Thoughts on Matthis Chiroux
It kills me when I read about people like Matthis Chiroux, an Auburn kid who joined the Army and deployed around the world for four years before refusing orders to Iraq. For a lot of people, he’s a hero for this. I actually don’t fault him for not going to Iraq. I’ll get to that in a minute because a lot of things about Mr. Chiroux annoy me.
First, his anti-military thing is a little curious.
Once in the Army, he said he was taught how to punch someone in a way that it would kill that person and how to stab someone to do the same. “I was taught how to kill people like everyone else,” he said.
The Army taught you how to kill people? Someone call the media! This isn’t the Boy Scouts, kid. Professional armies kill people. It’s basically murder and movement by threat of murder that is sanctioned by Congress and the President. It’s not pretty, but I assume you knew what the US Army did when you signed up.
On his blog, he also comments about the racism, sexism, and homophobia in the military. I’ll admit from my anecdotal experience that these things can sometimes be a problem – particularly the male chauvinism and homophobia. I don’t, however, think that these are just military issues. It’s a bunch of mostly-young men. They have freedom and they think that they’re all movie star badasses.
Two things bother me about these claims. First of all, Mr. Chiroux was an NCO – a sergeant. If you witness inappropriate behavior, you correct it. If you’re unable or unwilling, charge the individual. I’ve charged people for constantly showing up late to muster, and you can be damn sure I would have charged them for inappropriate behavior toward a female or “dark green” Marine or civilian. The other issue I have is that Mr. Chiroux is an adult. I constantly got hell for not being a homophobe – I was even called names. Years later in a civilian, professional desk job, I still get hell for it. But I’m a grown-up.
So Mr. Chiroux refused orders to go to Iraq, citing moral objection, and was discharged. He currently appears to spend his time speaking against the war in Iraq. I’m okay with that, actually. Doesn’t bug me at all. He has a strong moral obligation against the war and if he’s willing to risk court martial and all that, he probably means it.
The only part of this that bugs me is that he’s a wartime deserter. He shouldn’t get an honorable discharge and keep his GI Bill benefits, yet he has an honorable discharge and maintains his GI Bill benefits. I’m really okay with the military letting him go, but shouldn’t they at least slap him on the wrist with something as weak as a general discharge?
Print This Post
I read that same article this morning and had eerily similar thoughts. I was shocked, just shocked to learn that the military trains people to kill. Good thing our adversaries don’t train their armies to do the same.
The honorable discharge is perplexing. I didn’t think qualms with the mission was grounds for an honorable discharge.
He had to either be incredibly naive when he enlisted or he had an ulterior motive.
Dan, I can tell by your writing that you served in the Corps. Semper Fi. I didn’t sense a lot of homophobia or racism when I served, but as an officer I didn’t usually see the younger Marines relaxed in their “native” habitat where that type of behavior would occur. It certainly didn’t occur at work. If it did then any officer or SNCO I know would have squashed it in a heartbeat.
No offense, but (again, my anecdotal experience in the USMC) officers are very far removed from non-rates and junior NCOs when it comes to matters of conduct. If an officer had to get involved with an issue of conduct, it was usually because someone died, got a DUI, or was himself the victim of an assault. The atmosphere changes dramatically when even a lieutenant enters the room. For a staff officer, we were practically at attention the entire time.
But I was in air traffic control. We seemed to have a ratio of about 40 Marines per officer. NCOs ran the show as tower supervisors, radar supervisors, and crew chiefs. The OIC was some dude that sat in an office and knew almost nothing about what we did. So maybe it was different for me.
I have a problem with this kid signing up with the US military when he did knowing his likelihood of deployment and then crying foul when he received his orders. At the very least, if the military is going to allow him out it should have been a dishonorable discharge. We would then see how serious his moral obligation is/was. That kind of discharge on your permanent record pretty much sets the tone for your career in the bottom-tier of the services industry or some liberal organization worker.
