IanHarrop 37 #1 December 7, 2004 This article is in regard to an American deserter that is applying to stay in Canada as a refugee. What are your thoughts? I personally believe that if he joined up and was willing to take the Army's money for a college education, then he is obligated to perform the tasks they assign him and go where he is told to go. Those are my thoughts, what are yours? http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/12/06/hinzman041206.html The article for those that want to read it here: -------------------------------------------------------- U.S. army deserter seeking refugee status in Canada Last Updated Tue, 07 Dec 2004 05:06:34 EST TORONTO - An immigration panel in Toronto opened a hearing on Monday that will decide whether a former paratrooper who fled the United States to evade the war in Iraq should be allowed to stay in Canada. INDEPTH: Immigration http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/immigration/ Jeremy Hinzman on July 7, 2004 in Toronto ( CP Photo - file) Jeremy Hinzman is seen as a deserter by the American military, but to his supporters he is a war resister and should be given refugee status in Canada. "I think he has a perfect right to be here as a refugee. His life would be in danger if he went back to the U.S.," said one of Hinzman's supporters outside the hearing. Hinzman enlisted in the U.S. army three years ago as a paratrooper with the 82 Airborne Division. He deserted earlier this year, rather than go to Iraq, and moved to Canada with his wife and small child. In an interview several months ago Hinzman said he enlisted "for pragmatic reasons, because I wanted a college fund." His lawyer says Hinzman is seeking refugee status because he's morally opposed to the war in Iraq and that the U.S. invasion of Iraq violates international human rights. "We are allowed to argue that the conduct of the war on the ground is sufficiently outside the Geneva Conventions that Mr. Hinzman ought not to be associated with it. He should not be compelled to participate in an activity which is in violation of the Geneva Conventions," said lawyer Jeffrey House. Watching the proceedings is a handful of other U.S. military deserters, among them Brandon Hughey. "We're optimistic that in the end we'll be able to stay. But it's going to be a long road," he said. Three days have been set aside for the hearing. Written by CBC News Online staff"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #2 December 7, 2004 The bastard needs a few years in Leavenworth. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
larsrulz 0 #3 December 7, 2004 Let's hope they decide that he can't immigrate and deport him back to the US. I got a strong urge to fly, but I got no where to fly to. -PF Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 37 #4 December 7, 2004 QuoteThe bastard needs a few years in Leavenworth. I agree and I am concerned that if they let him stay we will be opening the doors to a whole bunch of people that belived they signed up only to receive and not to give. I don't agree with much that my government does these days and fully expect that our Canadian courts will indeed let him stay!"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #5 December 7, 2004 QuoteThe bastard needs a few years in Leavenworth. Don't worry Anvil, Canada is smarter than that... They won't let him stay!!!! They know the cosequences of that if they do grant the refuge status.... There are 3 people in question. One of them will be allowed to stay, but his case is different.... He is a duel citizen of the US and Canada. Canadian law says he can stay since he is a citizen of the country. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #6 December 7, 2004 I've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #7 December 7, 2004 QuoteI've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. Hear Hear!!! That was my Tax money that sent the bastard to College!!!!!!! ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #8 December 7, 2004 I'm really quite curious what you think the consequences would be? Canada has a long history of accepting refugees who choose not to serve. Usually this only helps people who are fleeing a country that practices the draft - largely because it's rare that someone would take the path this man has. I honestly have no idea which way the refugee board will rule. I think it's really a wildcard for now. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #9 December 7, 2004 I am getting scared when I read this forum Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #10 December 7, 2004 Hmm, The consequences would be most likely notting that you can just bail out of your contract, and Canada will be there to help you out..."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #11 December 7, 2004 QuoteThis article is in regard to an American deserter that is applying to stay in Canada as a refugee. What are your thoughts? I personally believe that if he joined up and was willing to take the Army's money for a college education, then he is obligated to perform the tasks they assign him and go where he is told to go. Those are my thoughts, what are yours?Quote Hi Ian Me thinks same as you eh! Never had a problem with the "draft dodgers" going to canada to avoid a "selective" draft. IMO This case is different the guy signed a contract, got some bennies, and now he doesn't want to fullfill his part of the contract Of course the Canadian courts will decide whats legal. Our opinion don't mean squat ehRather than wasteing our money putting this person in jail. How about a Dishonorable Discharge and pay the gov't back for all their costs. Including military training, housing etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites IanHarrop 37 #12 December 7, 2004 Back in the seventies I knew several people that had left the States for Canada and Europe to avoid the draft and I didn't really have a problem with it then. But this situation is different. At this time my big issue is that he signed up voluntarily, accepted the benefits and then when he was called to hold up his end of the deal, he left. Unfortunately, as I indicated earlier, I will be surprised if Canadian courts refuse his application for refugee status. Our courts are very soft on pretty much everything these days. Edited to Add: as for punishment, the only choice is internment. If the States were to offer to execute him has a deserter (I know they probably don't really do this), then for sure that Canadian courts would make him a refugee."Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,121 #13 December 7, 2004 QuoteI've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. I agree, I think we should send him back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EBSB52 0 #14 December 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe bastard needs a few years in Leavenworth. Don't worry Anvil, Canada is smarter than that... They won't let him stay!!!! They know the cosequences of that if they do grant the refuge status.... There are 3 people in question. One of them will be allowed to stay, but his case is different.... He is a duel citizen of the US and Canada. Canadian law says he can stay since he is a citizen of the country. Cananda won't return criminal refugees if they are subject to capital punishment. So where is your, "cosequences" rambling now? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EBSB52 0 #15 December 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteI've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. Hear Hear!!! That was my Tax money that sent the bastard to College!!!!!!! Wait, don't you get college money after returning from service? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EBSB52 0 #16 December 7, 2004 Quote Canada has a long history of accepting refugees who choose not to serve. Usually this only helps people who are fleeing a country that practices the draft - largely because it's rare that someone would take the path this man has. I honestly have no idea which way the refugee board will rule. I think it's really a wildcard for now. _Am I'm really quite curious what you think the consequences would be? Typical American response as if we're going to go kill them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tunaplanet 0 #17 December 8, 2004 Where's the, "Should be shot" option? Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AMax 0 #18 December 8, 2004 QuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? there we go Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #19 December 8, 2004 QuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? That's probably what would have happened to him 50 years ago. I think he should at least spend a lot of his life in jail breaking big rocks into little ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EBSB52 0 #20 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? That's probably what would have happened to him 50 years ago. I think he should at least spend a lot of his life in jail breaking big rocks into little ones. Actually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #21 December 8, 2004 QuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Whether you agree with him being charged with desertion or not, Pvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Pvt. Eddie Slovik Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tunaplanet 0 #22 December 8, 2004 QuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. QuotePvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Another SC poster debunked. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites slug 1 #23 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. QuotePvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Another SC poster debunked. Hi Tuna I couldn't agree with you more everyone in SC is full of it except you and me. 41 R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jdhill 0 #24 December 8, 2004 QuoteWait, don't you get college money after returning from service? Officers can get the money up front (scholarships or academy)... college courses taken while on active duty are paid 75%... student loan repayment is 1/3 per year... if the individual was on a 2+2 or a 4+2 contract they may have already received money... not sure what this dirt bag's story is... but once you sign, and are sworn in for the second time... you are uncle sam's. JAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EBSB52 0 #25 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Whether you agree with him being charged with desertion or not, Pvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Pvt. Eddie Slovik Ok, you're right. I thought it was during WWI. "Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower ordered that Slovik's execution be carried out to avoid further desertions in the late stages of the war." Hmmm, he's a murderer, let's make him president. The more things change, the more things stay the same. "Slovik was court-martialed for desertion under fire and sentenced to death by firing squad. His execution was carried out in the closing months of World War II, his wife totally unaware of the sentence. The army denied responsiblity, claiming that Slovik himself should have notified her." Pardon me, I'm welling up - I just love America... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 1 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
