>Gautam >wanted all of the reservists "hanging from the >yardarm" (he's a Marine, and I think really enjoys >playing to the stereotypes), and the other four all >thought that they should be spending a long, long, >long time in Leavenworth. Four of them did express >concerns over the way that the Reserves are treated, >etc. but all felt that no matter the nature of those >complaints, those Reservists engaged in mutiny, plain >and simple.
Talk in the Ft Bragg area about the "18" is pretty much in alignment with Damon- news clips may not give enough/all the info. "Orders is orders" is the first and most consistent feeling, however it is not always that simple was also a second part to several sentences. Evidently there are requirements "that need to be met" for orders. If the requirements are not met or if they are unjust or immoral then soldiers can refuse an order. (No, it was not a setting that I went into "what the requirements are"- Damon, can you help here?) Seems the equipment readiness and fuel status do have bearing in some opinions. The other thing that surprised me was that there was a discussion that some considered the action of refusing the order may not really be mutiny as they were not in the "heat of battle". Overall, I think it is safe to assume some congressional inquires on this. Dee _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
