It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Military News/Veterans => Topic started by: S0N_of_trapeze on October 16, 2013, 04:09:15 AM
-
Many of you I am sure have read the Oath of Enlistment that many thousands of soldiers have taken. For those of you who would like a refresher, click here http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/oaths.html. (http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/oaths.html.)
Within the Oath, I promise to uphold the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic but I also promise to follow the orders of the president. What can I do, as a modern day soldier, when it is fully realized that what my CiC is doing and ordering is unconstitutional and is, in fact, attacking the Constitution? The way that the current military is run, it has stepped away from tradition and values and moved more towards following orders without question. If you question what comes down the chain, you are labeled and cast out of the "click" or good soldiers. do so again, you may even face punishment under UCMJ. With this in mind, lend me your perspective on how I can continue to uphold what I swore three years ago without needlessing throwing away the chance at a good career. In my opinion, a good example of potentially mistaken would be some of the recent wikileaks major breakers. I understand that they had their own motives, but you have to admit that they more than likely have access to information that would be deemed unconstitutional. what could they have done? what if they had been right to do so? now those people will never see the light of day but could the leak have been worth it if it had included the right info? May seem like useless dribble but if we dont occassionally deal in "what if's" we can never be truly prepared.
PS- I know it has been quite a while since I have posted here and I am amazed at how this community has grown. I hope to become more active here as this is a great place of education into the current state of our way of life. No matter how much time i spend reading here, I always come away smarter than when I entered. Thank you all for what you do.
-
Glad to see you. Thank you for what you do.
::USA::
With this in mind, lend me your perspective on how I can continue to uphold what I swore three years ago without needlessing throwing away the chance at a good career.
I'm sorry, Son, you can't. You'll eventually be compromised -- that's your principles -- or be drummed out .. or, worse, prosecuted.
-
Nice to hear from you SoT!
You are indeed in a pickle, not so long ago the questioning of orders was not just tolerated it was expected, and leaders had to adapt by giving their charges as much information as they could without prematurely disclosing details best kept compartmentalized. And the oath that each soldier, sailor, airman and marine took never used to mention POTUS, that is a relatively modern adaptation. But even still one could make an argument that the order within the current oath (the Constitution being first!) indicates where the Founders always wanted the emphasis to be - to the nation and the people within it that created the Republic in the first place. That the POTUS is CinC of the Armed Forces is obvious and legitimate, but the concept of and morals and ethics pertaining to what constitutes a "lawful order" from anyone in the chain of command has been omitted (intentionally IMO) from the training of officers and enlisted personnel. Anyone familiar with my posts on this forum know I am not liking any of the changes being imposed upon our service members, and it is more than social experimentation, it is a concerted effort to transform the services into absolute tools of the state. Part of this insidious effort counts upon those opposed to its principles in voluntarily exiting the ranks, thus speeding the transformation. But one is a true liberty-loving patriot to do? Must I impose my wishes upon them to remain in service and fight the PTBs and resist this effort? How can I do that in good conscience when senior leadership in all of the branches is not resisting this? Sadly, it is my belief that this transformation is rapidly moving toward the point-of-no-return, it may be there already, so while I am hopefull that enough liberty-loving patriots stay in service if for no other reason than to make it as hard as possible on those willing to execute horrific orders against the people of this nation should any leader issue such orders, I cannot ask them to do this against their will. And those who leave service are more than welcome in our civilian ranks...their skills will be required to protect life and liberty wherever they may be.
Good luck son, may God Bless and watch over you.
-
As I recall, one need not obey an illegal order. An order to overthrow the Constitution, break existing laws, or to stomp on citizens' rights to speak freely/and or demonstrate seem to me to be illegal orders.
-
SoT, glad to see you! I'm interested in your perspective/insight.
-
As I recall, one need not obey an illegal order. An order to overthrow the Constitution, break existing laws, or to stomp on citizens' rights to speak freely/and or demonstrate seem to me to be illegal orders.
