Soldier Says He Failed To Report Crimes
May 16, 2008and Matthis Chiroux is refusing to be deployed to Iraq. As a photo journalist he heard of many crimes but did not report them, silenced by fear. He was honorably discharged, but is being called back. He will remain stateside to fight, but this fight will be against the military.
h/t Crooks and Liars.
Is it just me, or does he look kind of like Dwight Schultz?
On a more serious note, as someone with journalist credentials, he should have more assumed knowledge than the average soldier, but one could also claim he is bitter.
GOOD FOR HIM. You can tell that this is a hard decision for him, and I respect his courage in the face of his fear. Based on the IVAW’s positions, I understand his perspective. http://ivaw.org/faq
The problem is that we’re already in Iraq. I don’t believe that we can just pick up and leave. I think that rollin’ out after we’ve done our damage is even worse than the initial occupation.
I think that if the Iraqis and so called Arab Street, for lack of a better term, do not want to cooperate en masse, justifiably or not, that pretty much absolves us of spending blood for them. I’d rather pass this off to the UN, et al, and, yes, throw as much money at the problem as we can handle, and non of that should be from oil revenues. The Iraqi people don’t owe us one cent from it, and how any decent person can suggest they do, is beyond me. With the legality of the war at least being in disputed, there’s no incontrovertible basis from which to even contend they owe us oil revenue. This is like returning a wallet by breaking into its owners home and then whining that he wouldn’t give you a reward.
*in dispute, unresolved.
WFG,
First, if Iraq is uncooperative, it absolves nothing. We have a military foothold in that part of the middle east region and once we have that, we don’t leave.
Second, we already spend $250,000,000 a year on an ineffective UN and you suggest “throwing as much money as we can handle at the problem”, as a solution?
BRILLIANT! Your taxes will definately be on the upswing. Or, would you suggest we just print more money?
Third, what “legality” are you speaking of? Congress gave the President it’s approval.
Lastly, if you don’t want their oil, maybe you might consider drilling here onshore and off? If not then where, OH BRILLIANT ONE?
…that pretty much absolves us of spending blood for them Excellent point, W.
I’d rather pass this off to the UN, et al, and, yes, throw as much money at the problem as we can handle, and non of that should be from oil revenues. I think that this should have been handled by the UN to begin with. You said that we should provide as much money as “we can handle”, and I think that was well-stated. Once again, Grandpa Grumpy Ken failed to read the comment in full.
Grandpa Grump~ follow the link I provided above, so that you can see what the IAVW believes makes the war illegal.
A. We shouldn’t have military footholds without at least some good original cause. However you might see it now, Iraq was not a good reason to have a foothold.
B. Any obligation by one party must be met with sufficient assistance from the party to which it’s indebted. If the Iraqis, its neighbors, and whoever else, are trying to kill us, whatever their justification, they most certainly are helping to absolve us of a great deal of our debt to them. They doubt have the right to expect us to help provide security while being part of the reason their security is needed. Is that unfair to many Iraqis? Yes. But they have a choice to make, as do we.
I didn’t exclusively say the UN, I was mainly saying that some other organization might be more amenable to Iraq and the international community.
I am not a lawyer, therefor, I shall not defer to a claim that Congressional approval alone justifies war in the minds of all applicable courts of law. What I can say is that it is a debated issue, especially based on the information used to take us to war.
I have never said I would not consider drilling for oil here. Considering it is not a ruled out option.
Ken, thanks for acknowledging my intelligence. If you’d please stop pissing yourself in envy, I’ll get the mop.
ROFLMAO!
He’s in what’s called Inactive Ready Reserves!
According to A Soldier’s Perspective website:
~ The media is making it sound like Chiroux is about to deploy and that he is making this big stand as an active duty Soldier in refusing to deploy. The fact is that he is a civilian who received a recall letter back in February which he has ignored. The military has already said that they are not hunting down individuals who ignore those letters, though they’d have a legal right to prosecute if they wanted to. So, where’s the news again? Here’s the part of Chiroux’s speech no one seems to be reporting:
“As an army journalist whose job it was to college and filter service members’ stories, I heard many a stomach-churning testimony of the horrors and crimes taking place in Iraq. For fear of retaliation from the military, I failed to report these crimes. Never again will I allow fear to silence me. Never again will I fail to stand. In February, I received a letter from the Army, ordering my return to active duty, with the purpose of mobilization in Operation Iraqi Freedom.”
So he is not in the military…not technically yet.
Ugh…it happens all the time. I bet he is not the only one. Just as there are many deserters in the military, there are just as many who fail to report about crimes. Many people even “harbor” these deserters. I bet there was someone else who knew he was not reporting crimes but did not say a zinch.
And he was honorably discharged so he did not really lose any benefits the military offers you after service. Jeez, big deal this news was.