• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Seeking Asylum in Germany, the US Soldier edition

Childlike Empress

Banned
Childlike Empress
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
20,632
Location
Ivory Tower
Not an easy thing to do as a soldier if you have ample evidence of US war crimes but nobody has the cojones to act on it.

Watch André Shepherd report about his journey which lasts almost a decade now:


The tired old question: Hero or Traitor?
 
The_Animus said:
Summary of video please
Click to expand...


Skip the video go to the wiki.

Basically he did not want to become objector of conscious because it would mean he was against ALL war. He was only against this one which he deemed illegal. He asked asylum to germany, but whether due to political consideration or not he was refused. After appeal the court give him the possibility to provide evidence that he would have been involved in crime against humanity or atrocities. This is the point we are : if he can prove he would have been invovled in such a crime and fleeing was his only possibility he wins. So it does not look too good for him. At least that was the state in june.
 
Aepervius said:
Basically he did not want to become objector of conscious because it would mean he was against ALL war. He was only against this one which he deemed illegal.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it is well known to scholars of the US Constitution that for a war to be legal it has to be authorized by Congress, the President is Commander in Chief, and the final say rests with Private Whatshisname.
 
Giz said:
Indeed, it is well known to scholars of the US Constitution that for a war to be legal it has to be authorized by Congress, the President is Commander in Chief, and the final say rests with Private Whatshisname.
Click to expand...
The US legislature may not be the sole determiner whether an action of the USA is legal or not, if it involves citizens of other countries.
 
Craig B said:
The US legislature may not be the sole determiner whether an action of the USA is legal or not, if it involves citizens of other countries.
Click to expand...

But when you volunteer to serve in the US armed forces, you should probably expect to go serve where your democratically elected representatives/president say you go. It's just a little bit narcissistic of him to think that he has the right to override those empowered by the constitution.
 
carlitos said:
I can't think of any way this comment could be interpreted in a non-racist way. Making a "darkie" joke about a black soldier is really not cool.
Click to expand...


Stop trying to lecture me on social behavior (and following me around), carlitos. It's a bit creepy and you really aren't in a position to do so. The cutesy thing here is about "integration". We don't have a slave minority here, understand?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Stop trying to lecture me on social behavior (and following me around), carlitos. It's a bit creepy and you really aren't in a position to do so. The cutesy thing here is about "integration". We don't have a slave minority here, understand?
Click to expand...

A dark guy ordering a dark beer being "cute" has nothing to do with integration. Last time I checked, "we" don't have a slave minority in the US, either.
 
carlitos said:
A dark guy ordering a dark beer being "cute" has nothing to do with integration. Last time I checked, "we" don't have a slave minority in the US, either.
Click to expand...


The spam you spout is completely transparent in its intention and has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Thought about retirement?
 
Deserter. Plain and simple. Bottled it when he had to go where the shooting was. Lock him up.
 
Deserter - charge him, try him, and if found guilty, punish.

I believe that most NATO nations, including Germany will allow you to refuse an order, but only if it is manifestly unlawful (ie. unlawful on its face).

I also believe that his taste in beer is irrelevant, although it does show that he's got better taste than many North Americans, content with "meh" lagers....
 
Seems I recall several reservist not wanting to deploy in umm Iraq II? Afghanistan? So cases like his have already been through the American justice system. I don't know how the Germans see the precedents- proof of lawful order, or proof of systemic lawlessness?
 
Giz said:
It's just a little bit narcissistic of him to think that he has the right to override those empowered by the constitution.
Click to expand...


No, it's not. He has a duty to do so. At least, that is what we were taught while I was in the service. It's drilled into us from day 1 that there is no duty to obey an unlawful order, while there is a duty to disobey an unlawful order and report it up through the chain of command. The problem comes in when there is significant room for interpretation of an order when determining its lawfulness. Our training said that the first step should be up through the chain of command to verify legality; but in some cases, this is clearly not possible.

Personally, this should have been dealt with in the US, by US officials; but none of the recent administrations have had a particularly good track record regarding objectors and whistle blowers.
 
luchog said:
No, it's not. He has a duty to do so. At least, that is what we were taught while I was in the service. It's drilled into us from day 1 that there is no duty to obey an unlawful order, while there is a duty to disobey an unlawful order and report it up through the chain of command. The problem comes in when there is significant room for interpretation of an order when determining its lawfulness. Our training said that the first step should be up through the chain of command to verify legality; but in some cases, this is clearly not possible.

Personally, this should have been dealt with in the US, by US officials; but none of the recent administrations have had a particularly good track record regarding objectors and whistle blowers.
Click to expand...

Right, but this order was not clearly unlawful. So my point stands.
 
Aepervius said:
Skip the video go to the wiki.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/André_Shepherd

On November 12, 2014, Advocate General Eleanor V.E. Sharpston of the European Court of Justice advised that Shepherd had the right to claim asylum in the European Union despite the fact that he was a noncombat, helicopter mechanic. She further advised that it was for the German court to decide whether the punishment that Mr. Shepherd would face if convicted of desertion in the U.S. would count as an act of persecution. She also advised that the German court would need to determine whether there was a reasonable likelihood of Shepherd being involved in war crimes if he were deployed to a conflict zone, without needing to establish that fact beyond reasonable doubt.[13][14]

On February 25, 2015, the European Court of Justice ruled in line with Advocate General Sharpston's opinion. The court held that, while it is possible Shepherd could seek asylum in Germany, he would have to prove that he would have been involved in war crimes and that deserting was his only option to avoid committing such crimes. The ECJ left that finding to German courts to decide, as well as whether the prosecution Shepherd could face under the Uniform Code of Military Justice actually amounted to persecution. Shepherd's case now returns to the German court for their decision.​

ETA: Also, it doesn't much seem like this is a topic of US politics. More like European/German politics.
 
Last edited:
What's all this about German courts? Pah! Pfui! In my day, the Herrenvolk would have done themselves the honor to stand this deserter from an ally's forces against a well-pocked barracks wall and shoot him. And then throw his carcass in the Neckar or any other convenient river and let it float down to the sea accompanied by pecking crows, to warn skulkers of what they deserve.

What happened to the Germany I knew?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom