I went to the Naval Academy to defend freedom, not to dismantle it (2 Viewers)

[Oozlefinch]

So you are dodging the question which is really a very simple one.

The statement was made that soldiers do not have to follow orders and are even encouraged not to do so.

Do you agree with this or not?

That is absolutely a 100% correct and true statement. Absolutely no member of the military has a duty to "follow orders". In fact, we are absolutely encourage to sometimes directly disobey orders, and failure to do so can get us in trouble.

I am sorry you can not comprehend this.

 

[mike2810]

You don't want the military to follow orders but to make their own decisions?

So a president orders a strike somewhere and you want the military to go, "hold on now, we aren't going to blindly follow that order we are going to have a discussion about it first to make sure it's a good order, we will get back to you Mr. President."

lol

You seem to want a military that follow orders without question even though the order may not be lawful. Would you not want a discussion on the pro and cons of the operation?

So, a President orders the military to take out all anyone who disagrees with his policies, you would want the military to say "Yes, sir, Seal Team 6 will take care of that today"


Removing access to reading material that discusses race, gender, sexual preference is a far cry to questioning a military strike in your example.

 

[VanceMack]

Cute. The leftists that shit themselves over Dr Suess and Huck Finn are concerned about the removal of DEI bullshit and Marxist literature.

 

[Bodecea]

Cute. The leftists that shit themselves over Dr Suess and Huck Finn are concerned about the removal of DEI bullshit and Marxist literature.

Who is Dr Suess? And who is shitting themselves over them? Name names.

 

[Fledermaus]

The question is whether a soldier has to obey a direct order or if they can debate it, not about what happens throughout the chain of command.

If your commander tells you to rush that hill and take it do you have to or can you sit down and discuss it first?

Asked and answered.

See Post #19 for example.

 

[mike2810]

Cute. The leftists that shit themselves over Dr Suess and Huck Finn are concerned about the removal of DEI bullshit and Marxist literature.

Cute. Seems some want the Government to decide what one can read or not read.

Shouldn't one have the right to choose to read or not read a particular book? There are many books I have seen available in libraries or bookstores that I ignored. Had no interest in reading.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Removing access to reading material that discusses race, gender, sexual preference is a far cry to questioning a military strike in your example.

This is where things actually get interesting.

Most of us in uniform had no problem with the "DEI classes". The problem is that it has become absolutely out of control.

Now such classes are not even unique to the military. I had to do the same types of classes in the civilian world. But here is the difference. In the civilian world, I would on average have to take each of them once a year. And I knew I would not have to take it again for yet another year. And if it was an "online" course, I would take it at work. They were paying me to take the class.

In the military, that is just not how it works. Somebody in the Pentagon that actually makes the classes makes some changes, and suddenly the one taken the month before is no longer valid so everybody has to do it all over again. And when you have a unit of 100 people but only 2 computers available to take the online courses, that means that a significant number are going to be forced to take those online classes on their own time outside of working hours.

Back in the 1980s through the early 2000's and 2010s, the "DEI Classes" were not all that big of a deal. Maybe two or three days a year we would take a break from our normal jobs and training to spend a day in a classroom suffering "Death by Power Point". But in around 2011 that started to change.

Just once a year was not enough. Some GS-9 up high in the Pentagon decided that the most recent changes to the Human Trafficking class is so critical that everybody has to take the class all over again. Then some other GS-9 in another part thinks that the class in LGB Sensitivity is not enough, so adds another 30 minutes of lecture so that has to be given all over again. And it was no longer just once a year, those in uniform were having to sit through the damned things pretty much every month.

How many in a civilian job would sit still for that? Imagine having to take 8-16+ hours of classes like that every damned month. Oh, and do another 2-4 hours on your own time every month.

 

[choiceone]

Wow, do you have a really bad idea of how the military is run.

No, I do not expect the military to simply "blindly follow orders". In fact, the military itself does not want their members to blindly follow orders. That is why in the UCMJ there is actually no such requirement.

Feel free to look it up, there is absolutely no requirement in the military to just "follow orders". In fact, we are actually encouraged to not follow them at times. There is a reason Article 92 is written as it is.

I'm old enough to remember US participation in the Vietnam War. If you received an illegal military order, one that violated the Constitution, you were not supposed to carry it out, because you took an oath to defend the Constitution, not your superior officer - and that ultimately included all superior officers, including the Commander in Chief.

