Article

2005-06-13 China-Japan-Koreas

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-06-13 00:15|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Jenkins is 65 years old, in poor health, and he lost 40 years of his life in N. Korea. He wants to visit his invalid mother who is 91. I for one have no problem with Jenkins being given some consideration to visit his mother in the USA for humanitarian reasons alone. During the Korean War, 1.5 million American men were conscripted. Perhaps Jenkins was one of the 1.5 conscripted, and in my opinion no country has the moral right to enslave young men to fight in the military against their will. Also, there were 80,000 draft dodgers in the Korean War who got off scott free, not to mention that we allowed countless numbers of Vietnam draft dodgers to come back to the USA and re-start their lives with no penalty. What's the big deal about keeping Jenkins away from his country of birth in his old age?

Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-13 01:31|| 2005-06-13 01:31|| Front Page Top

#2 Yer half right there Thotch...but I take umbridge at the consription = slavery; at least as far as the U.S. is concerned. Draft dodgers only got off "scott free" thanks to Jummuh. Did you for him? Something tells me you love draft dodgers...so get bent.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2005-06-13 02:03|| 2005-06-13 02:03|| Front Page Top

#3 Did you for him? Something tells me you love draft dodgers...so get bent.
Sorry to disappoint your pop-psych analysis of who I am. Draft was/has never been a threat to me. I'm a menopausal female. But I don't think one needs to be a male draft dodger to recognize the un-democratic underpinnings of conscription. Most civilized Western countries have done away with conscription and for good reason. You can't call yourself a free country if you force people to do risky things at your bidding against their will.

Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-13 02:23|| 2005-06-13 02:23|| Front Page Top

#4 Thotch the menopausal female:

First do a maintance check on the tinfoil and repair as needed...as the radio waves and exotic beams may interfere with the following concept.

I don't care what you imagine a "free country" is or what you think a draft, a citizen, a republic, a democracy, or rights and responsibilities are.

/btw Thotch you're on my list.

Posted by Red Dog 2005-06-13 03:29|| 2005-06-13 03:29|| Front Page Top

#5 Well then I must be half suicidal to take on a "menopausal female" but what the heck. We can argue about conscription...I would say that conscription in defense of the US Constitution is not slave, and again, I would hazard a wager that you would disagree. And, what makes you think I ever said the draft was a threat to you? I said no such thing. My mistake was assuming you're a US citizen. My bad.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2005-06-13 03:33|| 2005-06-13 03:33|| Front Page Top

#6 Whatever, red dog. I doubt your type of pseudo macho man has ever "fought" in anything other than computer games. Dream on.

Yes, I'm a US citizen, rex mundi. And I'm not alone in viewing conscription as a negative - the military itself has no use for conscription either so I guess I'm in good company. I've found that most people who believe in conscription have never served on the front lines of battle themselves. They just want others to do so against their will. The Vietnam War, which heavily used conscripts, did not affect my freedoms one way or another, but it certainly took away freedoms from the young men who were draftees. The military profession should be chosen voluntarily, not be handed down as an edict.

Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-13 04:21|| 2005-06-13 04:21|| Front Page Top

#7 I've read that Jenkins enlisted on his own right out of high school well after the end of the Korean War. His defection was in the early 60's..

Still, I agree that he ought to be left alone. He's done hard time in Nork land and his attitude has been nothing but forthright, remorseful and repentant. In all his public utterances he has admitted that he made a huge mistake and has not tried to make excuses or ask for understanding - only lenience in light of having already suffered 40 years of slavery. While he may have a hard time resisting the temptation of the money for the inevitable book-deal, so far he has not sought to draw attention to himself through interviews, the talk-show circuit, left-wing anti-military groups, etc. - a refreshing change compared to the current crop of traitors like Pablo Paredes, et al.

Posted by John in Tokyo 2005-06-13 05:03|| 2005-06-13 05:03|| Front Page Top

#8 Whatever, red dog. I doubt your type of pseudo macho man has ever "fought" in anything other than computer games. Dream on.

...Said the person who can't change her name in a dialog box.

Lissen, everyone's not only got a right to an opinion, but to have an opinion on other people's opinion. YOURS is noted, weighed, and found wanting in the light of the vast majority of draftees that DIDN'T desert. (Which draft, by the way, DEMOCRATS have been trying to bring back.)

