A conscientious objector application
Some halfwit named Air Force Staff Sergeant Nathan Rodriguez thought it would be a great idea to post his application for conscientious objector to Lew Rockwell’s website. His explanation of his views is fairly typical of what we’ve heard over the years, Raised in a Republican home, growing up as a conservative, the “horrors” of war that he witnessed as an Air Force commo guy and what he “studied” led him to his suddenly anti-war leanings.
he begins his story telling us that he joined the Air Force as a stepping stone to a career as a politician, and I’m guessing that goal hasn’t changed since, instead of quietly filing his application and hoping for the best, he’s broadcasting his intentions to the world to make a name for himself.
Abiding by the Non-Aggression Principle, and adhering to Scripture, I realized that my service was in direct contradiction to my personal beliefs. This came to fruition before my deployment to Afghanistan in July 2011. The duties I carry out directly leads to the loss of life. This fact has been stated numerous times during official AF classes and formal gatherings, such as CC calls, and official creeds.
The thought of me as a “warrior” for the USAF is a nauseating one. I do not wish to fight any man or group of people I have never interacted with or who have never caused harm to my life or property. It is obvious wars are fought between states and not between the people, though others would have everyone believe otherwise. I am surrounded by this nationalistic aura that I fail to agree with. I am encouraged to be proud of the military heritage, and what is has supposedly accomplished. I am expected to give respect to murderers in the name of the beloved country. All these sentiments weigh heavy in my soul and the toll of my mind has been great.
I don’t know how many people he had to murder as an AF commo guy, but I’m guessing I could easily count to that number even though I’m merely an infantryman. I’m guessing that the political climate has changed since he put his grand political plan into action and since he liked the beer more than he liked taking college classes got in the way of educational plans, so he wants to get out of the service and play with someone’s private parts instead of being an airman.
No matter what job he has in the Air Force, he was never a “warrior”, he’s just little pussy who has been gobsmacked by reality. Nothing in that letter indicates to me that he is really a conscientious objector.
Thanks to JP for the link.
Category: Shitbags
Oh … and did I mention … CPL York was (is) a recipient of the MEDAL OF HONOR and DISTINGUISHED SERVICE CROSS along with several other less notable foreign MILITARY AWARDS FOR VALOR!
Hondo: If there was a foreign invader, there is nothing wrong with people defending themselves or paying someone to defend them. As long as all cooperation is voluntary there is no fault with these actions. Even if an individual wished to possess nuclear weapons for self-defense or community-defense, they should not be barred from doing so, as long as all exchanges are conducted in a voluntary manner.
Yat Yas; I understand, that was wrong to do so on my part.
Again, I am for voluntary exchanges. I believe that the market provides the best services, whether it be roads, education or welfare programs. The government is a violent organization that forces its subjects to fund its operations, with the illusion that we have an influence. If someone wants to pay for a defense service, education, roads they should be free to do so, but not forced.
“Force is immoral. The use of force to achieve an objective, any objective, deprives the result of any morality at all. It degrades and demeans both the objective and the result. Compelled charity is no charity; coerced faith is no faith; enforced morality is no morality.”
MCPO: I don’t know why you instist on demeaning me. I have already stated I did my job while deployed and was rewarded for it. I would understand your attacks if I filed for CO right after I learned I was to be deployed, but that was not the case.
1. Shut up!
2. “Force is immoral. The use of force to achieve an objective, any objective, deprives the result of any morality at all. It degrades and demeans both the objective and the result.”
3. Therefore, you would not use force to protect and/or preserve life.
4. I would use force to proctct you and others.
5. Refer to # 1 above.
Suck it up cupcake … I am not demeaning you.
Oh my … you sound hurt!
line # 4 error: protect vs. proctct
You still have not explained why you volunteered for military service in a time period when there is a 95% probability of deployment to an active war zone, and now you want to file as a concientious objector.
Explain that in a non-whining, non-defensive way, and maybe someone will cut you some slack.
Everyone on this board who is a recent member of the military knew full well before enlisting that he or she would very likely be sent to a war zone, i.e., the Middle East. Most of them have been there. Like me, they fail to understand what you’re complaining about.
And stop whining like a girl.
Joshua-so I gather that you are an anarcho-capitalist as you hang out with Rockwell’s bunch (or some other flavor of anarchist, though I think I’ve got you pegged) and are opposed to “coercion”. I’ve read plenty of that stuff over time (it’s interesting as an intellectual exercise), but it falls apart when applied to the world we actually live in.
What the An-Caps don’t grok is that their worldview inevitably devolves into the rule of the biggest and most ruthless gang (and for all intents and purposes they become the government), at which point the devil you know is replaced by the devil that you don’t.
Of course, it generally is a good idea to not place much trust in the government, but it really does have some legitimate functions-and it should be restricted to those functions. A “Public Good” is essentially that which cannot be provided through the market (there is a more strict definition, but that will do) and the classic example is defense. If only there were some document that laid out such a system of government (if only we adhered to it).
joshua: so, you see no problem with group self defense – provided participation and the effort is not government-led. You just don’t want to be required to pay taxes to support it unless you want to, or to be required to help defend yourself. You want the option to let others do that dirty work for you.
Christ, what a naive, foolish, and hypocritical position. If you actually believe that an untrained, ad-hoc force of volunteers can defend a nation against a modern invading force, you must believe in unicorns too.
You also indicated you’re OK with hiring mercenaries to perform that defensive function. That’s blatant hypocrisy, youngster. Government-led war in opposition to an armed invasion is nothing but collective self-defense; that is just as morally justified as individual self-defense. Further: those who hire mercenaries to fight in a war are just as culpable as the mercenaries who fight in one. What your position here tells me is that you don’t really oppose war per se – you just don’t want to get your own hands dirty fighting for your own freedom.
Please finish your tour and leave the military; go hang out with Lew Rockwell and his buddies. Be forewarned, though – you just might be a bit surprised at some of Rockwell’s beliefs. Rockwell is reputed to have been the ghostwriter for many of the rather racist articles in Ron Paul’s old newsletters.
No response so far to my reasonable request for an explanation from Joshua.
Okay, then, Joshua, when you sign up for military duty you are expected to suck it up and grow up, and quickly, too. Filing as a conscientious objector because you got sent to a war zone and you don’t like it doesn’t fly under any circumstances. You have only yourself to blame for where you are now and the things you have to put up with. If you don’t like it, that’s tough bananas.
Right now, I see only a whiny, spoiled brat complaining about the job he volunteered to do.
Is that your mom calling?