Letter to the editor

By John Powell
Capital Times (Madison, WI)
January 12, 2007 

Dear Editor:

It's discouraging that this administration either does not understand or does not agree with the Constitution of the United States.

The story about 1st. Lt. Ehren Watada, the soldier who is refusing to serve in Iraq, quotes "Army spokesman" Joe Piek as saying, "He joined the Army and swore an oath, and that includes following the orders of the officers appointed over him."

No, it doesn't.

Perhaps Piek has never served in the military, but I remember the oath I took when I was inducted into the Army as a lowly buck private in 1968. The oath for soldiers is virtually the same as the oath taken by the president of the United States and every other official of every level of government in the country: an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.

There is nothing in that oath about obeying orders. In fact, the Geneva Convention and the Uniform Code of Military Justice make it clear that a soldier's duty is to disobey illegal orders.

Watada alleges that the Iraq war is unconstitutional and therefore illegal, and that he is duty-bound to refuse to serve in it. This should be the issue -- not whether he refused to obey orders (clearly he did), but whether those orders were legal.

Piek's confusion about the oath of office should come as no surprise since the commander in chief is also misinformed about our legal system.

George W. Bush famously says, "I am the decider." Wrong again. Congress is supposed to be the decider. The Constitution makes it very clear that only Congress can levy taxes, appropriate money, make laws and declare war.

To continue with Bush's juvenile use of language, the president is the carryouter of the law. Bush's claim to be above the law is unconstitutional and un-American.

We can only hope that the new Congress restores constitutional government in America.