet they also state it could take up to three years, with the outcome unknown. One has to realize here that at the mistrial Judge Head was trying to retry him immediately! Then it was finally supposed to occur in October when the injunction against it was ruled.
4. Ehren has not been allowed to leave the military though his contract was up LONG ago.
5. Ehren's right to speedy justice has been denied both in the mistrial and the military's dragging of their feet.
THOSE ARE THE ISSUES. Not "So how come this blogger could not have reported the thousands of troops that do fulfill their duty" That is NOT the issue.
First Lieutenant Ehren Watada's rights are the issue.
Robin at 7:10PM on Jun 11th 2008
41. Dear Robin--in this swirling mess that blogs become, it is hard for me now to recount each point. Perhaps my sarcasm about Learned Head was too subtle, but I understood immediately that the Judge was doing none of the participants in the trial a favor with the mistrial. I have seen Military Judges do it before, trying to bust guilty pleas or stipulations by trying to wheedle out facts that were at best unnecessary, at worst, prurient--sometimes taking what appeared to be almost pure delight in eliciting real garbage in child sex abuse guilty pleas, in particular.
Not that the soldiers in question didn't deserve to go to jail! I've see cases where both Prosecution and Defense were squirming and rolling their eyes. It seemed to me that some of the Judges were trying to bust the deal, just so they could see a show. Only some did that b.s.
I wish Ehren the best. I met his dad and step-mom once, and saw Bruce Gordon attempt to savage Mr. Watada at a press conference by making suggestions that Ehren had become a pacifist and coward. At the time Mr. Watada was not very media savvy. Since Mr. Watada was taking questions, I asked some that got things back on track--that LT Watada volunteered for Afghanistan _first_.
I wish it was all over for LT Watada--it has to be almost unbearable, and tantamount to punishment, for him to be in the circle of hell he is in. It's almost as if someone is saying--"we'll show you--we can't convict you but we'll get you some other way." And I have seen that happen, too, to a Ranger I represented.
In a properly run military, the Inspector General would hammer a Commander attempting to take a piece out of a soldier that he could not get convicted.
The shame started when Bush and Gonzales usurped the powers of the Service Judge Advocates, and decided that they were going to do things their way. It has crept into the services with the proselytizing of a particular religion in Colorado. It can be seen in the actions of Marines spreading materials to convert Muslims in Falluja to Christianity. It can be seen by the denials, then excuses for, inhumane treatment of prisoners/detainees, by waterboarding, and the lies that led us astray to Iraq.
The powers that be failed to win a war in Afghanistan that they had every reason to fight, and every obligation to win.
And they cannot win the war that they had no right to start in Iraq.
LT Watada put the pieces together, and made the right conclusion. Should he go to jail? Well. at least then it would be over. Martin Luther King, Jr., understood that sometimes serving in jail will show the strength of your character and beliefs.
Oddly enough, Watada may spend as much time waiting for his trial as William Calley did for the murders at My Lai. Calley only spent about 3 1/2 years in detention--all in house arrest at Fort Benning, GA.
Thomas Shoener at 7:25PM on Jun 11th 2008
42. It does not matter his view's or opinions. He is a soldier. A soldier is supposed to take orders and carry them out effectively. He joined a VOLUNTEER Army and volunteered to obey his commander in chief. It does not have an ammendment in the oath stating "when I feel it is right". He is a deffective soldier. I think he should be charge with treason. He should be hung.
JON P. at 7:33PM on Jun 11th 2008
43. Cyndi,
Have you read a single thing I have posted here before you made this statement:
"he could very easily leave the military and work in the real world, but this guy wants you to pay the bill, cover his medical, send him to school, train him for a better life than most of you will have yourselves and then when all is said and done thumb his nose at you because you are willing to let him do it and back him while he does it"
Obviously you have not. Ehren submitted his resignation to the military in (I believe) January 2006 as was his RIGHT to do as an officer after they refused his request to be deployed to other than Iraq. The military refused his resignation and instead chose to court martial him. Ehren followed absolutely every SINGLE military rule there was to obtain his resignation.
FURTHERMORE, his contract with the military was up LONG ago and they still will not release him. Don't go trying to say that Ehren wants us as taxpayers to pay his bills! Nothing could be further from the truth. He reports daily to his desk job at Fort Lewis.
Do you not also realize that it is highly possible he is going to receive a dishonorable discharge which will be on his record which can be held against him in future job pursuits, yet he was willing to stand up for his convictions?
There is definitely much misunderstanding on Ehren's case, but if people read the FACTS before making impuning statements against him then perhaps there could be a much more knowledgeable and productive conversation.
ISSUE: Ehren's due process has been violated.
Robin at 7:38PM on Jun 11th 2008
44. "OBEY ALL ORDERS"
I've noticed this little thread of comments--"he's a soldier, damn it, and a _volunteer_, so he does not have a conscience anyone."
If you look at who are considered real heroes today in the armed forces, it's not merely the SF LT from Long Island who held off Taliban so his men could scape, nor the Navy sniper who jumped on a grenade to save his buddies (I believe a soldier did a similar thing) but CW2 Hugh Thompson, who at great personal risk, and to the detriment of his career and social life (he was long considered a pariah in the Army) quite literally stopped the My Lai massacre by coming down in his helicopter and making sure that Charlie Company knew this had to stop. Some of Calley's troops did not take kindly to this, and Thompson had his assistant point a machine gun in their direction.
