Draft

Nobody's Hero: My War Story

dlindorff — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:32:53 -0400

By Dave Lindorff

I’m certainly no hero, but since some readers of my last post have
reacted by attacking my courage and integrity on the grounds that I
“never served,” I want to at least set the record straight on my
youthful response to war.

In 1967, when I was a senior in high school in Storrs, CT., I faced
a momentous decision. In April, I would turn 18, and would have to
register for the draft. The Vietnam War was by then in full swing. A
year or two earlier, I’d been an avid fan of military aviation
magazines, and bought into the whole anti-Communist Cold War thing. But
by ’67, I had seen enough of the violence being done in Vietnam against
a desperately poor peasant population—the napalm attacks on civilians,
the burned babies, etc.—that I had done a 180-degree turn. I wanted
nothing to do with war and killing. So I made a decision: I would fill
out my registration at the draft board, and I’d get my draft card, but
I would not let myself be inducted into the military.

When I told my parents, who still supported the war, of my plan,
they were of course upset but supportive. My dad was an engineer and a
former Marine and my mother a Navy WAVE in WWII. My paternal
grandfather had earned a silver star in WWI and my maternal grandfather
had had his lungs permanently scarred by mustard gas in the same
conflict. A history teacher, Bernie Marlin, referred me to a junior
high teacher in the school who had been a conscientious objector during
the Korean War. I talked with him, a Mr. Storrs, at length, and was
very impressed with his story, but I soon realized that I didn’t really
think I was CO material. I did feel war could be justified
sometimes—for example if America were attacked. At any rate, in early
April of ’67, I went ahead and filled out my draft registration form.

That fall, I began college at Wesleyan University. By then, I had
been working as a foot soldier in the anti-war movement a bit, and had
already been to one anti-war demonstration and march in New York City.
At college registration, there was a table for registering for a
student deferment. I decided on the spur of the moment to pass that up.
It seemed unfair to me that friends of mine in high school, who were
not college bound, were going to get drafted, but I wouldn’t because I
was lucky enough to be going to college. So unlike Vice President and
Warmonger-in-Chief Dick Cheney, I just skipped it. I figured when my
time came and I got an induction notice, I would just refuse, and
they’d jail me.

In October, there was a huge demonstration and march in Washington
against the war—the famous “Mobe” about which Norman Mailer wrote in
“Armies of the Night.” I went down to DC with a few other students. We
ended up near the front of the march, and then up on the Mall of the
Pentagon. Through the night, federal marshals were arresting people up
there on the Mall. I made it through until morning, when I was finally
grabbed by the legs, yanked through a line of bayonet-armed soldiers,
beaten with clubs and carried off to a paddy wagon, which took me to a
federal minimum-security prison in Occoquan, VA. I spent a couple days
there in the company of a hundred or so other demonstrators in a prison
dormitory. It was an education like no other. Veteran anti-war and
civil rights activists ran workshops about the war and about a strategy
of resistance, and about how we could build a better world. I soaked it
all up avidly.

When I was released, with a small fine and a 10-day suspended
sentence for “trespassing” on the Pentagon, I hitchhiked back to
school, all fired up to challenge the war. The night before my arrest,
I had joined hundreds of other protesters in burning my draft card. I
had kept the ashes in my shirt pocket, and when I got home, I put them
in an envelope and mailed them to my draft board, with a note saying I
would never carry that card again (a federal crime). My draft board
responded by sending me a new I-A card. I tucked it in my wallet,
saving it for the next card-burning opportunity.

Over the next two years, during which time I participated actively
in student radical activism, building sit-ins, and draft-resistance
actions, such as informational picketing of inductees at the induction
center in New Haven, CT, I had occasion to burn my card and tear up my
card several times—including once at a communion at the Yale chapel,
where we turned our cards in to Rev. William Sloane Coffin. Each time,
I’d send the ashes or the pieces of card to my draft board, and each
time, they’d send me a new one. Along the way, the infamous draft
lottery was established. I was number 81—a certainty to be called up.

