"Don't Give up the Ship"

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I said: "crafting Executive Branch documentation."

In my military staff work, it was a big part of my job to do the actual writing of operations orders and other directives that would signed by my colonel or general...because I was the one who knew the details of what had to be accomplished.

That is the way the system works. The boss says broadly, "Get this done," someone with the detailed knowledge of how it should be done writes the order with all the necessary details, and the boss signs it.

I appreciate your posts and the consistently well-researched, balanced information you share, which greatly aids in understanding the topics we discuss. While I may not always share your viewpoint, I hold your contributions in high regard.

Reading some of your posts in this thread, it's truly reassuring to know there's a chain of command for how orders flow through the military structure. By the time a lower-level soldier carries out an order, it has been vetted at multiple levels and goes through a legal process to ensure those orders align with military and US law. Therefore, what these six lawmakers claim about disobeying an illegal order is unlikely, because even if the commander in chief issues such an order, it would be modified to meet legal standards and align with U.S. law.

Given all this, the situation is fundamentally political—not a matter of military law or the U.S. Constitution. The six elected officials aimed to make a political statement, and the Trump administration is responding exactly as they intended. Every time the Trump administration refers to an "illegal order", it loses political ground. There is absolutely no political gain for the administration in this scenario.

Imagine if this had occurred during the W. Bush administration. Most likely, President Bush would ignore it. If a reporter asked him about it, he might have responded, "This is America; elected officials have the right to speak their minds," and then shifted to another topic. The story would probably fade after a day or two.

 

[durangodawood]

....Reading some of your posts in this thread, it's truly reassuring to know there's a chain of command for how orders flow through the military structure. By the time a lower-level soldier carries out an order, it has been vetted at multiple levels and goes through a legal process to ensure those orders align with military and US law. Therefore, what these six lawmakers claim about disobeying an illegal order is unlikely, because even if the commander in chief issues such an order, it would be modified to meet legal standards and align with U.S. law......

I dont share your faith. I could well see "Secretary Of War" Hegseth applying various pressures to remove "obstructionist" individuals from the process to permit illegal or unconstitutional actions. Blowing up suspected criminal boats comes to mind as just an initial test of how far they could go.

 

[RDKirk]

Given all this, the situation is fundamentally political—not a matter of military law or the U.S. Constitution. The six elected officials aimed to make a political statement, and the Trump administration is responding exactly as they intended. Every time the Trump administration refers to an "illegal order", it loses political ground. There is absolutely no political gain for the administration in this scenario.

Yes, it is fundamentally political. My problem with the video from those Congresspeople is that they are shading it as a problem for Corporal Smith to face.

If they don't want the president to go to war with Venezuela, it's up to them to prevent the president from going to war with Venezuela. It's not for Corporal Smith to say, "No." Only another branch of government can check a branch of government.

 

[RDKirk]

I dont share your faith. I could well see "Secretary Of War" Hegseth applying various pressures to remove "obstructionist" individuals from the process to permit illegal or unconstitutional actions. Blowing up suspected criminal boats comes to mind as just an initial test of how far they could go.

But notice that Congress has done nothing to prevent "blowing up suspected criminal boats." Appealing to the courts will ultimately fail in this context, because the Supreme Court took itself out of considering military operations long ago.

This is something for Congress to handle, not Corporal Smith.

 

[durangodawood]

But notice that Congress has done nothing to prevent "blowing up suspected criminal boats." Appealing to the courts will ultimately fail in this context, because the Supreme Court took itself out of considering military operations long ago.

This is something for Congress to handle, not Corporal Smith.

Perhaps the constitution should be amended to require congress to declare not war, but rather declare who we are not at war with.

 

[NxNW]

Your defense of this travesty is weak at best.

Why do you oppose following the law?

Our soldiers already know that.

There's nothing wrong with reminding them. They work for us, after all.

These seditious six are trying to sow discord in our military because of hatred for Trump. This is indefensible !

Given that Trump is a convicted felon and rapist, there is nothing seditious about reminding the military to follow the law.

 

[Postvieww]

Why do you oppose following the law?

I don’t. I oppose undermining the Commander in Chief.

There's nothing wrong with reminding them. They work for us, after all.

Ridiculous. Not our job nor the members of congress. Sad these six have duped so many in to believing their behavior had a pure motive. It was to undermine Trump nothing more or less.

Given that Trump is a convicted felon and rapist, there is nothing seditious about reminding the military to follow the law.

Typical liberal diversion. You are just proving my point, this is all about hating Trump.

 

[Postvieww]

Yes, it is fundamentally political. My problem with the video from those Congresspeople is that they are shading it as a problem for Corporal Smith to face.

They don’t care about Corporal Smith. It is all about undermining Trump and pleasing the radical base.

 

[NxNW]

They don’t care about Corporal Smith.

"They" being the GOP?

It is all about undermining Trump and pleasing the radical base.

Only the GOP would claim that following the law is radical.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

It is all about undermining Trump and pleasing the radical base.

Nothing radical about resisting abuse of power. “Hate” is not even a factor. Let’s stick with the law.

 

[RDKirk]

They don’t care about Corporal Smith. It is all about undermining Trump and pleasing the radical base.

Well, if Trump is fomenting a war with Venezuela, I'm all in favor of undermining that intention.

 

[7thKeeper]

Their motives were OBVIOUSLY seditious.

Prove it. Should be easy for you since it's supposedly "obvious". But the problem is that it's not and it's not obvious. Just stomping your foot and Internet figuratively yelling the word doesn't make it so.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Their motives were OBVIOUSLY seditious.

January 6th was seditious and yet pardoned. Go figure. Despicable!

 

[Belk]

I don’t. I oppose undermining the Commander in Chief.

Ridiculous. Not our job nor the members of congress. Sad these six have duped so many in to believing their behavior had a pure motive. It was to undermine Trump nothing more or less.

Typical liberal diversion. You are just proving my point, this is all about hating Trump.

Kindly explain how making a factual statement that troops should not follow unlawful orders is undermining the Commander in Chief?

 

[Postvieww]

Kindly explain how making a factual statement that troops should not follow unlawful orders is undermining the Commander in Chief?

Many current and former former military men and women have figured out what these disgraceful six were trying to do and have called them out. Not my problem if you can’t figure it out.

 

[RDKirk]

Many current and former former military men and women have figured out what these disgraceful six were trying to do and have called them out. Not my problem if you can’t figure it out.

Well, there are a few million of us, so, sure, you can find some.

 

[Postvieww]

January 6th was seditious and yet pardoned. Go figure. Despicable!

The “official “ liberal narrative of Jan 6 is bunk! Go figure. The unofficial Jan 6 committee was a sham and is being exposed.

 

[Belk]

Many current and former former military men and women have figured out what these disgraceful six were trying to do and have called them out. Not my problem if you can’t figure it out.

I'm former military and I think it is bunk. You seem unable to articulate the reasoning of why I should find it to be "undermining the Commander in Chief". If you can't even explain the reasoning you have no case.

 

[Postvieww]

I'm former military and I think it is bunk. You seem unable to articulate the reasoning of why I should find it to be "undermining the Commander in Chief". If you can't even explain the reasoning you have no case.

Those despicable six can’t define what illegal orders they were talking about. Maybe you should concentrate on who else is behind this anti - Trump conspiracy. I don’t need to prove a case . I have had my eyes open to this get Trump cabal since he ran the first time. Nothing has changed. Why don’t you state the illegal orders given by Trump with the relevant statute and put all of this to bed.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The “official “ liberal narrative of Jan 6 is bunk! Go figure. The unofficial Jan 6 committee was a sham and is being exposed.

No damage done then?