What a Pussy!

[olderguy]

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
hedo wrote:
the problem is your military is a jobs program rather then a fighting force.

Only a raving mad, war-crazed zealot would consider this to be a “problem”.

Get this: They haven’t been attacked nor are they under threat of attack (due to the fact that they mind their own business in international affairs).

They have a national defense, unlike the United States of America.

The U.S. has a national offense.

Their military, which you apparently consider to be weak, dominates this country’s armed forces in it’s ability to deter attacks from the outside.

No 9/11’s for Sweden or Switzerland. Not now, not ever. It won’t happen to them. It WILL happen to us (again).

All because of the differences in foreign policy and your precious imperial police force.[/quote]

IMHO, both of your posts are off the wall and you are the one who is raving mad. “No 9/11’s for Sweden or Switzerland” is as moronic as it gets. How much thought did you put into that statement? I doubt you are born and raised in the US as you sound like you have that Euro thought process going through your deranged mind. Only a nitwit would compare Belguim, Sweden, and Switzerland with the US in terms of military necessities.

[hedo]

[quote]pookie wrote:
hedo wrote:
Your a European and an Austrian no less. Your opinion has zero credibility with regard to empire building because of your history.

It’s a bit unfair to constantly hit the Europeans over the head with their history. Most Europeans on these forums wouldn’t be born for another 20 or 30 years when those events took place.

It’s important to remember the mistakes of history as to not repeat them, but to constantly use 60 year old events as justification to ignore their criticism of current events is an easy dodge.

That said, many Europeans might help their cause if they were able to articulate their views without simply resorting to anti-US rhetoric. Seeing as many of those countries are members of NATO and/or consider the USA as an ally.

[/quote]

Pookie

Your correct. I find the anti-US rhetoric amusing and misguided. No use having a real discussion with them unless they bring something to the table besides Bush phobia.

[hedo]

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
hedo wrote:
the problem is your military is a jobs program rather then a fighting force.

Only a raving mad, war-crazed zealot would consider this to be a “problem”.

Get this: They haven’t been attacked nor are they under threat of attack (due to the fact that they mind their own business in international affairs).

They have a national defense, unlike the United States of America.

The U.S. has a national offense.

Their military, which you apparently consider to be weak, dominates this country’s armed forces in it’s ability to deter attacks from the outside.

No 9/11’s for Sweden or Switzerland. Not now, not ever. It won’t happen to them. It WILL happen to us (again).

All because of the differences in foreign policy and your precious imperial police force.[/quote]

Perhaps you should move then. A Mass. resident would feel right at home in any number of socialist European countries.

Sweden how interesting an example. Pointless and obtuse but interesting.

[hedo]

[quote]orion wrote:
hedo wrote:

Your a European and an Austrian no less. Your opinion has zero credibility with regard to empire building because of your history.

Why don’t you go an lecture someone who cares about your opinion. Perhaps the Austrians could bully a small african nation…one of the favorite Euro things to do over the years.

By the way I served in one of those bases, in Europe. They weren’t there because the rent was cheap. They were based in countries that were defeated in wartime to protect them from the Soviets. Remember that little empire. The ones that made the Europeans piss their pants for 45 years. We should have left it to them.

Now we just have to wait a few more years until you are overtaken by your guest workers.

Since you are staring to resort to ad-hominem arguments I think you agree with some of my ideas concerning US and empire building.

Plus a few small questions to throw in there:

Would the SU have existed without the US intervention in WWI?

Why DID the US intervene in WWI?

Is it possible that said intervention led to WWII by destroying Austria-Hungaria, leading to unacceptabe peace terms and letting the bolsheviks take over and thereby help the fascists into power years later because of the communist “threat”?

Was WWII perhaps something we see quite often, the US trying to fix things after they first helped to royally fucking things up?

Just asking, I rarely meet experts on history, especially American ones, and since American are widely famous for their allmost instinctive grasp of foreign cultures, languages and complex social interactions…

… please enlighten me![/quote]

Pookie answered your question with far more patience then I have for a cosmopolitan European dandy.

Most Americans have a far freater understanding of culture then the sheltered Europeans that exist there today. I mean please open your eyes.

As to the fate of Europe. Without the US fixing your problems for you and then protecting you from outside agression, Europe would have continued it’s slide into self destruction or been taken over by the Soviets.