At one point, back in the summer of 1968, I filed a CO application,
but I made it clear that I was not religious, and that I was not
opposed to all wars. When I had my CO hearing at the draft board, the
board members were sitting at a table, with all my destroyed draft
cards set in a pile in front of them. I explained to the men sitting in
judgement on me that while I opposed the war in Vietnam, if I were
Vietnamese, I would surely be fighting for my country against the US.
That didn’t go over very well. My application was unanimously rejected.

My day came in the spring of 1969. At the time, I was in a full leg
cast, having broken both bones in my lower leg just above the ankle in
a ski accident. I notified the induction center that I was on crutches
and in a cast and suggested they postpone my pre-induction physical
until I was out of the cast and all better—a delay of about four months
according to my doctor. They said no. They wanted to see me to make
sure I was genuinely injured.

So on a cold late-winter day, I found myself on a bus riding from
the draft board in Rockville, CT to New Haven with a bunch of
frightened young men. I handed out informational packets to everyone,
telling them their rights, how to apply for CO status, etc., and talked
about what was wrong with the war.

When we arrived, I joined everyone in taking the so-called
intelligence test. Then we went for our physicals. I was pulled from
the line and told I needed to go to see a consulting physician at
Yale-New Haven Hospital. Since the address was a mile or so away, and
the sidewalks were icy, I said I’d need cab fare. I was told by the
head of the medical unit that the government didn’t pay for
transportation. He informed me there was a bus that stopped outside
that would take me there.

I replied that I was on crutches, and that I hadn’t asked to be sent
to a consultation—in fact I had asked for a postponement until my leg
was healed—and said that if they wanted to send me anywhere they could
fucking well pay for the transportation. That didn’t make the guy very
happy. He had a screaming fit, and called the head of the center, who
came down. “What’s the problem?” he asked. I explained the situation,
and said that if they wanted me to go all the way to a hospital because
they didn’t trust that my leg was truly broken, they could pay my
fucking cab fare. The guy got angry, called me a “little prick,” but
then took out his wallet and threw some bills at me. I picked the money
up off the floor and went down to the street. Seeing no cab, I went
over to the bus stop. I looked up and saw the Induction Center
commander looking out of a window, so as the bus pulled up, I flipped
him a one-finger salute and got on.

At the hospital, I discovered that the office of the doctor in
question was closed for the day. Angry that I’d wasted all this time
for nothing, I got back on the bus and returned to the Induction
Center. This time, I went directly to the office of the head of the
center, and tossed an envelope of X-Rays from my doctor on his desk.
“It’s no wonder you’re losing the fucking war!” I said. “You guys can’t
even arrange a doctor’s appointment. The office was closed.” I told him
that he could check my X-Rays, and added, “But I’ve come down here once
already, and it’s the last time I’m coming. If you want me back, you
can send the FBI to bring me.” I hung around until the end of the day
and rode home on the bus to my draft board.

When I got there, I went into the office, where the office
secretary, an older woman with a neat grey perm, was still at her desk.
“Excuse me,” I said. “But I’m really pissed off.” She started at my
coarse language. I recounted my experience and she said, “Well, I think
they owe you an apology.” To my astonishment, she picked up the phone,
called the Induction Center, and asked to speak to the head of the
operation—the guy who’d thrown the money at me. “I have a young man
here who is very angry,” she said into the phone. “And I think you owe
him an apology.”

She handed me the phone.

“All right, you little prick,” he said, sounding like he was gritting his teeth. “I’m sorry.”

“You fuckin’ oughta be,” I said, again shocking the secretary.

I put down the phone, thanked the secretary and left.

A month later, to my astonishment, instead of FBI agents at my door,
I got a letter from my draft board. It was a card declaring me to be
IV-F—“unfit for military service.”

Clearly, there was no medical justification for my rejection. My leg
bones healed up just fine a few months later, and I spent part of the
next year loading heavy boxes in a warehouse and driving semi-trailer
trucks. I suspect that, it being 1969, and the army in Nam being by
then in a state of near insurrection, the Army had concluded it didn’t
want people like me anymore. Perhaps a year earlier, before Tet, I
might instead have been sent into the infantry.