Posted by Ptah">Ptah 2005-06-13 05:18|| http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org]">[http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2005-06-13 05:18|| Front Page Top

#9 Most civilized Western countries have done away with conscription. TG, you'll go far at Rantburg, saying France, Germany, Italy and at least a dozen other European countries are not civilized. http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/mil_con&int=-1 is UN.

Posted by phil_b 2005-06-13 06:19|| 2005-06-13 06:19|| Front Page Top

#10 TG, keep it up.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-13 07:27|| 2005-06-13 07:27|| Front Page Top

#11 I agree about letting him in to visit, but I must take umbrage with "The Vietnam War, which heavily used conscripts, did not affect my freedoms one way or another". Sorry. The Vietnam war is connected, via history, to everything that came after - good and bad - including Watergate, Jimmy Carter, Iran Hostages, fall of the Berlin Wall, collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War. Didn't CAUSE all that stuff, but is connecected to it. Had there not been a Vietnam War, the world - yours included - would be different. Some things might be better, some would be worse, but see if you can figure out which things might be worse. Too bad you can't eliminate history.

Posted by Bobby 2005-06-13 07:42|| 2005-06-13 07:42|| Front Page Top

#12 During World War II after the initial rush by motivated ment to enlist there was a shortfall of manpower in the military. By the war's end somewhere around 86% of all military personnel were draftees. It is my view that if a person refuses to defend or support a state he/she should have no rights to protection by that state.

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2005-06-13 09:04|| 2005-06-13 09:04|| Front Page Top

#13 I'll go along with TG in saying that in usual circumstances there should be no draft. Our military agrees.

In an all-out dog-fight such as WWII, the draft is necessary. If the survival of your country comes into question, you pick up a rifle and defend it.

As to Jenkins, I have to agree with Fred. He may be repentant but I don't want him in the country. Do a video-link with his Ma.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2005-06-13 09:33|| 2005-06-13 09:33|| Front Page Top

#14 #7 John in Tokyo, good point. I would add: (1) In today's Kool-Aid climate, conscription should be flatly avoided. The drain on cohesion and morale would require a draconian disciplinary system, making life seriously un-fun for the volunteers who want to be there. (2) However, when the very survival of the nation is on the line, a draft is entirely appropriate, and in fact, I'd make the right to vote and other privileges of citizenship contingent on honorable service.

As for being civilized, I'd also note that conscription, of men and women alike, is part of the reason Israel remains a civilized country, rather than a Judenfrei Islamist ~~shithole~~ paradise.

Posted by ST 2005-06-13 09:45|| 2005-06-13 09:45|| Front Page Top

#15 Hienlin's"Starship Troopers"has a pretty good take on who should be a"full"citezen.

Posted by raptor 2005-06-13 09:49|| 2005-06-13 09:49|| Front Page Top

#16 Thotch - The man had some fairly easy choices to make and he made some pretty poor ones yet doesn't want to live with the consequences. He turned his back on his mother a long time ago when he betrayed his comrades and went to live in a piss hole ruled by a nasty troll, and then the son of a nasty troll. He turned his back on his country of birth and his peers (like my Father who actually fought in the Korean War when it was far from certain what the end would be!) who gave some of the best years of their lives to serve the country that had provided so much to them. I feel sorry for his mother but to allow him into our country is an incredible insult to alot of people living as well as those who died over 50 years ago in Korea serving our country. He should take the time to apologize amidst his globetrotting.

Posted by Tkat 2005-06-13 10:35|| 2005-06-13 10:35|| Front Page Top

#17 I also noticed that he's working on his autobiograpy. Wonder when he'll be hitting up the Army for 40 years worth of back pay?

Posted by tu3031 2005-06-13 12:05|| 2005-06-13 12:05|| Front Page Top

#18 Thotch Glesing2372 "the un-democratic underpinnings of conscription"

Actually they are very democratic, just a bit dated. Let me walk you through. The 'draft' or 'conscription' is actually the activation of the Federal Militia. For the United States since it founding, the Constitution, Article I, Section 8 gives the Congress the authority to organize all land and naval forces to include the militia. The Federal Militia is defined under Title X U.S.Code. Section 311: Militia: Composition and classes is that instrument. Besides the National Guard all males at least 17 years of age and no older than 45 years of age are members of the unorganized militia, para.(b)(2). Considering that in 1789, women, slaves and indians where not considered full members of the politicial body, all males therefore were part of the militia. The incorporation of all male rather than the reservation of authority and bearing of arms limited to a knighty class and its retainers marks a keen historical transition from rule by a few to rule by the many. That part that hasn't caught up yet, is that all citizen should carry the same burden.

