Gun Argument #957

[Harrison]

I just don't draw the same lines of similarity since what I have done and am doing is voluntary.

I'm not ignorant to it. That, to me, is a huge difference.

[Tikker]

voluntarily giving up your individuality to unquestioningly follow your CO vs someone that just blindly follows authority is a pretty flimsy straw house to build your argument on


it's just semantics at this point

[araby]

semantics is the new life

[Lueyen]

voluntarily giving up your individuality to unquestioningly follow your CO vs someone that just blindly follows authority is a pretty flimsy straw house to build your argument on


it's just semantics at this point

Except he's not doing that, in fact it is just the opposite of unquestioningly following orders. The Oath of Enlistment by it's nature mandates that a soldier must first consider if any order given to him or her is a lawful order, if it is not then it his or her duty to disobey the order. If the oath was as you characterize it to unquestioningly follow orders then "just following orders" as a legal defense would hold water, but it in fact does not.

[Eziekial]

That defense did stretch a few necks in Nuremberg if I'm not mistaken.

[Evermore]

Why of course, Harrison! Why should we take responsibility for our lives when we can hand it over to someone else and not need to worry about it? Liberty is just a silly concept anyways. Obviously the smarter people in society should dictate what everyone else can and can't do with their time, money, property, and life. Surely those people will have our best interests at heart.

the conservative manufesto...

[Evermore]

[quote="Lueyen]


Except he's not doing that, in fact it is just the opposite of unquestioningly following orders. The Oath of Enlistment by it's nature mandates that a soldier must first consider if any order given to him or her is a lawful order, if it is not then it his or her duty to disobey the order. If the oath was as you characterize it to unquestioningly follow orders then "just following orders" as a legal defense would hold water, but it in fact does not.[/quote]

this is exactly correct.

[ClakarEQ]

Evermore, Lue, all due respect, while the laws say one thing, reality is a lot different. Even if the individual that did the "deed" (whatever that maybe) could attempt to say, but my CO ordered me to, I think we all realize and agree, ultimately the person that did the act, will be punished.

However, lets be real here and also agree that very few, and you military guys please chime in, orders are questioned. Sometimes the CO themselves may not have all the information to allow his subordinates to make a decision on right or wrong.

If the CO says blow that place up, the grunt says but I see a child there, the CO says, do it anyway, there are terrorists inside. What does the grunt do? He is damned if he does, and he's dammed if he doesn't.

What if there are terrorists and he delays and ends up getting one of his own killed = court martial for disobeying command
What if there are no terrorists and he completes his order, kills a child = court martial for murder

I think some folks here tend to read a lot but somehow remove themselves from the reality. Words in books are fine and nice but those words do NOT equate to the real world in every respect.

/derail along with my normal sarcasm

This reminds of a video I saw about some legal guy saying never talk to cops, EVER. If you get pulled over for speeding, supply the documents required but say nothing, after all the law protects you. The law says you do NOT have to say anything. Next time someone gets pulled over, why don't you take that approach and see what happens.

Cop: Do you know how fast you were going
You: I take the 5th
Cop: What?
You: I take the 5th
Cop: Can you step out of your car please
You: <steps out of car>
Cop: What are you trying to pull here
You: I take the 5th
.
.

Before too long you'll have 2 cops there, you're car is getting impounded and you'll locked up for the day. You'll have to pay for this that and the other thing but all along you used the rights the constitution gave you, everything you did was legal and on the table. Yet you're a lot lighter in the wallet and got to spend time in the tank.

[Harrison]

You just proved without a doubt that you don't have any idea how it really is.

[Gidan]

Evermore, Lue, all due respect, while the laws say one thing, reality is a lot different. Even if the individual that did the "deed" (whatever that maybe) could attempt to say, but my CO ordered me to, I think we all realize and agree, ultimately the person that did the act, will be punished.

However, lets be real here and also agree that very few, and you military guys please chime in, orders are questioned. Sometimes the CO themselves may not have all the information to allow his subordinates to make a decision on right or wrong.

If the CO says blow that place up, the grunt says but I see a child there, the CO says, do it anyway, there are terrorists inside. What does the grunt do? He is damned if he does, and he's dammed if he doesn't.

What if there are terrorists and he delays and ends up getting one of his own killed = court martial for disobeying command
What if there are no terrorists and he completes his order, kills a child = court martial for murder

I think some folks here tend to read a lot but somehow remove themselves from the reality. Words in books are fine and nice but those words do NOT equate to the real world in every respect.