Now all we have to look forward to is the coming of Eurabia because the Western Europeans can’t out fuck or out fight their guest workers.

[orion]

[quote]hedo wrote:

As to the fate of Europe. Without the US fixing your problems for you and then protecting you from outside agression, Europe would have continued it’s slide into self destruction or been taken over by the Soviets.

[/quote]

That actually made me laugh,thank you.

You do realize that without the US WWI intervention we might not have needed poblem fixing nor would there have been a strong SU, a fascist Germany, i.E. problems to fix?

Will you tell the same to some Middle Easterners when you fix their problems down the road, that were caused by your “liberation” of Iraq?

What about not breaking things you do not understand, then there is no reason for you to fix them?

If I set your house on fire, stirred it into a flaming inferno, extinguished the flames, killed a few family members along the way and then lectured you how much you needed me, your reaction would be?

PS: European, cosmopolitan dandy? How do you know I am not a brick layer in Iowa?

This is the Internet, after all.

[olderguy]

[quote]hedo wrote:
orion wrote:
hedo wrote:

Your a European and an Austrian no less. Your opinion has zero credibility with regard to empire building because of your history.

Why don’t you go an lecture someone who cares about your opinion. Perhaps the Austrians could bully a small african nation…one of the favorite Euro things to do over the years.

By the way I served in one of those bases, in Europe. They weren’t there because the rent was cheap. They were based in countries that were defeated in wartime to protect them from the Soviets. Remember that little empire. The ones that made the Europeans piss their pants for 45 years. We should have left it to them.

Now we just have to wait a few more years until you are overtaken by your guest workers.

Since you are staring to resort to ad-hominem arguments I think you agree with some of my ideas concerning US and empire building.

Plus a few small questions to throw in there:

Would the SU have existed without the US intervention in WWI?

Why DID the US intervene in WWI?

Is it possible that said intervention led to WWII by destroying Austria-Hungaria, leading to unacceptabe peace terms and letting the bolsheviks take over and thereby help the fascists into power years later because of the communist “threat”?

Was WWII perhaps something we see quite often, the US trying to fix things after they first helped to royally fucking things up?

Just asking, I rarely meet experts on history, especially American ones, and since American are widely famous for their allmost instinctive grasp of foreign cultures, languages and complex social interactions…

… please enlighten me!

Pookie answered your question with far more patience then I have for a cosmopolitan European dandy.

Most Americans have a far freater understanding of culture then the sheltered Europeans that exist there today. I mean please open your eyes.

As to the fate of Europe. Without the US fixing your problems for you and then protecting you from outside agression, Europe would have continued it’s slide into self destruction or been taken over by the Soviets.

Now all we have to look forward to is the coming of Eurabia because the Western Europeans can’t out fuck or out fight their guest workers.
[/quote]

Pookie and Hedo

thanks for filling in the blanks in my thought process. Great posts.

[ChuckyT]

[quote]orion wrote:
ChuckyT wrote:
Hedo,

Think about it this way: there are both lone Austrian SS divisions and lone Austrian villages that oversaw the murder of more innocents than the TOTAL number of people that have died in the global war on terror (combatants, innocents, accidents, etc.) This doesn’t even touch on Austria in WWI…

Let’s be serious. Do you really want the Austrians and Germans re-arming? I for one would rather have them carping on the sidelines than bathing in blood.

Yes you are right, when it comes to commiting atrocities we win and you lose.

Get over it.

As long as your answer is not the attempt to outdo us in numbers during your war on drugs terror and whateverelsecomesnext, I can live with that. [/quote]

Does that mean you’ll stop complaining, since by the standards of your own country we’re fucking angels?

[ChuckyT]

[quote]orion wrote:
hedo wrote:

As to the fate of Europe. Without the US fixing your problems for you and then protecting you from outside agression, Europe would have continued it’s slide into self destruction or been taken over by the Soviets.

That actually made me laugh,thank you.

You do realize that without the US WWI intervention we might not have needed poblem fixing nor would there have been a strong SU, a fascist Germany, i.E. problems to fix? [/quote]

This is incredible. Do you even know the dates of the Russian Revolution? Who was it that pushed for a punitive settlement at Versailles? You’re arguing that Europe would have been better off under a military aristocracy?

