Thursday, September 5, 2013

I'M WITH THIS GUY

7 comments:

  1. Agreed. We DO NOT ALLOW our soldiers to pick-and-choose which orders they'll obey. I understand the sentiment, but still...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Somebody promote this kid - PRONTO

    ReplyDelete
  3. So.... If ordered to fire on un-armed civilians he should do so and say "I'm just following orders"?

    At SOME point people have to refuse orders. I'm not saying we have reached that point at this time. But you tell me. WHERE do/would you draw the line?

    Note: I'm not military and never have been so I don't have the "field experience" you and HE have, but still I expect that at some point you have to draw the line.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree, but I hate to be the Wessel in the bunch. Isn't the Army Commendation Medal higher in precedence then the Army Achievement Medal? Or is that not an AAM on top?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Its to serve the people not some company that wants to build a pipeline thru Syria...That's why this country is so f*cked up...Then we wonder if the military will fire on us...This proves they would...

    ReplyDelete
  6. An obsequious little turd . when he's ordered to delete those who oppose the fascist regime in washington . I suppose he will "get the fucking job done"

    ReplyDelete
  7. Each who took the Oath and serves (or has served) have the moral and lawful duty under the Constitution and the UCMJ to respectfully refuse to obey unlawful orders. Unlawful orders may be, in fact, 'legal,' as they are given by a superior, but if they violate the Supreme Law of the Land, are unlawful. Save for a formal declaration of war by the Congress of the United States in joint session, any order by the president to attack a country, even for a demonstration, is unlawful.

    Each man or woman, enlisted or commissioned, bears the individual responsibility to determine which orders are lawful, and which must be disobeyed.

    Period.

    Each must also remember, as pointed out in the Nuremburg trials that blind obedience to orders violates a duty to a 'higher authority' than the CINC, Chief of Staff, or any officer under their guidance.

    Anyone remember Lt. Calley?

    P.S. Retired from active service and have knowledge of what constitutes lawful orders v. unlawful/illegal orders.

    ReplyDelete