Right now, Trump doesn't like that. He wants everyone who works in the administration and military, and in the Republican positions in Congress, to be loyal only to him, and he wants to be able to disobey the Constitution and make other people disobey it if he feels like it.

We somehow have to survive this creepy time.

 

[choiceone]

This is where things actually get interesting.

Most of us in uniform had no problem with the "DEI classes". The problem is that it has become absolutely out of control.

Now such classes are not even unique to the military. I had to do the same types of classes in the civilian world. But here is the difference. In the civilian world, I would on average have to take each of them once a year. And I knew I would not have to take it again for yet another year. And if it was an "online" course, I would take it at work. They were paying me to take the class.

In the military, that is just not how it works. Somebody in the Pentagon that actually makes the classes makes some changes, and suddenly the one taken the month before is no longer valid so everybody has to do it all over again. And when you have a unit of 100 people but only 2 computers available to take the online courses, that means that a significant number are going to be forced to take those online classes on their own time outside of working hours.

Back in the 1980s through the early 2000's and 2010s, the "DEI Classes" were not all that big of a deal. Maybe two or three days a year we would take a break from our normal jobs and training to spend a day in a classroom suffering "Death by Power Point". But in around 2011 that started to change.

Just once a year was not enough. Some GS-9 up high in the Pentagon decided that the most recent changes to the Human Trafficking class is so critical that everybody has to take the class all over again. Then some other GS-9 in another part thinks that the class in LGB Sensitivity is not enough, so adds another 30 minutes of lecture so that has to be given all over again. And it was no longer just once a year, those in uniform were having to sit through the damned things pretty much every month.

How many in a civilian job would sit still for that? Imagine having to take 8-16+ hours of classes like that every damned month. Oh, and do another 2-4 hours on your own time every month.

I may completely agree with you on this and, at the same time, think that banning the DEI books from the library is a disgrace to the US and an insult to the military itself.

 

[Tigerace117]

So the military shouldn't blindly follow orders but they should?

What exactly are you folks trying to say here?

Either they do or they don't.

Gee, military personnel are supposed to reject unlawful orders.

In practice, they pretty much don’t, but military personnel not “blindly following orders” is something that should be encouraged, actually.

 

[mike2810]

This is where things actually get interesting.

Most of us in uniform had no problem with the "DEI classes". The problem is that it has become absolutely out of control.

Now such classes are not even unique to the military. I had to do the same types of classes in the civilian world. But here is the difference. In the civilian world, I would on average have to take each of them once a year. And I knew I would not have to take it again for yet another year. And if it was an "online" course, I would take it at work. They were paying me to take the class.

In the military, that is just not how it works. Somebody in the Pentagon that actually makes the classes makes some changes, and suddenly the one taken the month before is no longer valid so everybody has to do it all over again. And when you have a unit of 100 people but only 2 computers available to take the online courses, that means that a significant number are going to be forced to take those online classes on their own time outside of working hours.

Back in the 1980s through the early 2000's and 2010s, the "DEI Classes" were not all that big of a deal. Maybe two or three days a year we would take a break from our normal jobs and training to spend a day in a classroom suffering "Death by Power Point". But in around 2011 that started to change.

Just once a year was not enough. Some GS-9 up high in the Pentagon decided that the most recent changes to the Human Trafficking class is so critical that everybody has to take the class all over again. Then some other GS-9 in another part thinks that the class in LGB Sensitivity is not enough, so adds another 30 minutes of lecture so that has to be given all over again. And it was no longer just once a year, those in uniform were having to sit through the damned things pretty much every month.

How many in a civilian job would sit still for that? Imagine having to take 8-16+ hours of classes like that every damned month. Oh, and do another 2-4 hours on your own time every month.

I was commenting on the removal of reading material not on mandatory training sessions.

I can agree that some DEI efforts went too far in the government. While I never served in the military, I did spend 30 years working for a federal agency. There were some bs training sessions that was required that was, imo, a waste of time.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I'm old enough to remember US participation in the Vietnam War. If you received an illegal military order, one that violated the Constitution, you were not supposed to carry it out, because you took an oath to defend the Constitution, not your superior officer - and that ultimately included all superior officers, including the Commander in Chief.