Posted by Ebbereck Uneregum5631 2005-06-13 12:39|| 2005-06-13 12:39|| Front Page Top

#19 An LA-based leftist documentary on Jenkins will soon be released (they've been selling it to distributors via Canada).

They think he is a hero and the USA is evil. Oh, you already knew that.

Ceterum censeo, Mecca delenda est.

Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2005-06-13 13:34|| 2005-06-13 13:34|| Front Page Top

#20 Actually they are very democratic, just a bit dated. Let me walk you through...That part that hasn't caught up yet, is that all citizen should carry the same burden.
You contradict your own argument. Conscription is highly selective, unfair, and the burden is not shared by all.

Someone suggested that voting should be dis-allowed without military service - I would agree with that concept. Then most of us on Rantburg, myself included, would lose our vote.

Another poster said that Jenkins was not a draftee. I did not know that. An account I read did not mention his status but said that he drank up to 10 beers on the night he deserted because he was so scared. He was inebriated, not thinking clearly, on the night when he made his decision to desert. I'm sure many a lawyer has used this type of defesnse to get scoundrels off worse charges than desertion stateside and we've tolerated it. No outcry. Also what I read was that Jenkins had intended to turn himself in after he deserted during the night but because he was so drunk he got lost and walked into the hands of the North Koreans. In other words he had not intended to go over to the enemy.

I'm a coward. I admit it. I hate scary rides. I would never join the military even if it meant I had to give up my vote. I don't see myself as being less a productive citizen than a military warrior. I am productive because I have other skills than warrior skills. Therefore, I have sympathy for other people - like Jenkins - who lose their heart to risk their lives as warriors. Not every person is meant to be a warrior, and that's why it's so laughable when a hear some of you think that it's perfectly sane to demand that every male in age group 18-25 be an instant warrior at your command, not that you have been warriors yourself - perhaps only a handful have at most.

Jenkins meant to do the right thing by turning himself in to US military authorities to face consequences, but he was drunk and everything else went wrong for him. What's the point of punishing him at age 65? He has already served 30 days in jail. As I said 80,000 cronscriptees avoided the draft in the Korean War. Did they lose their citizenship? The Vietnam War had even higher numbers of draft dodgers, draft avoiders who "hid" stateside in the reserves or in college or behind marriage and childbirth certificates or actually ran off to Canada. What was their punishment? Some sit in high political office representing both political parties. How were they punished? Jenkins did what many Americans did after him, he like they, did not want to die, but Jenkins was clumsy about making his get-away.

Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-13 14:25|| 2005-06-13 14:25|| Front Page Top

#21 What's the point of punishing him at age 65?

He committed a military crime, called desertion. He chose to go over to NK. He was free to make any choice he wanted. He chose wrong but more importantly he deserted not the US Army but his unit and his buddies. He has yet to pay his debt for that action. If NK was a poor choice and he later recognized that - well that was his alone to make not ours or his units, or his buddies or the command structure of the US Army. He is the worst kind of soldier who deserts his unit. The only consolation was it wasn't under fire in which he would be sentanced to death most likely.

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2005-06-13 15:15|| 2005-06-13 15:15|| Front Page Top

#22 Uh ohh.... I'm getting soft.

I find some of TGs arguments fairly persuasive. But no book.

Posted by Shipman 2005-06-13 15:25|| 2005-06-13 15:25|| Front Page Top

#23 Thotch Glesing2372 -

No, its an obligation shared by all able bodied men. Therefore it was equal when it was first initated upon the country's founding since those excluded were not considered part of the political body [women, slaves, indians]. What is selective is the call-up process which is why before its termination it was known as 'selective service'.

[What has become unequal is that women now enjoy full benefits of the body politics, but don't carry the obligation. Slaves being done away with in 1865 and the independent or sovereign indian nations being incorporated by the end of the 19th century.]

You have selective activation of the militia because you only take on as much as you need [or can support] for the threat. You still need [literaly] manpower for the economy [tax base upon which it will all have to be paid from] and sustainment of the society from which the militia is drawn.

