State Department diplomats drafted for duty in Iraq

[Thomas Veil]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Calling it "a potential death sentence," several hundred diplomats expressed their resentment Wednesday over a new State Department policy that could force them to serve in Iraq or risk losing their jobs.

Some at the hourlong town hall-style meeting questioned why they were not told of the policy change directly, learning about it instead from news organizations last week.

Others pointed out the risks of such a rule, considering the dangers of a war zone, lack of security and regular rocket attacks on U.S. personnel.

One State Department worker complained she was not provided medical treatment for her post-traumatic stress disorder after she voluntarily served in Iraq.

The session was marked by angry exchanges, according to an audio recording of the meeting held at the State Department.

The sharpest comments came from Jack Croddy, a 36-year veteran of the Foreign Service.

To loud applause from his fellow workers, he asked how the State Department could protect people in Baghdad or the Iraq countryside when "incoming is coming in every day. Rockets are hitting the Green Zone."

"It is one thing if someone believes in what is going on over there and volunteers," he said, "but it is another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment. And I'm sorry, but basically that is a potential death sentence and you know it. Who will raise our children if we are dead or wounded?"CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/31/state.department.iraq/index.html)

Oh, Lord. Is there nothing this administration does that makes any sense?

[solvs]

This is going to go over just about as well as anything else the administration has tried to do.

Which is to say, not very well.

[Swarmlord]

Diplomats actually expected to go work where they are needed? What a concept.

[leekohler]

Too bad the state department wasn't screaming louder when all those other people were sent to Iraq.

[skunk]

Diplomats actually expected to go work where they are needed? What a concept.Don't be ridiculous. There is no reason on earth that diplomats - or anyone else bar the military - should expect to be sent to a war zone. After all, war is supposed to be the continuing of diplomacy by other means. They aren't supposed to be concurrent.

[mactastic]

Diplomats actually expected to go work where they are needed? What a concept.
And pharmacists actually expected to dispense the medicines doctors have determined the patient needs? What a concept.

[Swarmlord]

And pharmacists actually expected to dispense the medicines doctors have determined the patient needs? What a concept.

You get off your meds for a moment there? :confused:

[mactastic]

You get off your meds for a moment there? :confused:

Not at all. It's just amusing watching people who support the right of an employee to not do a part of their job that they find objectionable suddenly decide that it's not acceptable for an employee to not do a part of their job that they find objectionable.

But hey, thanks for the insinuation that I'm insane. Well done.

[solvs]

They should say they'll go as soon as the entire Bush administration and their cronies can go there, and stay there, without making "surprise" visits. This is more than just doing their jobs, it's pretty much the definition of above and beyond. And very likely, as they said, a death sentence. Since we've been throwing diplomacy out the window since day one, it seems even more ridiculous.

But yeah, I'm also wondering where they were when it was others being sent there.

[mactastic]

No wonder BushCo doesn't want to resurrect the military draft...

[Dont Hurt Me]

Too bad the state department wasn't screaming louder when all those other people were sent to Iraq.Bingo, its OK as long as someone else is getting killed for some draft dodgers policy.

[solvs]

Maybe all of those calling for the diplomats to be forced to go, should go there themselves. Put their money where their mouths are. Won't happen of course. But it's an idea that should be asked of everyone who insists they should be made to go. Here's the oath they have to take BTW:

I, [state your name.] do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. That I take this obligation freely and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. That I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me, God.