Will you tell the same to some Middle Easterners when you fix their problems down the road, that were caused by your “liberation” of Iraq?

Unlike Austrians, we believe that empowerment is important. Instead of being swept along by the whims of more assertive peoples and nations, we believe that we can help Iraqis determine their own course.

It is possible that Iraqis will take the Austrian route… Blame everyone else for their many problems, allow other countries to defend them, become a satellite for the more powerful, refuse to help people in other countries. If they’re free, they can do that. I just hope they have better sense than the hordes of cowardly, smug, morally afloat Europeans that infect the world, but I won’t hold my breath.

What about not breaking things you do not understand, then there is no reason for you to fix them?

Like the Jewish Question? Wouldn’t it be therefore reasonable for you to stop commenting on the problems with Israel, given your country’s way of dealing with the “problem”?

[quote] If I set your house on fire, stirred it into a flaming inferno, extinguished the flames, killed a few family members along the way and then lectured you how much you needed me, your reaction would be?
[/quote]

Well, I would say that if I were a Nazi sympathizer, as your post implies, that maybe you ought to invade me again. That’s the second time you’ve implied that the US should be faulted for saving the world from the Germans and Austrians – the ARMIES OF DARKNESS – sixty years ago.

Fuck you, wholeheartedly.

[ChuckyT]

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
If every soldier followed his example, there would be no Americans getting killed in Iraq. [/quote]

COWARD.

[kaaleppi]

[quote]olderguy wrote:
karva wrote:
olderguy wrote:
1.3bil Muslims and 10 to 15% want to kill all Infidels. Do the math. If you thought Hitler had a master plan, well I think it’s nothing compared to what they have in store for the world.

You give the impression of the islamic world as a coherent whole. If the islamic world is going to stand united under one flag in a march against the corrupted west, they have a long way to go.

I would like to know what your idea is of “a long way to go”. Just watch the video "Obsession, radical Islam. Same central thought process throughout the arab world.

Trust me, I don’t think for a second that the islamic world is a coherent whole, but there is no doubt in my mind that they are united in their thoughts about infidels, Jews, Christians, whatever and march under many flags. I think that anyone that thinks otherwise is foolish. Call me crazy, but whether Sunni or Shia, being Saudi, Syrian, or Iranian, they want us dead. Plenty of factions, plenty of flags. Period. Plenty of sympathizers from plenty of rich familys, sects, whatever.
[/quote]

From terrorist attacks to attacking troops on western borders, there is a long way to go. You mentioned Hitler and his master plan.

[orion]

ChuckyT,

your total ignorance concerning my country, except fo our part of WWII, is astounding.

And yes, I am arguing that WWI was basically a draw even with the US help.

I`d say that peace would have come sooner without the US and that the peace initiatives of both emperors and the peace afterwards might have prevented the republican revolutions.

I am also arguing that a strong military aristocracy would have been a strong opponent for a fascist party, in part because they played to the same audience.

I also believe that Austria-Hungaria, as a basically German nation, BUT an overwhelming non-German majority would not have been eager to wage war on behalf of the arian race.

Now I do not know what would have happened, had the US not intervened, and neither do you.

I do know however that the US had a part in creating a clusterfuck they helped “fix” later on, which seems to be an ongoing theme in US foreign politics.

PS: as to Austrias passive approach to world affairs.

Feel free to google the Prague spring, the uprising in Hungaria, the war in former Yugoslawia, Austia`s role in all of them and, for a quick encore, find out where the four UN cities are and where the OPEC headquarter is.

[olderguy]

[quote]karva wrote:
olderguy wrote:
karva wrote:
olderguy wrote:
1.3bil Muslims and 10 to 15% want to kill all Infidels. Do the math. If you thought Hitler had a master plan, well I think it’s nothing compared to what they have in store for the world.

You give the impression of the islamic world as a coherent whole. If the islamic world is going to stand united under one flag in a march against the corrupted west, they have a long way to go.

I would like to know what your idea is of “a long way to go”. Just watch the video "Obsession, radical Islam. Same central thought process throughout the arab world.