Dishonorable discharge should be the absolute minimum.
Unacceptable that he keeps his benefits.
Not exactly on the main subject here, but what I have a problem with is the continued use of the term “homophobic” as if it were a legit description and not outright propaganda. There are many legitimate and illegitimate reasons why someone might be opposed to homosexuality, and there are many reasons why a person might mock homosexuals, but virtually none of these have a thing in the world to do with any kind of “irrational fear” (phobia), certainly not of the clinical variety suggested by the terminology. Actually, the term doesn’t make any sense at all: It literally means “irrational fear of uniformity.” Huh?
But, say its defenders, opposition to homosexuality stems from a person’s irrational fear that they themselves may be gay. Bullcrap. Not unless your opposition to bestiality reveals that you secretly have the hots for your retriever.
Time to retire this shopworn verbiage and at least employ a term that is more accurate.
I dunno about the dishonorable discharge. That’s easy to say in a fit of self righteousness, but that’s a serious deal. I mean, it’s like treason. It’s actually a sentence – it can only be handed down by a General Court-Martial and typically only happens for premeditated murder, sexual assault, or giving aide to the enemy. And even then mitigating circumstances can easily nullify the discharge.
There have been 40.000 desertions since 2000. I don’t think they all deserve the stigma of a dishonorable discharge. From all accounts, Mr. Chiroux has been cooperative with the Army except that he refuses to return to duty and go to Iraq. I’m not saying he deserves an honorable discharge, but the dishonorable is a bit much if we’re talking about the real world here.
A Bad Conduct or Other Than Honorable discharge makes the most sense, but a General Discharge is the very minimum. There’s no way an Honorable Discharge should be applied here.
Desertion in a time of war? That seems like it would be the perfect example of a place where the a dishonorable would apply.
He gets his benefits? That’s insane.
Who joins the Army to be a “journalist”? This guy ain’t the sharpest knife in the drawer.
BTW, Ben, you’re 100% correct.
Well, how about Private Joker? Who is based upon the real life Dale Dye?
And I myself am in the process of “reclassing” to 46R. However, I have done my time. 10 years Marine Infantry (0311), then after 14 years as a civilian joining the Army as a PATRIOT missileman. Finishing my 4th deployment, and 45 years old, I think I deserve an “easy job’ to finish up my career.
But I have no sympathy and nothing but scorn for this fool. A disgrace to the NCO corps, he spent all of his time in cushy jobs, never deploying to a war zone. And by his own admission a drug dealer that joined the service as a way to get the charges dropped. A man that in his own blog site admits to so many crimes that he should be doing time if even 10% of them are true.
Johnny Reb,
In answer to your question: Al Gore was an army journalist.
HEY. I joined the reserves after my active duty time as a Broadcast Journalist.
Oops. I just made your point.
Matthis’ father has finally weighed in. http://www.oanow.com/oan I think he is local to you guys in Huntsville. Sounds fed up.
Thanks for the tip.
Here is the comment purportedly from Chiroux’s father:
Posted by ( rchiroux ) on July 06, 2009 at 2:44 pm
I was appalled when I read this article. Matthis is a professed atheist. Speaking at a church and potentially recieving financial support from it is galling. For Matthis to brush off his youth as “… run-ins with the law…“ vastly understates his pre-19 behavior, right there in Auburn. Matthis chose to join the army at the Lee County Justice Center in the presence of his probation officer, myself and the army recruiter I invited along. I was his custodial parent and I had had enough and my son knew it. Matthis spent his entire five year enlistment in Tokyo and Heidelberg with a one week trip to Afghanistan, Palawan and other brief forays as an army journalist. To my knowledge he was at risk for no more than a fortnight during his entire enlistment. His public anti-war activities began after he was recalled to active service specifically for deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom. As it is not for me to judge his reasons for resisting being sent in harms way I have done my best to be quietly tolerant, patient and supportive. I will tolerate no more. Our family does not stand by Matthis’ actions or comments, we stand by our country, right or wrong.
