A violation of military regs

Submitted by Dean M. (United States), Jul 17, 2011 at 12:57

Conscientious objector status has to be based on objection to war, period. As retired from the US Army, I am aware of the regulations. One cannot claim objector status based on specific wars against specific nations. (Also, there is the noncombatant status for conscientious objectors. One of the best medics I knew during the Vietnam era was a conscientious objector. He wouldn't take up arms, but he would administer aid as a medic and try to save lives.)

This is a violaton of Army regulations. The man should have been given a general discharge and released for other reasons. Muslims fight Muslims all the time. Look at the Iran-Iraq war. Many thousands of Muslims died fighting each other. Again, military regulations require an conscientious objector object to all war. This is a type of caving into "political correctness" that does violence to good discipline and order.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".