Trust me, I don’t think for a second that the islamic world is a coherent whole, but there is no doubt in my mind that they are united in their thoughts about infidels, Jews, Christians, whatever and march under many flags. I think that anyone that thinks otherwise is foolish. Call me crazy, but whether Sunni or Shia, being Saudi, Syrian, or Iranian, they want us dead. Plenty of factions, plenty of flags. Period. Plenty of sympathizers from plenty of rich familys, sects, whatever.

From terrorist attacks to attacking troops on western borders, there is a long way to go. You mentioned Hitler and his master plan. [/quote]

It doesn’t have to be carried out like Hitler did to be a “master plan”. How about infiltration of democratic societies if you will, US, Uk, France to name a few. Trust me, those nations wish they never had a muslim enter their country. Hatred of western ideals is preached in, (let’s get really crazy), 50% of mosques all over the world. Let’s not forget the education they are giving their children on the subject.

All of you have some nerve trashing the “corrupted west”. We should have left you to the Germans, and they eventually would have gotten to you, but soon enough, you will be grovelling to the whims of the muslims. Then again, who wants to go to Finland. Were you the ones that invented “wooden shoes”? Damn. To hold that patent. Enough said.

You get it, you just want to be an ass and nit pic.

[Zap_Branigan]

Nominal Prospect wrote:
If every soldier followed his example, there would be no Americans getting killed in Iraq.

You are right. The targets of the terrorism would be American civilians.

[Wreckless]

[quote]hedo wrote:
orion wrote:
hedo wrote:

Empire building…yeah that’s the US. You really didn’t pay attention in school did you. Open one of those books and read a little history.

You have bases in more than 2/3 of the worlds countries?

Your military spending is probably larger than all the rest of the world`s combined?

You solve inner political problems by destroying other countries, f.E Columbia?

A country that was envisioned as a federation with a rather weak president more and more becomes centralized with the presidency becoming more and more powerful?

If I argued that you weapons industry and your military are gigantic for peacetime purposes and have common interests which leads to allmost constant warfare and the erosion of rights for US citizens who more and more become subjects than free citizens and if I compared all that to Rome before the republic finally fell also in name…

When do you think empire building starts?

Plus, the empire building started in earnest, IMO, with the invasion of the Confederation which did not exactly happen yesterday.

Your a European and an Austrian no less. Your opinion has zero credibility with regard to empire building because of your history.

Why don’t you go an lecture someone who cares about your opinion. Perhaps the Austrians could bully a small african nation…one of the favorite Euro things to do over the years.

By the way I served in one of those bases, in Europe. They weren’t there because the rent was cheap. They were based in countries that were defeated in wartime to protect them from the Soviets. Remember that little empire. The ones that made the Europeans piss their pants for 45 years. We should have left it to them.

Now we just have to wait a few more years until you are overtaken by your guest workers.

[/quote]

Ah, the mindless Euro-hating and Euro-bashing. Why don’t you bring anything more substantial to the table. With just a pinch of racism thrown in for good measure.

[ssn0]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Nominal Prospect wrote:
If every soldier followed his example, there would be no Americans getting killed in Iraq.

You are right. The targets of the terrorism would be American civilians.[/quote]

Targets of the Americans would be Terrorist Civilians.

[bigflamer]

[quote]olderguy wrote:
I assume you’re a fireman and it amazes me that you think that this coward has integrity.[/quote]

First, I’ll get you up to speed on integrity.

[i]integrity

Pronunciation: in-'te-gr&-tE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English integrite, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French integrit?, from Latin integritat-, integritas, from integr-, integer entire
1 : firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : INCORRUPTIBILITY
2 : an unimpaired condition : SOUNDNESS
3 : the quality or state of being complete or undivided : COMPLETENESS
synonym see HONESTY[/i]

Now, I understand that you disagree with this guy about his decision to not deploy with his unit, but to say that he’s not being true to his values is incorrect. Get this;

Integrity is not giving up on your beliefs and submitting your will to the popular opinion.

Integrity is doing what HE, not crusty old fucks like yourself, believe to be the right thing.

Integrity is making this decision at a time that does not put the personnel underneath him in danger. This wasn’t a battlefield desertion, it was a premeditated legal decision.

Integrity is making this decision in the face of intense public scrutiny, knowing full well that he will be called a coward by those who are so blinded by their own belief system that they cannot accept a military man who has enough integrity and courage to stand up for his belief system

Integrity is doing the right thing at the right time.

