Tag Archives: iraq
RESOLUTION OF THE SACRAMENTO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUPPORTING PHASED WITHDRAWAL OF U.S. FORCES IN IRAQ
AGENDA DATE: January 8, 2008
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SUPPORTING PHASED WITHDRAWAL OF U.S. FORCES IN IRAQ
WHEREAS, the United States is now into the fifth year of a war in Iraq with no end in sight and little apparent progress; and
WHEREAS, despite the deaths of more than 4,360 American men and women in our Armed Forces, and the injury of more than 30,000 Americans, President George W. Bush has refused to begin a safe and orderly withdrawal of American soldiers from Iraq; and
WHEREAS, more than 460 Californians have been among the service members killed in the Iraq conflict, more than any other state, and thousands more Californians, including more than 800 members of California’s National Guard, remain deployed in Iraq and at grave risk; and
WHEREAS, in the County of Sacramento, the direct toll has been at least fifteen members of the Armed Services who have been killed and scores injured, and is estimated to cost County taxpayers more than $700 million through FY 2008; and
WHEREAS, civilian casualties in Iraq have been significant, with more than 700,000 civilian Iraqi men, women, and children killed, and millions more wounded or displaced from their homes; and
WHEREAS, hostilities in Iraq have continued for more than four years, requiring the expenditure of $10,000,000,000 per month and estimated at more than $450,000,000,000 already appropriated since its inception, an amount that directly affects the funding available to address Sacramento County’s needs and pressing issues such as funding for children’s health insurance, job training programs, homeless assistance, housing assistance, flood protection, water supply development, public and other transportation development, and other vital domestic needs; and
WHEREAS, the widely respected and bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended that the United States withdraw its Armed Forces from Iraq by early this year; and
WHEREAS, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed legislation which would have allowed California voters the opportunity to express their views on the war in Iraq; and
WHEREAS, despite the best efforts and tremendous sacrifices made by service members and their families, the continued presence of United States Armed Forces will not lead to peace and stability in Iraq or the Middle East; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors, County of Sacramento, believes that the war in Iraqi has significantly adversely affected the ability of the County of Sacramento to address many crucial matters facing the people of Sacramento County without increasing public safety or reducing the threat of terrorism;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors, County of Sacramento, State of California, calls on the Congress and the President to set specific dates and timelines to withdraw and phase out our Armed Forces in Iraq in order to better serve our national interest and meet critical domestic priorities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to transmit this resolution to the President of the United States, the leadership of the Congress, the United States Senators from California, and the members of the Sacramento delegation of the House of Representatives.
Agenda Date: January 8, 2008 Page 2
On a motion by Supervisor_____________________,
Seconded by Supervisor_______________________ , the foregoing
Resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Sacramento, State of California, this 8th day of January, 2008, with
the following vote, to wit:
Chair, Board of Supervisors
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
By Marti Hiken
Co-chair NLG Military Law Task Force
Are you in the IRR and received your marching orders for Iraq?
IRR members have been called to active duty throughout the country. The marching orders state that you are headed for Iraq. The military does not have enough troops and has decided that you will fill its needs.
Many of you have simply not shown up and yet, have not had warrants issued to pick you up and have not been arrested. There have been reports from IRR members, however, who have received threatening phone calls and mail from the military, but still were not arrested. There are others of you who do not feel comfortable remaining in this no-man’s land.
The MLTF and GI Rights Hotline continue to receive many calls from Army and Marine IRR enlisted and officer members who have been called up. Here are some things to consider:
- Do you have a DD 214 in your hands that says you have been discharged? What is the stated basis for the discharge? What obligation were you discharged from? Too often GIs think they are discharged only to discover that they weren’t.
- For those who were actually discharged, you will need to “document” clearly the reason for the discharge to the military.
- Have you been discharged, but are still being “held” in the IRR for some reason?
- Have you previously been discharged and had your orders for discharge revoked? You are in a good position here, and a simple letter to the command might correct the situation.
- Have you requested delays or exemptions? Are you medically fit or is there a need for you to care for family members? Do you have grounds for financial hardship?
- If an officer, have you resigned your commission?
Two different viewpoints have been expressed by experienced MLTF members concerning how to deal with this situation. The first viewpoint asserts that nothing happens when IRR members do not report, and as one attorney states, “It is unfortunate that too many IRR members cave. A warrant is not the end of the line, but rather an opportunity to get a discharge from the IRR through turning themselves in at Forts Sill or Knox.” A “bad” discharge from the IRR has no affect on the benefits otherwise accrued.
The second viewpoint urges IRR members to always ask for extensions to delay their reporting dates as long as possible and to have attorneys assist them. One attorney states, “In my experience — just as we experienced with the Selective Service System years ago — the military personnel commands will frequently back off rather than fight over a particular person who effectively (and publicly) resists.”
Resources: DOD Directive 1235.13