IanHarrop 37 #12 December 7, 2004 Back in the seventies I knew several people that had left the States for Canada and Europe to avoid the draft and I didn't really have a problem with it then. But this situation is different. At this time my big issue is that he signed up voluntarily, accepted the benefits and then when he was called to hold up his end of the deal, he left. Unfortunately, as I indicated earlier, I will be surprised if Canadian courts refuse his application for refugee status. Our courts are very soft on pretty much everything these days. Edited to Add: as for punishment, the only choice is internment. If the States were to offer to execute him has a deserter (I know they probably don't really do this), then for sure that Canadian courts would make him a refugee."Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,121 #13 December 7, 2004 QuoteI've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. I agree, I think we should send him back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #14 December 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe bastard needs a few years in Leavenworth. Don't worry Anvil, Canada is smarter than that... They won't let him stay!!!! They know the cosequences of that if they do grant the refuge status.... There are 3 people in question. One of them will be allowed to stay, but his case is different.... He is a duel citizen of the US and Canada. Canadian law says he can stay since he is a citizen of the country. Cananda won't return criminal refugees if they are subject to capital punishment. So where is your, "cosequences" rambling now? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #15 December 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteI've got no problem with people opposed to the war not entering the military, but once you enter it you live up to your commitements. I hope he doesn't get refugee status. Hear Hear!!! That was my Tax money that sent the bastard to College!!!!!!! Wait, don't you get college money after returning from service? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #16 December 7, 2004 Quote Canada has a long history of accepting refugees who choose not to serve. Usually this only helps people who are fleeing a country that practices the draft - largely because it's rare that someone would take the path this man has. I honestly have no idea which way the refugee board will rule. I think it's really a wildcard for now. _Am I'm really quite curious what you think the consequences would be? Typical American response as if we're going to go kill them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #17 December 8, 2004 Where's the, "Should be shot" option? Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #18 December 8, 2004 QuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? there we go Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #19 December 8, 2004 QuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? That's probably what would have happened to him 50 years ago. I think he should at least spend a lot of his life in jail breaking big rocks into little ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #20 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhere's the, "Should be shot" option? That's probably what would have happened to him 50 years ago. I think he should at least spend a lot of his life in jail breaking big rocks into little ones. Actually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #21 December 8, 2004 QuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Whether you agree with him being charged with desertion or not, Pvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Pvt. Eddie Slovik Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #22 December 8, 2004 QuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. QuotePvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Another SC poster debunked. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #23 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. QuotePvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Another SC poster debunked. Hi Tuna I couldn't agree with you more everyone in SC is full of it except you and me. 41 R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #24 December 8, 2004 QuoteWait, don't you get college money after returning from service? Officers can get the money up front (scholarships or academy)... college courses taken while on active duty are paid 75%... student loan repayment is 1/3 per year... if the individual was on a 2+2 or a 4+2 contract they may have already received money... not sure what this dirt bag's story is... but once you sign, and are sworn in for the second time... you are uncle sam's. JAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #25 December 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteActually go about 100 years ago and that was the last time a desserter was killed. Whether you agree with him being charged with desertion or not, Pvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad during WWII. Pvt. Eddie Slovik Ok, you're right. I thought it was during WWI. "Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower ordered that Slovik's execution be carried out to avoid further desertions in the late stages of the war." Hmmm, he's a murderer, let's make him president. The more things change, the more things stay the same. "Slovik was court-martialed for desertion under fire and sentenced to death by firing squad. His execution was carried out in the closing months of World War II, his wife totally unaware of the sentence. The army denied responsiblity, claiming that Slovik himself should have notified her." Pardon me, I'm welling up - I just love America... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