At what point do you not go into a building that your fellow firemen are in?

When the incident commander running the scene of the Worcester six fire had to make the decision to not send anymore men into the building on fire, he said that it was the most difficult decision he ever had to make. He made that decision knowing in his heart that it was the right thing to do, he made that decision in the face of screaming firefighters on scene calling him a coward. Firefighters who later admitted that they were wrong.

That was integrity, that was doing what was right even if it was intensely unpopular.

Your analogy is incredibly misguided in that this guy made his decision at a juncture which didn’t put personnel in danger. As I said before, this wasn’t a battlefield desertion when the shit was hitting the fan. It was a decision that he made in advance of a dynamic situation

If I’m on the scene of a structure fire and assigned as a RIT officer, and know that the scene has developed into a state that NO human lives could have survived the conditions inside the structure, then the right thing to do would be to not go into the building, no matter what my chief orders. If I know it’s not the right thing to do, then personal integrity demands that I do not do it.

Would you rather have this guy on the battlefield? Think about it.

You’re a disgrace to your uniform…You’re a coward as he is.

At this point, my personal integrity demands that I tell you to go fuck yourself. But hey, if it makes you feel better, I’ll be a coward in olderguy’s world. I have nothing to prove to you that’s for sure.

[quote]Let’s hope that the police don’t start thinking that a call might be a problem or have overtones that might not be PC. If so, I guess it will be OK to “sit this call out”.

I was in the USMC in 1970 so I have a little credibility. I know for a fact that I couldn’t live with myself if I were to have gone to Canada after deciding I didn’t believe in the decisions of the policy makers in mid stream. And who’s to say this guy just wasn’t flat out afraid to go?[/quote]
[/quote]

Your retarded diatribe is beginning to bore me. You sound like some senile old fuck wandering around his trailer park with an open can of Coors calling anyone with an opinion not in line with his a communist.

Stick around olderguy, arguing with you makes me look REALLY smart.

[bigflamer]

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Integrity? WFT?[/quote]

Yup, integrity. See my response to olderguy.

When you sign up for military duty you should know you have a good chance of going to war and you don’t get to choose which war you want to fight in. This is not a draft. He was a dumb-ass to sign up and should probably be discharged due to stupidity.

I already stated that I think he deserves a dishonorable discharge. Did you not read my original post? WTF?

[hedo]

[quote]orion wrote:
hedo wrote:

As to the fate of Europe. Without the US fixing your problems for you and then protecting you from outside agression, Europe would have continued it’s slide into self destruction or been taken over by the Soviets.

That actually made me laugh,thank you.

You do realize that without the US WWI intervention we might not have needed poblem fixing nor would there have been a strong SU, a fascist Germany, i.E. problems to fix?

Will you tell the same to some Middle Easterners when you fix their problems down the road, that were caused by your “liberation” of Iraq?

What about not breaking things you do not understand, then there is no reason for you to fix them?

If I set your house on fire, stirred it into a flaming inferno, extinguished the flames, killed a few family members along the way and then lectured you how much you needed me, your reaction would be?

PS: European, cosmopolitan dandy? How do you know I am not a brick layer in Iowa?

This is the Internet, after all.[/quote]

Brick layers have common sense, especially those that work in the Midwest…that’s how. And if they were of European heritage they wouldn’t resent the help they were given in the past.

You are a perfect example of the common thought of an average European. No wonder we are kicking Western Europe to the curb.

[olderguy]

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
olderguy wrote:
I assume you’re a fireman and it amazes me that you think that this coward has integrity.

First, I’ll get you up to speed on integrity.

[i]integrity

Pronunciation: in-'te-gr&-tE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English integrite, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French integrit?, from Latin integritat-, integritas, from integr-, integer entire
1 : firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : INCORRUPTIBILITY
2 : an unimpaired condition : SOUNDNESS
3 : the quality or state of being complete or undivided : COMPLETENESS
synonym see HONESTY[/i]

Now, I understand that you disagree with this guy about his decision to not deploy with his unit, but to say that he’s not being true to his values is incorrect. Get this;

Integrity is not giving up on your beliefs and submitting your will to the popular opinion.