I tell this story because while it may not be heroic, and while
other war resisters paid heavily for their stands, I nonetheless think
it contrasts well with the likes of a Dick Cheney, who hid through the
war years behind student deferments and his wife’s skirt, or of a
George Bush, who joined the Air National Guard and made care to check a
box saying he would be “unavailable for overseas duty”—something the
poor guys in the Guard now doing multiple tours in the Iraqi desert on
Bush's orders didn’t have the option of doing.

I don’t apologize for my opposition to the Vietnam War. And while
being prepared to go to jail for a principle may not rank on the
courage meter anywhere near to standing one’s ground under fire during
an enemy assault, or jumping on top of a live grenade, I’m proud that I
did my best to oppose it, and that I never once tried to duck
responsibility for my own actions. Furthermore, I’ll stand my actions
up against any of those in the Bush administration or in Congress who
are so quick to support wars, but who hid behind student deferments or
used powerful connections to avoid military service or combat duty
themselves when it was their turn to “serve.”
__________________

DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist.
His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006
and now available in paperback). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

digg_url = 'http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34504';
digg_title = "Nobody\'s Hero: My War Story";
digg_bodytext = "By Dave Lindorff\r\n\r\nI’m certainly no hero, but since some readers of my last post have reacted by attacking my courage and integrity on the grounds that I “never served,” I want to at least set the record straight on my youthful response to war.\r\n\r";
digg_skin = 'standard';

Our duties to humankind: The Nuremberg Principles

CactusPat — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:22:39 -0500

Some things for any military personnel (and all of us) to contemplate in resisting Bush's illegal global wars of aggression... from TomJoad..org

Our duties to humankind: The Nuremberg Principles

Nuremberg Principles - Individuals have International Duties which Transcend National Obligations of Obedience

To choose to refuse orders, to not cooperate with established authority, carries legal and personal risk. For those in the military this is especially true. Such action should be done only after much careful reflection, and exploration of the consequences of a chosen path of resistance. We hope that people who are considering such actions take full advantage of the resources available to them... (more)

There are also risks associated with obeying orders that fall outside what is acceptable by the standards of international law, or to participate in a war of aggression, such as the brutal U.S. occupation of Iraq. We urge people to consider this as well, especially those within the U.S. military. The following comes from the principles developed after the trial of Nazi war criminals, and is now considered to be part of international law and the standard under which the actions of nations, and the individuals that act under orders of national leaders, are to be judged.

Please see these statements encouraging resistance for the sake of humanity.

Iraq Pledge of Resistance

Refuse to Kill

Source for the following: United Nations (Emphasis added)

Principle I. Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II. The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III. The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV. The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V. Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI. The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:

(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War Crimes:

Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave-labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity:

Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII. Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

If you'd desire a deeper understanding than what's presented I suggest a Google proxy search on The Nuremberg Principles for further contemplation...

Want to end the Iraq war: Re-instate the draft!

Frank Ranelli — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 01:02:51 -0500

This goes back to an idea I floated on a forum node that discussed why there is not a mass upheaval in the public square. As was posited by Bill Harding – and I supported – there are not enough body bags coming out of Iraq and currently we do not have a draft. My point at the time was in Vietnam, we had throngs of protests because people did not have a choice, there was a draft in place, – and the choice to participate (get your ass shot off) was not available to those of draft age. Today, all circular arguments aside as to why we are in Iraq, the soldiers are there of their own free volition.

I hypothesized the idea that a reverse psychology plan to bring the American people to their collective feet would work:

Impose a mandatory draft and watch mass demonstrations, work stoppages, sit-ins, and mass protests ensue immediately to demand we leave Iraq. In other words, once Bush’s war impacts all families and young men and women on a grand scale and leaves them without choice, the opposition to the war would be more than a “November vote” and a lot of arm-chair quarterbacking.

Enter Chuck Rangel's (D-NY) proposal and why:

WASHINGTON - Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 under a bill the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee says he will introduce next year.

