• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian AFG War "Resister"

geo said:
Journeyman:

:p

he was "REG" navy.  Don't try to pin this POS on the Res

Geo it wasn't Journeyman he was just responding to Link's post. Now link you want to expand on that statement there troop? For a reservist who just put in his CT to the regs a month ago don't you think it's a bit soon to start on the reserve bashing. Maybe we should just write it off as a pathetic attempt at trolling or shit disturbing and await your public apology to the board.
 
Journeyman,

    I don't think Link meant to imply that really annoying idea that reservists aren't apart of the Army.  I think he was questioning if this guy was in at all because he seems to not know fundamental facts.  This guy was in,  that is a fact,  I don't know if he flubbed BOTC I  or BOTC II,  by the timing of everything I *think* BOTC II, but that is a poorly educated guess.

On a side note,  I'm a reservist and I can say first hand it does feel like I'm just playing dress up sometimes, not really being usefull.  So if you get a reservist who gets really upset over being told he isn't real army,  chances are he (or she) feels the same way I do at times.
 
Now, truth be told boys & girls.....I really don't care about Link's Reg/Res opinion one way or the other (I'm one of those old-fashioned 'respect should be earned' types).

The "duck & cover" was merely anticipating the inevitable dogpile.  ;)
 
REF: geo's post above....

But can't we have sooo much more fun with this than the usual Res/Reg bun fight??

Fact is, the gent was in the Navy for a few years before moving to the green world.

"Targets to your front ......"

;D
 
I think that avoiding what he is vice what he says should be the focus.  I'd rather avoid ad hominem attacks and focus instead on the logical fallicies within his own arguments.
 
Ok I realize that this can be a heated issue for some, which is probably why the mods are using the velvet glove approach in this thread.

However the minute it starts to go south you know what happens.

Anyone who feels the need to start another pointless reg vs reserve or army vs navy bun fight as opposed to making some meaningful contributions, either stop typing now or feel free to take it elsewhere. I hear milposers.net is looking for a few good trolls.
 
From MacLeans,
Shared under the Fair Dealings Provisions of the CopyRight Act RSC

  • Note the date, Nov 20, it seems this was published during a lull in our conversations, interesting to see Mr Juarez's stance 'evolve'.
  • Note also, Ruxted has made it to the big time ... quoted in MacLeans! WooWho!

Emboldening added



A resister without a war
MICHAEL FRISCOLANTI
Mon Nov 20, 12:00 AM


Francisco Juarez is the newest voice of Canada's anti-war movement, and understandably so. A former navy seaman turned army reservist, the 35-year-old famously quit the military because he couldn't stomach the thought of deploying to Afghanistan. Free to speak his mind, Juarez now spends much of his time travelling the country, telling crowds large and small why the rest of Canada's troops don't belong in Kandahar, either. Journalists have dubbed him the "first Afghan war resister" -- a title he happily accepts. "My ethics guide me," Juarez says, "and I followed them."

Peace activists couldn't buy a better spokesman, a real-life soldier who saw the light at the end of the propaganda tunnel. "If we send Canadian Forces members to work and possibly die in another part of the world, we owe them a debate," Juarez says. "There needs to be a broader discussion within our society about what we are doing, and I think the Prime Minister needs to be a bit more honest about the objectives."

But others -- including officials at the Department of National Defence -- believe it is Juarez, not Stephen Harper, who needs to start telling the truth. "From my point of view, he doesn't have any credibility," says Commander Denise Laviolette, a spokeswoman for the chief of military personnel. "He wasn't resisting anything because he wasn't even in line to go."

In March, after four years on the water, Juarez transferred from the full-time navy to the part-time army in the hopes of finishing his university degree while training to be an infantry officer. Now a reservist, Juarez was under no obligation to serve in Afghanistan. Part-time soldiers cannot be forced to deploy; they must volunteer. Juarez insists he intended to sign up for a tour by 2009, but then he began to question the military's evolving Afghan strategy, which he describes as war first, aid second.

He became so disillusioned that during a training course in New Brunswick he simply refused to participate, citing personal and family reasons.

But he never mentioned Afghanistan. "I kept that to myself," he says, speaking by telephone from his home in Victoria, B.C. "I just wanted to make it easy so I could get out and, as a private citizen, express my point of view." He got his wish. The Forces fined Juarez $500 and discharged him without honour.

Since then, he has become a poster boy for peace, applauded in the press for his refusal "to train for the Afghan campaign." To the military's chagrin, most reports have failed to mention the obvious fact: Juarez was never bound for the war he now claims to resist. The Forces' public affairs department has tried to set the record straight, but with little success. "We are not in a situation similar to other nations that have had numerous individuals desert  because they didn't want to serve," Laviolette says. "We have had zero conscientious objectors and we have had zero folks go absent without leave."

The Ruxted Group, a website that publishes defence-related commentary, has even gone so far as to demand that Juarez apologize for misleading the public. "The time has come for Mr. Juarez to come clean," the e site reads. "As a former service member, however briefly, we are sure he is still familiar with the concepts of personal responsibility and honour. As such, he knows that we ca cannot quietly accept his blatant disregard for the truth."