Integrity is doing what HE, not crusty old fucks like yourself, believe to be the right thing.

Integrity is making this decision at a time that does not put the personnel underneath him in danger. This wasn’t a battlefield desertion, it was a premeditated legal decision.

Integrity is making this decision in the face of intense public scrutiny, knowing full well that he will be called a coward by those who are so blinded by their own belief system that they cannot accept a military man who has enough integrity and courage to stand up for his belief system

Integrity is doing the right thing at the right time.

At what point do you not go into a building that your fellow firemen are in?

When the incident commander running the scene of the Worcester six fire had to make the decision to not send anymore men into the building on fire, he said that it was the most difficult decision he ever had to make. He made that decision knowing in his heart that it was the right thing to do, he made that decision in the face of screaming firefighters on scene calling him a coward. Firefighters who later admitted that they were wrong.

That was integrity, that was doing what was right even if it was intensely unpopular.

Your analogy is incredibly misguided in that this guy made his decision at a juncture which didn’t put personnel in danger. As I said before, this wasn’t a battlefield desertion when the shit was hitting the fan. It was a decision that he made in advance of a dynamic situation

If I’m on the scene of a structure fire and assigned as a RIT officer, and know that the scene has developed into a state that NO human lives could have survived the conditions inside the structure, then the right thing to do would be to not go into the building, no matter what my chief orders. If I know it’s not the right thing to do, then personal integrity demands that I do not do it.

Would you rather have this guy on the battlefield? Think about it.

You’re a disgrace to your uniform…You’re a coward as he is.

At this point, my personal integrity demands that I tell you to go fuck yourself. But hey, if it makes you feel better, I’ll be a coward in olderguy’s world. I have nothing to prove to you that’s for sure.

Let’s hope that the police don’t start thinking that a call might be a problem or have overtones that might not be PC. If so, I guess it will be OK to “sit this call out”.

I was in the USMC in 1970 so I have a little credibility. I know for a fact that I couldn’t live with myself if I were to have gone to Canada after deciding I didn’t believe in the decisions of the policy makers in mid stream. And who’s to say this guy just wasn’t flat out afraid to go?

Your retarded diatribe is beginning to bore me. You sound like some senile old fuck wandering around his trailer park with an open can of Coors calling anyone with an opinion not in line with his a communist.

Stick around olderguy, arguing with you makes me look REALLY smart.
[/quote]

Thanks for the enlightening post.

I can’t answer all of that stupid shit you posted, but I’ll give my opinion on a couple of things.

Your #1 definition was “firm adherence to a code of especially moral values”.

If you had half a brain, you would have looked at that and said, “hey ya know, he wasn’t exactly a Quaker”.

Let’s not put this guy in a class with Ali, who was a conscientious objector from the get go. This guy joined to fight arabs. He was willing to kill people if they were making WMD but not if they supported terrorists that flew planes on 9/11. Forget about the fact that he enlisted, (when many draftees died in other wars), left his unit to go off and fight, and disobeyed orders. And shouldn’t those firefighters in Mass who were calling their incident commander a coward just go into the building anyway?

According to your definition of integrity, they should have done what they thought was right and not what that crusty old fuck of an incident commander thought. High moral values.

One last thing on the subject, do we know this guy wasn’t just flat out scared to death? I’m sure given the choice, some would rather go to jail than back to battle. He very well might be one of them.

This guy gets to much credit. Look at your #2 and #3 definitions. Come on.

I apologize for the remark I made about you being a coward. I’m sure I wouldn’t make it to your face. We’re all entitled to our opinions even if you are wrong.

[Zeppelin795]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
…

I think his refusal to deploy is the right thing to do based on moral law. If he believes the war is truly unjust he has the moral obligation to refuse to go.

What is immoral about fighting terrorists in Iraq?

The whole thing is ludicrous. He thinks deposing Saddam was morally incorrect. Fine. That is done. He is not going there to depose Saddam.

He is going there to try to protect civilians from car bombs in markets.

It is kind of too late to protest the invasion. It takes a special kind of stupid to think that he can unring that bell.[/quote]

What is moral about killing many innocent people?

What is immoral about refusing to fight a war that he believes is based on lies(WMD’s,9/11 connection, spreading democacy)?