They don't emphasize that anymore...SoT can correct me if I am wrong, but the general belief is if the CinC says go here and stomp, you go there and stomp.
-
Just because it's not emphasized doesn't mean it's no longer in effect.
SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment.
The US Coast Guard is the only military service not subject to this Act, since it's not assigned to the DOD and it's main role is law enforcement within the United States.
http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm (http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm)
-
Understood.
But I would make three points:
1) There was some discussion not long ago about removing that section from the UCMJ, since that requires an act of Congress it has not happened...yet. Chances are with the GOP imploding and no single viable thrid party strong enough to fend off the progressives currenty exists...the prospects for large progressive majorities seems bright so this could fall pretty quickly.
2) Most military organizations institutionalize their core beliefs through repetition and practice, since the regimented top-down structure is most conducive to this end the lack of emphasis on Sec.15 isn't exactly an immaterial concern for one to have.
3) Even if Sec.15 stays in place...who will be around to enforce its provisions if it is violated? Certainly it is my hope and desire that there are some in service who would point out and fight unlawful orders...but the sad reality may be that those brave people are a rapidly shrinking population.
How many serving are familiar with "Befehl ist Befehl"?
-
Understood.
But I would make three points:
1) There was some discussion not long ago about removing that section from the UCMJ, since that requires an act of Congress it has not happened...yet. Chances are with the GOP imploding and no single viable thrid party strong enough to fend off the progressives currenty exists...the prospects for large progressive majorities seems bright so this could fall pretty quickly.
2) Most military organizations institutionalize their core beliefs through repetition and practice, since the regimented top-down structure is most conducive to this end the lack of emphasis on Sec.15 isn't exactly an immaterial concern for one to have.
3) Even if Sec.15 stays in place...who will be around to enforce its provisions if it is violated? Certainly it is my hope and desire that there are some in service who would point out and fight unlawful orders...but the sad reality may be that those brave people are a rapidly shrinking population.
How many serving are familiar with "Befehl ist Befehl"?
Even if Sec 15 remains in place I am willing to bet that a number of the younger officers, NCOs and troops would follow orders to act against US citizens here at home. All it would take is a small number of strategically placed senior officers willing to violate regulations and the UCMJ and issue the orders to move. First though law enforcement would have to provide the excuse to invoke martial law, perhaps by setting up and triggering an event that could be labled a "general insurrection" and then we go to General Quarters. I think Holder is up to the task.
-
Understood.
But I would make three points:
1) There was some discussion not long ago about removing that section from the UCMJ, since that requires an act of Congress it has not happened...yet. Chances are with the GOP imploding and no single viable thrid party strong enough to fend off the progressives currenty exists...the prospects for large progressive majorities seems bright so this could fall pretty quickly.
2) Most military organizations institutionalize their core beliefs through repetition and practice, since the regimented top-down structure is most conducive to this end the lack of emphasis on Sec.15 isn't exactly an immaterial concern for one to have.
3) Even if Sec.15 stays in place...who will be around to enforce its provisions if it is violated? Certainly it is my hope and desire that there are some in service who would point out and fight unlawful orders...but the sad reality may be that those brave people are a rapidly shrinking population.
How many serving are familiar with "Befehl ist Befehl"?
Even if Sec 15 remains in place I am willing to bet that a number of the younger officers, NCOs and troops would follow orders to act against US citizens here at home. All it would take is a small number of strategically placed senior officers willing to violate regulations and the UCMJ and issue the orders to move. First though law enforcement would have to provide the excuse to invoke martial law, perhaps by setting up and triggering an event that could be labled a "general insurrection" and then we go to General Quarters. I think Holder is up to the task.
With the so-called opposition party in full capitulation mode, I am afraid this scenario is all too plausible.
-
This an area I don't know anything about. But my experience has been that there are very few people to trust. People I thought would go to the end of the world with me got off at the next bus stop. I know there are good people in the service (like my nephew) but you're talking about people who are the product of public schooling and parents who are self-absorbed and higher-ups who have been given license to pursue their own self-interests.