Juarez insists he was never dishonest. "I was not in danger of being ordered to go to Afghanistan, and I try to make that very, very clear," he says. "I haven't been obfuscatory about that at all. I know in some of the articles it sort of sounds like it, but that was not my intention."

He believes his status as a reservist doesn't change the fact that he is a bona fide war resister. "What is a war resister?" he asks. "How do we define a war resister? Certainly some people say you have to be in a situation where you are going to be sent and then you refuse. But I think there are many different kinds of war resisters."

Take the United States, for example. Some deserters deployed, then fled. Others simply refused to board the plane. "I sort of see myself in there somewhere," Juarez continues. "But I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what kind of war resister I am. I just know that I oppose the mission as it is in Afghanistan and what Stephen Harper is doing to our country."

To comment, email letters@macleans. ca


 
Danjanou said:
Anyone who feels the need to start another pointless reg vs reserve or army vs navy bun fight as opposed to making some meaningful contributions, either stop typing now or feel free to take it elsewhere. I hear milposers.net is looking for a few good trolls.

A two by two matrix so we can sort out this bunfight. Pick a square!  ;D


                I      Regular        I      Reserve
    ______________________________________
      ARMY  I  Regular Army    I  Reserve Army
    ______________________________________
      NAVY  I  Regular Navy    I  Reserve Navy
                                       
 
Here are his latest ramblings

part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iroLoPn-d4M&mode=related&search=
part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xkDIZCGcms&mode=related&search=

My question now is; how much money does he make every appearance? Because he certainly is not paying for his travels around the country from his own pocket.
 
a_majoor said:
A two by two matrix so we can sort out this bunfight. Pick a square!  ;D


                I       Regular        I      Reserve
     ______________________________________
      ARMY  I  Regular Army    I   Reserve Army
     ______________________________________
      NAVY  I  Regular Navy     I   Reserve Navy
                                         

What happens when you factor in those Air Force people??  >:D
 
WRT a_majoor's post, the Part 1 vid in particular.

It's interesting to note the times at which Mr Juarez returns to his notes.

He is quite clearly telling his own story, and thus can do so extemporaneously, however there are at least two occasions where he returns to notes.

First, when talking about the fact that he joined the CF to get assistance with his educational costs and that (paraphrasing here) this fact was becoming more and more a fact as post secondary education funding was lagging and the military (as he said it) was resorting to getting recruits to by enticing folks with funding incentives.

I wonder if MarCom was subsidizing his studies in Law when he was an NCIOP?

This argument of course is an old saw used by ACT! and picked up directly from American Peace Protesters as part and parcel of a nefarious plot by the neo conservatives to institute a 'poverty draft' in Canada.

Interesting that we never heard this little tidbit from Mr Juarez before.

Interesting how he immediately referred verbatim to his notes whilst talking about this point. Perhaps the readers  have some inkling as to why this would be, I for one, am stymied....

Finally (or at least as far as I'll mention here), the last instance of this referring to notes is when Mr Juarez starts talking about how Mr Harper is executing Republican party plans to by $150,000 shells when it has taken ten years to fix our health care system.... again , perhaps the readers could comment on why Mr Juarez went to notes at this point in his oratory, I am buffled....

 
Now, of course I couldn't use the term dupe as that would be an 'ad hominem'  :-*
 
Why yes indeed the CF was funding Mr. Jurarez's law studies.  When I knew him, he was planning to get out and become a Saanich Cop.  I guess political martyr pays more.
 
Heh... I guess he has a future as a political hack / MLA / MP if nothing else
 
Why yes indeed the CF was funding Mr. Jurarez's law studies.  When I knew him, he was planning to get out and become a Saanich Cop.  I guess political martyr pays more.

I am reasonably familiar with the Saanich PD and several of their officers.  Let us just say that I do not believe that, as an organization, they would have been very interested in actually employing Mr Juarez.
 
Thank god for democracy that allows this lad to conduct himself in such a manner. I trust he will return any of the $2000.00 education grant he no doubt drew from the crown. If he dosn't as I suspect he will not, then where his honour as a human let alone serviceperson. Trust me the officer corp and indeed the CF as a whole is far better off without this kind of person. Frankly it was a cheap price to pay and thank the lord he did what he did rather than putting others at risk.

Perhaps he should visit one of our wounded fighting to stand up again for Canada. Then again he isn't worthy of taking in the same air.

It would be interesting to follow this chap and his career in law where truth and honour are suppose to be at the forefront. Oh well perhaps he is better off for the nations sake following the path he chose. Lord knows he has no place in the a noble disipline like the service.
 
captainj said:
in law where truth and honour are suppose to be at the forefront.
:rofl:
You're kidding, right?

I thought law wasn't about "right and wrong" but about "winning and losing" ;)


 
Justice and the law have two things in common, Jack, and squat, and Jack just left town.
 
Kat Stevens said:
Justice and the law have two things in common, Jack, and squat, and Jack just left town.

Taliban Jack left town?  Did he take Juarez with him?  ;D
 
Ok, so how did a thread on a "war resister", get turned into a bashing of the the law? I don't recall hearing the name of the law school this person is attending (if he's actually attending a law school as opposed to taking a few law classes in a Criminology/Justice program.  But hey, call me skeptical, this person does managed to stretch the truth a fair bit)
 
Back
Top