/derail along with my normal sarcasm

This reminds of a video I saw about some legal guy saying never talk to cops, EVER. If you get pulled over for speeding, supply the documents required but say nothing, after all the law protects you. The law says you do NOT have to say anything. Next time someone gets pulled over, why don't you take that approach and see what happens.

Cop: Do you know how fast you were going
You: I take the 5th
Cop: What?
You: I take the 5th
Cop: Can you step out of your car please
You: <steps out of car>
Cop: What are you trying to pull here
You: I take the 5th
.
.

Before too long you'll have 2 cops there, you're car is getting impounded and you'll locked up for the day. You'll have to pay for this that and the other thing but all along you used the rights the constitution gave you, everything you did was legal and on the table. Yet you're a lot lighter in the wallet and got to spend time in the tank.

You will not receive a court martial for obeying any LAWFUL order of your superior which does not contradict any LAWFUL order from a higher ranking individual. The key word obviously is lawful. Issuing an unlawful order is punishable by death (though usually imprisonment and/or court martial). In an instance such as this, if the CO orders you to blow something up, you do it. If on the other hand, the CO orders you to torture someone, your are obligated to disobey that order and immediately report that unlawful to the CO's superiors.

[ClakarEQ]

My point is, in the scenario I offered, what would you do?

Do you say, Sir, I require proof there are terrorists there because I don't see any so I don't think this is right, and because of that I can't follow your order.

How often to people in the service question their commanders that way?

In my scenario, the question in of itself is likely to force a reaction from your CO and lock you up for disobeying a direct order, no?

I agree on the torture example, IMO things like torture are crystal clear, everyone should know that is wrong, but what about my scenario where as far as the grunt is concerned he's being order to kill a civilian child.

So you're saying killing a civilian child is lawful?

[Harrison]

Your understanding of the military seems to be based off the 60s lol

I wouldn't feel bad, however. That's your typical civilian's level of understanding. Some of my friends believe some of the dumbest shit about the military in general, it happens.

Disciplinary action depends on the situation. Are you being fired upon? What are you doing that day, patrol?

If we randomly drove by a building and my squad leader told me to fire upon it, I'd ask why first, of course. If we were in the middle of a firefight. I wouldn't hesitate.

You're leaving too much open to speculation.

[ClakarEQ]

I think I have a better grasp on our military than you think I do, but I know I know, you've read a lot.

Same scenario, you are completely safe, this is a mission where you were "told by your CO" that terrorists are in that building. You don't see any, but you do see children outside of the building, but you're told to blow it up anyway, I mean they're using children as shields right? Not being fired upon, no direct threat during this.

I think the issue here is you don't want to be put in a position where I can say I'm right, I'm not saying I am so you know. I'm not taking a right or wrong approach, I'm trying to figure out how often grunts question their CO compared to just DOING IT and I don't believe regardless of what is written that any reasonable percentage actually questions orders, ever.

This is the guts of your oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

To question an order you would be required to fully understand some key aspects of the UCMJ, so what section of the UCMJ talks about lawful, unlawful, and your right to delay an order while your review in your head the lawfulness of it?
Don't be unrealistic and make it sound all black and white, you know it isn't.

[Harrison]

Given your ridiculous and wholly fallacious argument, chances are the building wouldn't be fired upon.

You really should make friends with someone that's been in a similar situation and ask these questions face to face. It's obvious you've either never spoke to anyone about it, or didn't listen if you did.

[Harrison]

I think I have a better grasp on our military than you think I do, but I know I know, you've read a lot.

Just by asking the question you are, and the way you're wording it, you have about the grasp I thought you had. Which is almost none...

[ClakarEQ]

Harri, some of what I posted is not far off from real events. I paint some what of realistic scenario and you can't even agree or disagree, you just dance. You make excuse after excuse but don't ever answer the question. You speak as if you're so worldly and experienced at your young age but prolly never left the county except for spring break, o wait, did you even get that far, I mean didn't you get a GED? If not, I'm sorry and I've mistaken you for another but don't talk the talk when you ain't even done the walk. Sorry about that last line but really I'm tired of your childishness (even though I stooped down to your level just now).

I have a great deal of respect for Gidan, Lion, and the rest that have served, I will even for you once you're in for a few years and see reality, but don't stand here and preach when you're hardly part of the congregation, frankly you don't know dick by the little you've been exposed to. BTW, I'm not saying I know more than you on this, but you are not educated enough to respond to my question.

Again, I'm not looking for a right or wrong, I'm challenging the posts of a few folks here that believe because it is written, it is done, and I'm here to say, just because it is written, does not mean it is done, that's all. Yet you can't say "yeah, ok I can see your point", or "BS if is it written it is 100% done and this is why . . . ".

Please do continue though maybe you'll break 20k posts before you're gone from here and freed us all from your worthlessness. Then when you return perhaps you can get some respect but I'm going the wait and see approach, it won't shock me at all if you're back 12 months from now with a dishonorable discharge, or cough cough, some medical issue, like bad knees, or a bloated cranium.

[Harrison]

My ex girlfriend was an intelligence analyst, my best friend is an interrogator, two friends in various parts of infantry, my little brother is a plumber, one friend is a nutrition specialist (I believe that's what they call it), a handful of combat medics...the list goes on.

I talk to, on a daily basis, people that have been in combat. You're very clearly just not very well informed at all.

[ClakarEQ]

So Harri, tell me how that responded to the question?
That is my point, you don't answer shit but you've got lots to spew.

I am not claiming to know more than you on this. I said, you've not lived it so you don't know (BTW army stories at bed time are great aren't they).
However since you've been exposed to so many second hand stories, out of that lot of folks you mentioned, how many disobeyed a direct order from the CO? How many seriously challenged their CO (not something like, Are you sure?). How many of your buds were put in the position I attempted to paint in my scenario? How many said something like, I don't think I can follow that order?

Agree or disagree with something tangible.

So far you disagree with nothing of value but ample insults.

I do not agree that any reasonable percentage of service people challenge their CO regarding the lawful or unlawfulness of a direct order. It goes against the very grain of your oath. The time needed to "think" can cost lives. You're not taught to "think" you're taught to DO.

Just as I do NOT believe written words unequivocally mean it can only be that way /poke Lue and evermore

[Harrison]

I do not agree that any reasonable percentage of service people challenge their CO regarding the lawful or unlawfulness of a direct order. It goes against the very grain of your oath. The time needed to "think" can cost lives. You're not taught to "think" you're taught to DO.

Seriously, your ignorance pertaining to the military is woefully apparent in every post. I've since given up trying to answer to your stupidity and stopped caring if you get it or not. You're a vapid black hole of ignorance wasting my efforts.

[ClakarEQ]

value points = 0
You're too chicken shit to answer me, don't kid yourself, boy.

[Gidan]

Its actually an extremely difficult question to answer. There are so many details that would go into the decision that you couldn't possibly address them all. In a combat situation, I would take out the building without thought. In a non combat situation is where it becomes a grey area. Of all the NCO's and Officers I have known, I honestly do not believe a single one of them would give that order even if they believed the building posed a direct threat to us. Like I said, its all in the situation. The exact same order in 1 situation would be completely lawful and in another be unlawful. It really depends on the situation. The best way to judge would be that if you know without a doubt that its illegal, you do not do it. General doctrine is, you assume all orders are lawful and you disobey at your own risk unless you know the order is specifically illegal in which case you are required to disobey.

[Harrison]

Yes, I fear whether or not an uneducated civilian understands a specific facet of military order and structure. You caught me. lol

[ClakarEQ]

Gidan, thanks, that is an acceptable response, and I see your points regarding the variables involved and there is no "blanket" answer, but the "assume it is lawful" is enough. Again I'm not looking for a right or wrong, I was really trying to understand what I will assume is the 99% type of response. Like in your other post, torture and things like it are pretty black and white, I was curious how a soldier would act in a situation that was a lot of grey.

Harri, you crack me up big time, seriously man, I read that last post and busted a gut. I'm laughing out loud at you. Shit man, how long you been "in", what's it been a month ROFL. You make sound like you're a lifer, me being a civilian and all.
OMG I can see you now, in your pretty boy suit, chin up, all high and mighty, good god that gives me the chuckles LOL. And to think, o wait, to KNOW you WILL risk your life to save mine, that is just icing on the cake, boy. Now go do the dishes and peel me some potatoes, you're cooked and done.

[Harrison]

You can laugh all you want. The sad part is you even had to ask that question.

You're about as informed as a high school kid who's just watched Full Metal Jacket recently. It's pathetic that you're in your thirties and are as misinformed as you are.

[Harrison]

Seriously, the only joke here is your absolutely abysmal understanding of the military in general.

Edited P.S.

I'm going out for the night. Feel free to exercise your lack of knowledge here in my absence. Maybe smoke some more to get some insight and clarity?