Fifty active duty officers to deliver Iraq pullout petition to Congress

[danarhea]

50 active duty military officers are about to personally hand deliver a petition signed by more than a thousand servicemen to Congress, demanding that we pull out of Iraq. So here is the dilemma - On one hand, those officers are committing insubordination by doing so, and on the other hand, they have also taken an oath to protect the Constitution from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. So what is your take on this? Should those officers be court martialed or praised?

Article is here.

 

[oldreliable67]

50 active duty military officers are about to personally hand deliver a petition signed by more than a thousand servicemen to Congress, demanding that we pull out of Iraq. So here is the dilemma - On one hand, those officers are committing insubordination by doing so, and on the other hand, they have also taken an oath to protect the Constitution from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. So what is your take on this? Should those officers be court martialed or praised?

Article is here.

Hmmm, what makes you think these officers are being insurbodinate? Since you are not and IIRC, have never been military, do you know what the UCMJ defines as insubordination?

For your convenience, here are some links to help you out:

Guidelines for Dissent

The "Punitive" Articles

Insubordination

 

[Goobieman]

So, if 50 active duty officers sent a similar 'stay untuil the job was finished' petition to Congress it would have the same moral standing as the petition in question -- right?

 

[Navy Pride]

I see that Dennis Kucinich will be their spokesman in the congress...He was the only one they could get.............

 

[tryreading]

Hmmm, what makes you think these officers are being insurbodinate? Since you are not and IIRC, have never been military, do you know what the UCMJ defines as insubordination?

For your convenience, here are some links to help you out:

Guidelines for Dissent

The "Punitive" Articles

Insubordination

Yes, they are doing something they have every right to do. And they serve to protect our right to do the same. They are doing what they think is right, and I support them. And, I would also support troops that approached Congress with a petition supporting the war in Iraq.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

50 active duty military officers are about to personally hand deliver a petition signed by more than a thousand servicemen to Congress, demanding that we pull out of Iraq. So here is the dilemma - On one hand, those officers are committing insubordination by doing so, and on the other hand, they have also taken an oath to protect the Constitution from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. So what is your take on this? Should those officers be court martialed or praised?

Too bad none of them are Commander-in-Chief.

 

[saggyjones]

Too bad none of them are Commander-in-Chief.

Doesn't that make Bush a dictator of sorts in the military if no one else has any say in how things go?

 

[Gibberish]

I see that Dennis Kucinich will be their spokesman in the congress...He was the only one they could get.............

I can't seem to find the part of the article that said Kucinich was the last and only choice.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Doesn't that make Bush a dictator of sorts in the military if no one else has any say in how things go?

Nope. It makes his the President of the United States.

 

[saggyjones]

Nope. It makes his the President of the United States.

Of course it does, but he can have more than one title or adjective describing him. I never really thought about it but the president is a dictator when it comes to the military. I guess congress can cut off funding, but still he gets to do whatever he wants. Not that that's a bad thing because a voting system within the military would make our troops extremely slow and we can't afford that.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

I never really thought about it but the president is a dictator when it comes to the military.

Study harder.

FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Article II: Annotations pg. 7 of 18

 

[saggyjones]

Study harder.

FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Article II: Annotations pg. 7 of 18

See the last post on the 1st page.

Also, I obviously didn't study this subject, so how can I study harder?

 

[jujuman13]

Quote
(Doesn't that make Bush a dictator of sorts in the military if no one else has any say in how things go?)

That argument is a fatuous one, what you are in effect trying to say is that every military decision be decided by committee, clearly that would be ridiculous, which is why the Military have ranks, each subordinate rank obeys the order's of the next rank in seneority, and lo and behold the President of the United States holds the TOP RANK in the Military, being the Commander In Chief.

 

[saggyjones]

Quote
(Doesn't that make Bush a dictator of sorts in the military if no one else has any say in how things go?)

That argument is a fatuous one, what you are in effect trying to say is that every military decision be decided by committee, clearly that would be ridiculous, which is why the Military have ranks, each subordinate rank obeys the order's of the next rank in seneority, and lo and behold the President of the United States holds the TOP RANK in the Military, being the Commander In Chief.

Actually that's not at all what I was saying, as shown by my other post. I don't expect you to read that one since it's on the bottom of the first page so I'll post it again:

"I never really thought about it but the president is a dictator when it comes to the military. I guess congress can cut off funding, but still he gets to do whatever he wants. Not that that's a bad thing because a voting system within the military would make our troops extremely slow and we can't afford that."

 

[rathi]

This is what soldiers are allowed to do. They can certainly recommend that bush leave Iraq. They can also protest when asked to follow orders they feel are wrong. However, regardless of what they feel, they will still carry out whatever orders are given.

 

[danarhea]

This is what soldiers are allowed to do. They can certainly recommend that bush leave Iraq. They can also protest when asked to follow orders they feel are wrong. However, regardless of what they feel, they will still carry out whatever orders are given.

That pertains to enlisted men. Officers are not allowed to question their superiors except to someone higher on the chain of command.

 

[Goobieman]

Of course it does, but he can have more than one title or adjective describing him. I never really thought about it but the president is a dictator when it comes to the military. I guess congress can cut off funding, but still he gets to do whatever he wants. Not that that's a bad thing because a voting system within the military would make our troops extremely slow and we can't afford that.

The powers of the CinC were intentionally made broad and concentrated into a single individual because of the Founders experience in the Revolution as well as the problems they had under the Articles of Confederation.

Congress declares war and controls the funding - but the CinC issues the orders.

 

[saggyjones]

The powers of the CinC were intentionally made broad and concentrated into a single individual because of the Founders experience in the Revolution as well as the problems they had under the Articles of Confederation.

Congress declares war and controls the funding - but the CinC issues the orders.

I know that, and I thought my post showed that, but thanks for your post (<-- not sarcastic). I was saying that the President is a sort of dictator in the military, which isn't a bad thing, because a voting system or something would take way too long for something that needs to be able to be roused quickly.