I’m beginning to think we are in the “theater of the absurd” after reading some of the letters supporting Lt. Ehren Watada and his actions. My only solace is that this man will be judged by a jury of his peers, men and women who have taken an oath and placed duty above their own personal ideology. These writers make this out to be the “Judgement at Nuremberg”. The reality is really quite simple.
Do we as a nation want junior officers in our military deciding for themselves what they will and will not do? Can they decide for themselves what our country’s foreign policy should be? When they took their oath and commission did they not lay down some of these rights to decide things for themselves? Did they not agree to obey the orders of their superiors.
These letter writers seem to think Lt. Watada is a civilian. He is not, he is commissioned officer in the United States military and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. These writers embrace the “moral” slant of Lt. Watada’s stand. Then what do you say to the honorable officer who, despite his/her personal feelings obeys the order given Lt. Watada? Obviously that officer must lack Lt. Watada’s moral courage? Rubbish. The writers support Lt. Watada not for his moral stand but that his actions support their ideology and nothing more.
Lt. Watada is a coward and lacks the moral fiber to be an officer in the United States military. Moreover, Lt. Watada has violated his oath and is a disgrace to his office. He deserves nothing less than to be stripped of his rank and office, a dishonorable discharge and a vacation to Leavenworth.
Stephen Thorsen
Mukilteo
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