Right now, Trump doesn't like that. He wants everyone who works in the administration and military, and in the Republican positions in Congress, to be loyal only to him, and he wants to be able to disobey the Constitution and make other people disobey it if he feels like it.

We somehow have to survive this creepy time.

Garbage political claptrap, appropriate disposed of.

You start out trying to make some kind of claim, then go right off the rails on your own political beliefs.

Guess what, cupcake? I could not care about your personal political paranoia. And I have actually as I stated started to believe that a significant amount of people in this country are now insane.

TDS, BDS, ODS, BDS, CDS, it is all the exact same thing in my book. I see all of those that suffer from those mental illnesses as being equal.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I may completely agree with you on this and, at the same time, think that banning the DEI books from the library is a disgrace to the US and an insult to the military itself.

What in the hell are you even going on about?

Got it, TDS. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[Hamish Howl]

So military orders should be debated by the troops beforehand.

You sure that is going to be effective during war?

How long to they get to discuss it before they have to make a decision whether to follow an order or not?

Question:

You are an infantry platoon sergeant. You are ordered by battalion command to execute POWs as there is not enough supplies to maintain them and your troops.

Is it legal to follow that order?

 

[Oozlefinch]

While I never served in the military, I did spend 30 years working for a federal agency. There were some bs training sessions that was required that was, imo, a waste of time.

Trust me, in the military it was far worse. The largest collection of Federal Employees that do not have a Union to cover them from the excesses like that.

In fact, in the last decade or so I have not hid my massive disdain for the "Modern DoD", and believe that most of it should be cut away with a chainsaw. In addition to the insane numbers of contractors that have infiltrated the military in the last three decades. When there are literally more people working in or for the DoD then there are members in uniform, that is an insane amount of bloat and needs to be excised.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Question:

You are an infantry platoon sergeant. You are ordered by battalion command to execute POWs as there is not enough supplies to maintain them and your troops.

Is it legal to follow that order?

Oh, Laws of Land Warfare is always a subject I loved teaching. And it is something that so few who never served can really understand.



The above is an interesting game intro, as early on it shows soldiers clearly executing somebody. And even though many insist it is a "war crime", it actually is not. But good luck explaining that to somebody that does not understand what a war crime really is.

 

[Girlpower]

Question:

You are an infantry platoon sergeant. You are ordered by battalion command to execute POWs as there is not enough supplies to maintain them and your troops.

Is it legal to follow that order?

You can't answer a question with another question.

 

[Girlpower]

Gee, military personnel are supposed to reject unlawful orders.

In practice, they pretty much don’t, but military personnel not “blindly following orders” is something that should be encouraged, actually.

And what constitutes an unlawful order?

 

[Girlpower]

You seem to want a military that follow orders without question even though the order may not be lawful. Would you not want a discussion on the pro and cons of the operation?

So, a President orders the military to take out all anyone who disagrees with his policies, you would want the military to say "Yes, sir, Seal Team 6 will take care of that today"


Removing access to reading material that discusses race, gender, sexual preference is a far cry to questioning a military strike in your example.

No, I am trying to determine where you folks draw that line.

None of you can provide an answer to that.

Was it unlawful for soldiers to drop the atomic bomb?

What about fire burning cities in Germany, should they have refused those orders?

 

[Fledermaus]

You can't answer a question with another question.

Your question has been answered.

 

[Tigerace117]

And what constitutes an unlawful order?

Orders to do things like torture prisoners, for example.

 

[ataraxia]

What is happening under the guise of getting rid of DEI , whatever that is is is disgusting. There will be so much that the next Administration will need to do to try and unwind this harm.

Much of the damage to American credibility, relationships and international standing is going to be irreparable.

 

[Oozlefinch]

None of you can provide an answer to that.

Several of us have, multiple times.

Your not liking the answer is not the same thing as us not giving one. Holy hell, I even quoted directly from the UCMJ itself. You can not get a more clear answer than that.

 

[Girlpower]

Several of us have, multiple times.

Your not liking the answer is not the same thing as us not giving one. Holy hell, I even quoted directly from the UCMJ itself. You can not get a more clear answer than that.

Quote the part of that which is relevant to this discussion because I don't see any answer there.

And frankly just throwing up a link is not an answer, if you have an answer then state it.

 

[Girlpower]

Your question has been answered.

Nope it hasn't.