Rep. Charles Rangel, said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars. There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rangel said.

[emphasis added]

I know many may disagree, but I believe that Rangel is right. Just the introduction of legislation to re-instate the draft -- which brings this depraved, immoral war – right into the living rooms and dinner tables of every American and every parent of a child between the ages of 18-26 would trumpet the final rubuke of Bush and his war of choice. Enact this proposal and see just how many shrill conservative pundits, Bush apologists, and neocon chickenhawks-Bush-supporters run for cover and start to demand an immediate withdrawal of our troops from the middle of this lawless, sectarian Civil war that WE caused.

Take away the words “choice” and “voluntary”, replace them with “required” and “mandatory”, and see how many pre-emptive wars we start again. My bet is none.

Last night's Daily Show a masterpiece

Thu, 02 Nov 2006 10:48:27 -0500

Last night’s episode of The Daily Show could have been written by an extremely savvy political consultant in the way it handled the hoopla over John Kerry’s recent misstatement vs. the Bush administration’s purposeful insults to both the nation and the troops. Watch the replay at 2:00 or 8:00 PM ET today, November 2, on Comedy Central. Later today or tomorrow it will be available on the Comedy Central website.

Good luck getting their mothereffing Motherload to work, though. I’ve followed all the troubleshooting instructions, and I can only get the sound, not the video. Just getting the sound is still a good thing, though.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

After 30 Years, Draft Fears Rise

Ted Kahl — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:27:29 -0400

(WashPost) In their Ellicott City kitchen, Jeff Amoros's parents handed their son the Selective Service registration form that arrived shortly after his 18th birthday. For them, it evoked dark memories of the Vietnam era. For Amoros, it meant: "I'm old enough to die for my country now."

At a Montgomery County Friends meeting house, peace activist J.E. McNeil explained to an audience how to convince draft boards that they are conscientious objectors. "Let me tell you why I think there's going to be a draft," she said.

Rarely in the more than 30 years since the draft was abolished has the Selective Service triggered such angst. Two years into the Iraq war, concern that the draft will be reinstated to supplement an overextended military persists -- no matter how often, or emphatically, President Bush and members of Congress say it won't.

The deserters: Awol crisis hits the US forces

CactusPat — Mon, 16 May 2005 07:20:17 -0400

"As the death toll of troops mounts in Iraq and Afghanistan, America's military recruiting figures have plummeted to an all-time low. Thousands of US servicemen and women are now refusing to serve their country. Andrew Buncombe reports"...

The deserters: Awol crisis hits the US forces
Independent News(UK) Sergeant Kevin Benderman cannot shake the images from his head. There are bombed villages and desperate people. There are dogs eating corpses thrown into a mass grave... Last January, these memories became too much for this veteran... Informed his unit was about to return, he told his commanders he wanted out and applied to be considered a conscientious objector. The Army refused and charged him with desertion... The case of Sgt Benderman and those of others like him has focused attention on the thousands of US troops who have gone Awol (Absent Without Leave) since the start of President George Bush's so-called war on terror. The most recent Pentagon figures suggest there are 5,133 troops missing from duty. Of these 2,376 are sought by the Army, 1,410 by the Navy, 1,297 by the Marines and 50 by the Air Force... But campaigners say the true figure could be far higher. Staff who run a volunteer hotline to help desperate soldiers and recruits who want to get out, say the number of calls has increased by 50 per cent since 9/11. Last year alone, the GI Rights Hotline took more than 30,000 calls...

At present, the hotline gets 3,000 calls a month and the volunteers say that by the time a soldier or recruit dials the help-line they have almost always made up their mind to get out by one means or another. "People are calling us because there is a real problem," said Robert Dove, a Quaker who works in the Boston office of the American Friends Service Committee, one of several volunteer groups that have operated the hotline since 1995. "We do not profess to be lawyers or therapists but we do provide both types of support."...

How long 'til the draft gets rammed down our throats? At this rate it can't be more than a year away, specially if the Smirkites start another war or two...