As for the “Chiroux” name my father served Honorably in the US NAVY, I served Honorably in the US NAVY and my step-son is within a month of completing his Honorable service to the US NAVY. We Chiroux’s have served this country Honorably in every generation we have been Americans. Additionally, although I was 48, I offered some time ago to re-enlist in the the US ARMY specifically to serve in Iraq, both due to my son’s actions and my own Middle Eastern experience. That offer stands. I will serve at the front if my country asks it of me.
Robert C. Chiroux, Ph.D.
Auburn University 2001.
If that’s the Robert Chiroux that I know from Huntsville, he is a true gentleman and a patriot. I guess none of us can control what our children think or do.
My soul bleeds for the thousand cuts of shame and humiliation that my son has brought upon me and my family. Matthis could have been a great man and perhaps that yet may happen. For now I fear he is living on the generous nature of those charmed by his charisma. I have met many of his former friends and girlfriends who have been scorched by his passing and feel a deep sense of sorrow and failure. On his website he as lashed out at me, his army recruiter, the judge that allowed him a chance at redemption in lieu of jail and his step brother who is at this time completing Honorable service to our country. It was I who forced him into the army in hopes he would see his great potential to succeed and add to the strength of our country rather than continue to feed on the kind hearted. All these are innocent and I ask all those from left to right to dismiss the slander my son has slung at them. Our family is a good family that has served our country every generation we have been American and likely will continue to do so. We are deeply hurt by what has been said of the “Chiroux” name. Know that I would serve at the front if my county would again accept my service. Perhaps my son would find the courage to serve with me. My Best, Rob Chiroux
Rob, thanks for stopping by. My children are still far too young for me to have experienced the anguish (is that the right word?) of them making life decisions I disagree with. If they’re as stubborn and antagonistic as I can be then I fear I have that to look forward to.
Here’s a different take on Matthis. It is another reminder of how great our country is. He is allowed to air grievances – just or unjust – about the very government that allows him to do so and the men and women who fight to preserve such freedom. There are other countries that are not so tolerant.
Actually, Matthis received a general discharge under honorable conditions – he’s no longer eligible to continue receiving education benefits. He will, though, because he won’t voluntarily tell the VA that the character of his discharge has been altered. It’s up to us citizens to make a stink about it to our elected officials.
I suspect that this might be the place to start making a stink.
Clearly, many of the authors and commenters here are veterans.
I’m a journalist with a simple question: are the Iraq and Afghanistan wars both illegal under US and international law?
If so, it would appear that a servicemember has an obligation to refuse to obey unlawful orders, or any orders that would make him/her an accomplice to a crime against peace — clearly, the Nuremburg standards show that “I was following orders” is not a sufficient excuse.
If these wars are in fact legal, and I am mistaken, please direct me to the part of US law which you find relevant.
How would any of you, as veterans, advise a soldier who felt he/she was given an order which violated the law?
Mike.Copass at Libertyonemedia dot com
I served with Chiroux. He’s not a bad kid, but I’m convinced this is a “scam” of sorts. He uses the antiwar movement to get out of the scary war, and they use him to make political points.
I’m not saying the war is legal (or that it isn’t for that matter), or that his claims about the morality of the war are a lie. I’m saying his beliefs are irrelevant, because he would have used the same argument no matter what – there’s no way to determine the truth of his convictions. Those claims were a means to an end, because Chiroux was so scared of getting deployed he took the only way out he could find.
Chiroux was always a little more immature than everyone else. It’s not that he’s a bad person, he just has a long way to go before he grows up. And honestly, I don’t think this little stunt is helping things any. He just got away with playing “little boy in trouble” again. I’ll bet you it’s not the last time this scenario is played out. Next he’ll be using PTSD as an excuse for why someone needs to hold his hand and live off the government dole.