sqwakvfr

"against this illegal war and against the madman" would qualify as reasons to not obey orders of superior officers. Only the JCS-Joint Chiefs of Staff recieve direct orders from the CIC(Trump). All other service members recieve orders from superior officers.

In some cases CO's have applied relgious reasons. Quakers during WWII refused to take up arms. Some were allowed to serve as medics or in other non combat arms positions. Presently I firmly believe a service members who can prove he or she is astrict observer of Muslim beliefs and practics could refuse to serve in any position that directly supports attacks on Iran. I also believe any service member of Iranian heritage could do the same. The simple argument would be "I do not want to participate in the killing of my brothers and sisters".

Let me give you a simple example how what you say could apply in a combat enviornment. Let's say you are an officer given a strike mission with a Tomahawak missle at a building in Terhan but a new satellite image shows a school next to the target. You question this order and refuse to launch the missle because of the threat of civilain casualties. Your superior could relieve you of your duties and order your arrest. But no decent offcier would do such a thing but I do not know abou the CIC. Is this simple enough for you to understand my point.

Why say sorry? Who decides the legality or constitutionality of any military order? You? Me? Anyone? This is the question that will be tested when a service members refuses to obey the orders of a superior officer. This is the point you seem to be not able to comprehend. Let's say a soldier refuses to deploy in support of Operation Epic Fury. The soldier is then arrested by military police and is advised of his or her Article 31 rights under the UCMJ. The soldier is then confined until a military trial occurs. The jury in military trials is composed of three officers of higher rank. So the soldiers sole defense is the "Commander In Chief is a madman and I refuse to obey his order". This would probably result in a quick conviction. You offer little to support any active service member to refuse orders of the CIC. "he is a madman" does not fly. Specific examples of where any CIC order is illegal has to be proven in a court of law. Disagreeing with the orders of the CIC does not legally fly.

So now I am mad. Another pearl of wisdom. No you did not answer the question. Who decides the orders given by the CIC is lawful or not? Service members are not following a "madman" into an illegal war. They are fullfilling their military service obligations. The other option would be to apply for conscientious objector status. This would be difficult to achieve. There were some CO's during WWII and many during the Vietnam War. One of the most famous was Cassius Clay (AKA Muhammad Ali). Ali went to prison to uphold his beliefs and did not flee to Canada. For that I have always had the upmost of respect for him. Let's see how many active US service members refuse orders to deploy or even apply for CO status. What you suggest for active US service members to do is "easier said then done".

You did not answer the key question: Who decides whether or not an order is lawful or not? So now you are comparing all service members who obey orders to Nazi's? Great logic. It is not a simple matter. UCMJ also prescribes consequences of disobeying orders as well. No service member is loyal to POTUS. He or she is swears to the following: 1) Support and defend the Constitution against all enemies , foreign and domestic and to obey the orders of the President and superior officers. Unless you served in the US military you would have never swore to such an oath. Therefore, what first hand knowledge do you have about the serving in the US military. I know virtually nothing about serving in any other countries military.

1) He is probably nuts 2) Who decides the orders are illegal? You? 3) What are the consequences of not following orders for active duty service members? You were in the Navy so you would know the consequences of insurbordination while on active duty. Right? It's not like a teenager at McDonalds who disobeys a shift supervisors orders. The consequences are severe for an act of insurbordinatin for active duty military members.

Who would us "yanks" answer to? You? The UN? The Court of Criminal Justice at the Hague? Be specific as to who us "yanks" would answer for the decisions made by POTUS.

Ah, since you were in the Navy then you know this: Following orders is mandatory when one is on active duty . So I served and followed orders does not mean I am "brainwashed". If I was on active duty and received deployment orders to Iran or anywhere eles in the world I would have to obey. Did you forget that part when you took your oath of enlistment in the Navy? Military service members do not have the option to obey or disobey certain orders depending on their individual beleifs. Since most countries in the world do not have manadtory military service most of us are volunteers. Military service is not for all. I do not support the current POTUS in anyway but he is the CIC (Commander In Chief) and his orders are lawful until a court of law says otherwise. I would never follow Mark Kelly anwyhere.

Do you know the diference between overall strategic mission and invidual service and sacrifice? I knew people who died while serving in Afghanistan. They did not fail. Our leaders did.

Then what did you mean by refering to Sharia Law? Actually Americans died in the Afghan Conflict. Approximately 2500 died during the years 2001 and 2021. I do not disagree with your conclusion . But my service and the service of all service members in Afghanistan was not a failure nor a waste. Does service, honor and dignity mean anything to you?

So saying "I am proud of my service" means I was brainwashed? Very insightful? Do you have another uniimformed "pearls of wisdom". "Sharia law bet thses(?) people are thanking you for your service??? This does not make any sense at all.

"you"? What do you know about the service of myself and fellow servicemembers. The answer is NOTHING. I am proud of my service in both deployments. I will maintain some level of diginity and not stoop to your level.

Yes but we continued even after the killing of Osama Bin Laden. This is because by then "nation building" was in full effect. When were you in A-stan? I was there in 2005-2006 and 2010-2011.

Sounds great. Who is going to extract it and sell it? During my last deployment the "talk" was A-stan had unlimited deposits of rare earth minerals. This sounds great as well.