Calley was, as a Commissioned Officer, superior to any Warrant Officer. What gave Thompson the right? His humanity. He refused to be a robot. He refused to be "only following orders." He refused to look away.
I am not trying to compare LT Watada's bravery (if you choose to call it that--I will) to CW2 Thompson's. Which was braver?--I can't say.
The first thing I remember an instructor say down in Charlottesville was to remind everyone that the "big green machine" was not about peace and love and helping the underprivileged, but a machine designed, in essence, to "kill people and break things." That being said, he reiterated that our job was to make sure we killed the right people and broke the right things, when that time came.
Watada got it--we were going after the wrong people, all because of lies, misperceptions, fears, greed. And I will add--oil. Well, of all the things we tried to get in Iraq, oil was the one thing we sure didn't get. A liar who succeeds in "bringing home the bacon" can sometimes get away with it. Our "Operation Canned Goods" to bring war to Iraq included a lot of cans of Bon Vivant Vichy Soir. We ate it, all right, and the botulism has spread throughout our country.
Thomas Shoener at 8:28PM on Jun 11th 2008
45. "I HOPE THEY PUT THIS LITTLE WHIMPERING BABY AWAY FOR 20 YEARS ... HE'S PROBABLY TOO AFRAID OF GETTING HIS PRECIAOUS SKIN BLEMISHED ... ALL HE WANTED WAS THE MONEY AND SECURITY HE COULDN'T EARN OTHERWISE!!! ... A TYPICAL MINORITY TYPE!!!
1. Ehren was born and raised in Hawaii. He is half Japanese (father) half Chinese (mother) Why don't you try checking out Hawaii's demographics before you try calling Ehren a minority, because Hawaii has the highest minority-majority population of any STATE. Japanese are the highest (16.7) Chinese the fifth (4.7) Furthermore "a typical minority type" is definitely a racist statement.
2. "I HOPE THEY PUT THIS LITTLE WHIMPERING BABY AWAY FOR 20 YEARS" He was facing six years at his first court martial. IF he is retried as the military supposedly plans on doing, they have tacked back on two charges, so he will be facing eight years.
3. "ALL HE WANTED WAS THE MONEY AND SECURITY HE COULDN'T EARN OTHERWISE!!! Eagle Scout, college graduate, good connections in Hawaii.
That was sure easy!
Dear Thomas,
There is much misunderstanding about Ehren's case. Even people I know who I have talked to at length still seem to think he is a CO so I continually have to remind them that he is not. That's an interesting point though, because Agustin Aguayo who IS a CO and was put in positions contrary to CO status was also jerked around horribly by the military. He enlisted as a CO, and they broke their own rules by putting him on guard duty which required carrying a weapon, which he never loaded. Repeatedly he sought to leave the military because his rights as a CO were being violated. He too refused to deploy when they came to his apartment in Germany to arrest him and throw him on a plane back to Iraq where he had served as a CO paramedic. He jumped out the window, hopped on a plane back here to the states, and turned himself in prior to the 30 days AWOL. He ALSO was court martialed, imprisoned in Mannheim, and released with a felony discharge even though it was the MILITARY who violated their own law. Now Agustin has been unable to obtain gainful employment (the last I heard)and the pressure it put on his family is beyond measure. CO status is perfectly legal and PERFECTLY honorable.
This administration, and this military, is beyond criminal. They literally make up their own rules as they go, running roughshod not only over the Constitution, but their OWN rules. Do people REALLY think that soldiers are not human beings and that they should cease to have consciences after they join the military? Your pointing to CW2 Hugh Thompson I have heard before when bringing up an officer doing the RIGHT THING. Ehren's integrity as a person is unquestionable to those who know and support him. It IS his humanity that spoke to him, but he was cut short, unable that day to even speak on his own behalf.
Judge Head knew damn well what Ehren was going to do, there was NO misunderstanding from any party, he just pulled it out of a rabbit's hat.
As stated before, he had packed up his belongings and was fully ready to face the verdict whatever it came down to. The military was in a PICKLE, because either way that was ruled, they lost. If he was convicted, he would have been a martyr to the anti-war movement-willing to go to jail for his convictions, if let free, which believe me, many of us there thought there was a very good chance of occurring because the prosecution had put on such a POOR case, then what? Egg on the face for the military.
Now that is DONE, yet Ehren is still not allowed to go free. You are absolutely 100% correct that this is a vicious game the military is playing with his life. Ehren Watada KNEW what he was doing, it is the military which has gotten itself into a mess with him. Personally, my gut feeling is that ironically Ehren will NOT be retried due to his firm double jeopardy defense and then Judge Head will end up taking the fall. The very Judge that did whatever was spoken in to his ear to do. That way the military will never have to deal with Ehren's defense, which WAS their aim from day one. That is my PERSONAL feeling on this, as well as my hope, because his double jeopardy defense is SOUND.
Robin at 9:21PM on Jun 11th 2008