Posted by Ebbereck Uneregum5631 2005-06-13 16:15|| 2005-06-13 16:15|| Front Page Top

#24 Wonder when he'll be hitting up the Army for 40 years worth of back pay?

All pay and time in service stopped when he was declared a deserter.

Then again, I once helped on a case of a seaman- apprentice who jumped ship - in 1929. Fast forward 60 years, he's in a rest home, senile. Wife remembers him mentioning being in the Navy and checks with VA to see if she can get help paying his medical bills. VA can't find his records, so they send the case to us.

Turns out he was never declared a deserter. What do you do with an 82-year old sailor still listed as active? Sooo... he gets 60 years of back pay as an E-2 and has to be medically retired.

Posted by Pappy 2005-06-13 17:31|| 2005-06-13 17:31|| Front Page Top

#25 EU, I think you're dancing around the fact that conscription remains unfair, unequal, by being focused on one gender and on one small range of age groups to risk their lives, and that's why today conscription has become such a negative concept. To say that other taxpayers foot the bill of wars, so it's fair that young men's choices for their futures be summarily taken away is pure nonsense. Conscription is always the cheap screw politicians' and taxpayers' choice for waging war. How does paying taxes stateside equal the value of an individual's life or future? Given that choice I'm sure that many 18-25 males would be more than happy to work at 2 civilian jobs at a time so ages 26-33 able bodied men AND women could be shipped off to war fronts around the world. And depending on when a war is declared age groups 18-21 have not even had a chance to vote even once. There's a saying that most wars are declared by stupid cowardly old men and there's good reason for that saying because the ones least likely to be affected by death on the battle front are the ones who merrily see nothing wrong with thrusting others to face death.

There would never be a need for conscription if military warriors were paid the true market value salaries as what their jobs are worth. But the electorate is too cheap to pony up the money it would take to pay for warriors. The politicians realize this and so they dally with the concept of conscription - cheap labor for work no one else wants to do. That's why Democrats were the party in power in recent years to mandate conscription -they are the elites who always want to save social programs for the "poor and disabled" state side but place no value on what true warriors should be worth. Conscription is not only unfair but it's dangerous to true warriors, but once again the elites have rarely fought for anything other than bargains at Macy's White Sales, so what do they know about how dangerous it is to have a unwilling comrade in arms covering your back? That Jenkins recognized that he was scared and had lost his heart for waging war and tried to leave the battlefield actually saved his comrades' lives then if he had stayed and frozen in the heat of battle and put comrades in jeopardly who might have counted on his support.

Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-13 17:36|| 2005-06-13 17:36|| Front Page Top

#26 I have/had a blacksheep uncle who deserted the USMC in the late '30s. It took Roy Geiger (then a Col.) to to keep his ass out of serious slam, Fleet Marine Force Pacific instead.

Posted by Shipman 2005-06-13 17:39|| 2005-06-13 17:39|| Front Page Top

#27 Don't the Swiss have two years mandatory national service? I missed Vietnam, not by much, but would've enlisted before being drafted. Younger son just got back from six months in Iraq with the Marines. Freedon isn't free, and somebody has to pay the piper. Ask the Swiss!

Posted by Bobby 2005-06-13 21:26|| 2005-06-13 21:26|| Front Page Top

#28 Basic Swiss military service is 4 months plus 12 times 3 weeks spread out until the age of 40 (iirc). Their doctrine is very limited: call in 600,000 men in 24h (they have their weapons at home so they can fight their way to assigned positions if necessary), withdraw into the Alps, make it very expensive for potential invaders attempting to occupy the country. Not sure it would work in a modern world.

Sweden has a different approach. They've gone from 1-2 years of service and able to raise 800,000 men in 24h -- thus destroying the economy, but not allowing the Red enemy to spend more than a few hours on Swedish territory -- down to soon a mere 3,000 people left for... UN missions.

Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2005-06-13 23:13|| 2005-06-13 23:13|| Front Page Top

00:01 someone
00:00 CrazyFool
23:59 Fred
23:56 .com
23:51 .com
23:46 Pappy
23:40 SC88
23:39 Dave D.
23:35 2b
23:32 .com
23:25 Frank G
23:13 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:11 3dc
22:30 Jackal
22:26 War on Islam
22:26 trailing wife
22:22 muck4doo
22:21 plainslow
22:20 plainslow
22:17 trailing wife
22:06 phil_b
22:01 Alaska Paul
21:43 muck4doo
21:39 muck4doo