corrente

Oh, wait, I have the answer! The Holy Gut™ said it's OK. Wow, I felt my faith waver for a moment. Phew! Snark off....

More news from their local paper, the Jackson Clarion Ledger:

Five members of an Iraqi-based platoon who refused a convoy order earlier this week were told they would be punished with a general discharge, the father of one of the soldiers said Saturday.

Right. And I'm sure that paperwork won't be covered with rat turds.

"My son said they are getting ready to be discharged and would be home in three or four weeks," said Ricky Scott of Quinton, Ala., father of Spc. Scott Shealey. "It's just a boot ... some way to put some type of close to this while using them as scapegoats."

A general discharge can be given by a military administrative discharge board without a hearing, said military law expert Mark Stevens of Rocky Mount, N.C. "It is not necessarily a bad thing," Stevens said. "It's certainly better than being charged with a crime. It is sort of a wimp's way to get it done and get rid of this thing."

Scott said his son told him some members of the 343rd, a supply unit whose general mission is to deliver fuel and water, left their station at Tallil Air Force Base for Taji, Iraq, days before the ultimate refusal of orders. The fuel was denied in Taji because it was contaminated and could not be used for aviation purposes, he said. The soldiers, who were not being escorted by armed personnel, were fired upon during their return trip by about 50 insurgents but were able to make it back without casualties.

There have been 1,089 U.S. casualties in Iraq, according to CNN.com. Many of them took place during attacks on U.S. convoys.

The trip took five days, Scott said, and the soldiers were ordered to deliver the same fuel to another base about two days later with what Shealey termed "civilian vehicles" with speeds no higher than 40 mph, Scott said. "That is when they said they had enough," he said.

Nancy Wessin of Boston, co-founder of Military Families Speak Out, said it takes courage for soldiers' relatives to speak out.

"People say you are disloyal or unsupportive when you speak out, but we feel the best way to support the troops is to really let people know what is going on by sharing your story," Wessin said.
(via Clarion Ledger)

Wow. Radical idea! You can support the troops by applying enlightenment concepts like "evidence" and "reasoning"! Way to go, Nancy! (See Military Families Speak Out)

Incidentally, this episode shows why the "support the troops, support the mission" concept is so lethally inane. The mission was to deliver contaminated fuel, fuel that was useless, in vehicles without armor, and no air support, down a highway where ambushes were constant.

So why support that mission?

Then again, why support the mission in Iraq? If the mission is crazy, the best way to support the troops is to show, using "evidence" and "reasoning," just how crazy the mission is. Sure, you get called a traitor by the 101st Fighting Keyboarders and the media whores, but that will happen no matter what, and for any pretext, so why worry?