ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Soldiers and Responsibilty

Any soldier in a democracy is obligated, by national and international law, to question, protest and if at all possible, refuse orders which he or she knows to be illegal. Any failure to do so on the part of the soldier is grounds for legal action in the form of a court martial.

Soldiers are not children. In a democracy, they are responsible adults. Regardless of the consequences, they must take responsibility for all their actions. They do not cease to be citizens because they are temporarily in the service of the citizenry. They may not blame their officers, and their officers may not blame their superiors. No one may blame the commander in chief, regardless of his position on the world stage, or anything he might have said. The ultimate Commander In Chief--the citizenry and its laws--will not accept such excuses, either morally or legally.

The World War Two generation does not need to be reminded why "just following orders" is no longer accepted as a valid legal argument. The World War Two generation should be reminding their children and grandchildren of the reasons.

Soldiers are obligated and should be fully trained to know the international law concerning all their actions, including the proper, humane and legal treatment of all prisoners. The complete soldier should and would be ashamed to use the excuse of being a child, or of "just following orders."

Would you want to live in a country where it was any other way?

Donna Barr, US Army 1970-1973, Clallam Bay, WA

America the Accountable

I made a sign that reads, "United States: 21st Century Nazis," because:

After the horrific pictures of tortured Iraqi prisoners were made public on April 28th, 2004, US military officials said there were more photographs and a videotape showing beatings and sexually sadistic atrocities (Seymour M. Hersh, May 17th, 2004, New Yorker Magazine). Since 2001, Amnesty International and the International Red Cross have been reporting that US torture techniques were being used on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and prisons inside Afghanistan and Iraq.

You can not torture accurate information out of people who don't have it. Coalition intelligence estimates 70-90% of prisoners detained in Iraq prisons since the war began "had been arrested by mistake" (May 11th, 2004, Los Angeles Times).

"The day the world learned that American soldiers had tortured Iraqi prisoners belongs high on the list of the worst things that ever happened to our country. It's a black mark that will be in the history books in a hundred languages, for as long as there are history books." (Andy Rooney, May 23, 2004, 60 Minutes)

I was holding my sign, in front of the Federal Building in Bellingham, Washington, during the weekly Friday Peace Vigil. As I stood there, a young white male rolled down the window of his car, screamed obscenities at me, and drove off. This young man displayed the same fear, ignorance, and arrogance that have allowed the Bush Administration (Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, who never fought in a war) to lead us into this moral degradation.

There is no redemption in denial. We must hold ourselves accountable, and make reparations to appease our shame and regain our humanity.

Dissent is not treason!

Judith A. Laws, Bellingham, WA

Why Nader?

Analogously, progressives, instead of writing vitriolic missives about Ralph Nader's candidacy, imploring him to give up the ghost, telling him that his candidacy may well mean another four years of the delusional George W. Bush and his band of imperialists, should be asking why the polls show that 7% of the voters interviewed prefer him over John Kerry.

Surely, one couldn't make the case that those polled really want another four years of a Bush theocracy. Surely, one couldn't, in one's wildest dreams, think that those polled support Bush's push toward world hegemony.

So, if John Kerry is a progressive and worthy of the votes of 7% of those who surely consider themselves progressives and would never "spoil" the chance of putting a true progressive in The White House, then why are they taking the chance of doing just that?

7% of those polled are the messengers and Kerry and his supporters are ignoring the message. And, yes, they are using their keyboards and airways to shoot the messengers.

Michael Bonanno, Antioch, CA 94531