Military Offers 15-Month Enlistments -- Meanwhile Appeals Court Upholds Extensions of Service

Ted Kahl — Sat, 14 May 2005 00:34:29 -0400

WASHINGTON (USA Today) - The Army, faced with a severe and growing shortage of recruits, began offering 15-month active-duty enlistments nationwide Thursday, the shortest tours ever. The typical enlistment lasts three or four years; the previous shortest enlistment was two years.

But wait a sec...can new recruits be so sure that it will be 15-months only?

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The U.S. military has the right to keep soldiers in service beyond their original contracted time by issuing so-called emergency stop-loss orders, a U.S. appeals court said on Friday.

The U.S. 9th Circuit of Appeals said the military acted within its rights when it ordered Emiliano Santiago, an Army National Guard sergeant, to remain in the service beyond the time of his eight-year contract after his unit was ordered to active duty.

Serve Bush... and Take it on the Neck

CactusPat — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 04:57:26 -0500

First is an obscure report from AP: U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth for the District of Columbia has nixed the lawsuit against the Pentagon's "Stop Loss Policy". This the backdoor draft forcing tens of thousands of US service personnel, guard, and reserves to do an extra year or so of service beyond their contracted commitments. Says ya shoulda read the fine print...

Next comes word that Smirk's new budget, with two thirds of a trillion in defence and security spending ($420B plus $80B extra for ongoing wars of aggression for the Pentagon, another $70B for the VA, $40B for "Intelligence", and $35B or so for Fatherland Suckurity), is calling for veterans of Smirk's foreign wars of aggression having to ante up an extra $250 a year for the privilege of using government health care, plus "... increase the co-payment for a month's supply of a prescription drugs to $15, from the current $7." So let me get this straight...

If you sign-up to serve your country, Smirk's Pentagon may very well break the contract and draft your ass for an extra year or so of kidnapping, raping, torturing, and mass murderin' the "Ali Baba's".

Then, if your fortunate enough to survive your second tour of duty in the Iraqmire in mostly one piece, you'll be tapped for a $250 yearly "user fee" and your co-payments for drug prescriptions will be more than doubled if you make use of your veterans benefits. This after previous benefit cuts as reward for service to Smirk.

Not that our government has treated vets very well since the quagmire in Vietnam, or ever for that matter. But since 'Nam the Pentagon has more or less taken the corporate lawyer approach of deny, deny, deny in hopes of the claimants just going away or dying.

Now, though, its clear... crystal clear...

Serve Bush... and take it on the neck!

PNAC Calling for a Draft; Bush Still Backing Chalabi in Iraq

Ted Kahl — Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:40:08 -0500

Will Pitt writes:

In the last three years, PNAC has gotten every single thing it placed on its wish list back in 2000. This is why their letter to congress last week is so disturbing.

[...]

Brush aside the patriotic language, and you have the ideological architects of this disastrous Iraq invasion stating flatly that the American military is being bled dry, and that the ranks must be replenished before that military can be used to push into Iran, Syria and the other targeted nations. The 'D' word is not in this letter, but it screams out from between the lines. All the lip service paid to the Iraq elections by these people does not contrast well with their cry for more warm bodies to feed into the meat grinder.

Speaking of the PNAC, remember the Neocons favorite Iraqi, the disgraced Ahmed Chalabi -- embezzler of millions from Jordan, passer of our secrets to Iran...well...he's baaaacckkkk!!!

Atrios writes:

Last night's little quote from The Queen of All Iraq wasn't just about the usual Miller-bashing, it was actually a bombshell revelation. Here we have a New York Times reporter going on the record saying that according to a source, the Bush administration was in talks with Chalabi about a position in the new Iraqi government. So, in one neat little package we learn that the Bush administration backs Chalabi and has significant influence over appointments in the new government, once it exists.

Isn't this important?

Repeat, Judith Miller on Hardball:

We now are told, according to my sources, that the administration has been reaching out to Mr. Chalabi, to offer him expressions of cooperation and support and according to one report he was even offered a chance to be an interior minister in the new government.