• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Question about the U.S. Military and unconstitutional laws

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

I'm going to chuck in 2 cents.

A lot of the soldiers I served with, had no clue why they were serving, at least initially.


Some wanted college.
Some didn't want to run a dairy farm in some pasture in Maryland.
Then some, wanted to make the most of what they could offer, for the benefit of the citizens of the US.

Hell I can remember a female soldier who literally made sure we was pregnant, or recovering from a pregnancy every day of her life.

I guess a free paycheck and medical for her family?


There is however a TON of mental processing that goes on. A change in character and personality is often brought on by this process. Anybody who has sent their youngins off to Basic Training, and met them at graduation took note of it somewhere in the immediate vicinity of the parade field.

Things are definitely not the same.

Loyalty is one of the core components of a soldiers existence.
(They still teaching L.D.R.S.H.I.P. in the Army?)

Loyalty to "what" is the best question any of us could ask.

For some, it's the "Chain of Command".
For others it's "Your fellow soldiers".
Then there's "To the United States".

I do have to say, that outside of the oath of enlistment though, there is not a lot of conversation or training (none actually) on the Constitution. Not even a passing reference.

Some have been wise enough to look up, and study, the Constitution that they swore an oath to.

Others would be willing to remain ignorant, and therein lies the problem. These are your federal baby killers.

Hate to put it that way, but that's the truth.

Need proof? Look at Katrina videos.



Let's put this in perspective though.

If a soldier is loyal to his or her government, that is not so much of an issue so long as government is abiding by the Constitution they also swore to defend.

When "the people" allow their government to violate the constitution, they are setting themselves up for failure. They are also setting their service members up for failure.

So yeah, make your votes count.
Hold your elected representatives accountable.
Impeach those who oppose the constitution.


Remember first and foremost, that the military is a big, stonkin, ever sharp blade of war. It is the iron fist of destruction. It is meant to engage and destroy enemies of the United States, in close, personal combat.

It is not a police force.

Not in this country, or any other.

As Forrest would say, "That's all I got to say about that..."
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

NavyLT wrote:
It would depend upon which part of the oath the person deemed to be more important to them:

I, Joe Soldier, do solemnly swear 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 regulation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

To some persons the "obey the orders" part is more important than the "support and defend part", especially when the "President of the United States" becomes a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

You can see, though, how the two halves of the oath can conflict with each other. I believe the first half far outweighs the second half.
I see no conflict at all. The president is also required to support and defend the Constitution which means that anything he does outside of it is, by definition, not only illegal but requires no obligation of direction or order upon the military.

The first obligation of the military is to the Constitution... not the commander in chief or any other officer. Obligations to those individuals must follow the supreme law which is the Constitution.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:
I'm going to chuck in 2 cents.

A lot of the soldiers I served with, had no clue why they were serving, at least initially.


Some wanted college.
Some didn't want to run a dairy farm in some pasture in Maryland.
Then some, wanted to make the most of what they could offer, for the benefit of the citizens of the US.

Hell I can remember a female soldier who literally made sure we was pregnant, or recovering from a pregnancy every day of her life.

I guess a free paycheck and medical for her family?


There is however a TON of mental processing that goes on. A change in character and personality is often brought on by this process. Anybody who has sent their youngins off to Basic Training, and met them at graduation took note of it somewhere in the immediate vicinity of the parade field.

Things are definitely not the same.

Loyalty is one of the core components of a soldiers existence.
(They still teaching L.D.R.S.H.I.P. in the Army?)

Loyalty to "what" is the best question any of us could ask.

For some, it's the "Chain of Command".
For others it's "Your fellow soldiers".
Then there's "To the United States".

I do have to say, that outside of the oath of enlistment though, there is not a lot of conversation or training (none actually) on the Constitution. Not even a passing reference.

Some have been wise enough to look up, and study, the Constitution that they swore an oath to.

Others would be willing to remain ignorant, and therein lies the problem. These are your federal baby killers.

Hate to put it that way, but that's the truth.

Need proof? Look at Katrina videos.



Let's put this in perspective though.

If a soldier is loyal to his or her government, that is not so much of an issue so long as government is abiding by the Constitution they also swore to defend.

When "the people" allow their government to violate the constitution, they are setting themselves up for failure. They are also setting their service members up for failure.

So yeah, make your votes count.
Hold your elected representatives accountable.
Impeach those who oppose the constitution.


Remember first and foremost, that the military is a big, stonkin, ever sharp blade of war. It is the iron fist of destruction. It is meant to engage and destroy enemies of the United States, in close, personal combat.

It is not a police force.

Not in this country, or any other.

As Forrest would say, "That's all I got to say about that..."
Absolutely and spot on correct.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
Aaron1124 wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
The question would be, When you are an officer Aaron how are you going to react, what are you going to do?
I can say that if it ever came down to that, I will risk losing my job rather than carry out an unlawful and unconstitutional order. Most people at the police departments that I am interested in know exactly how I feel - as do my relatives in law enforcement. They feel exactly the same, and it hasn't hindered their career in the least. I may be a bit old fashion, but I live my life by a moral code, and there is absolutely no part of me that would ever "sell out" or allow me to fall to peer pressure, so to speak.
That makes you a gentlemen and an honorable man. My hat's off to you, sir.
+1 Aaron hope you rub off on set a fine example for your peers.
 

bomber

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
499
Location
, ,
imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:
Once you swear in to the United States Military, you take an oath to defend the United States Constitution, right?

Why is it that there are numerous soldiers who have verbally admitted that they will follow any orders given, even if it involved turning on the very citizens that they swore to take an oath for, and seize their weapons, if need be?

because they are not trained to think, they are trained to kill.
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
SouthernBoy wrote:
Aaron1124 wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
The question would be, When you are an officer Aaron how are you going to react, what are you going to do?
I can say that if it ever came down to that, I will risk losing my job rather than carry out an unlawful and unconstitutional order. Most people at the police departments that I am interested in know exactly how I feel - as do my relatives in law enforcement. They feel exactly the same, and it hasn't hindered their career in the least. I may be a bit old fashion, but I live my life by a moral code, and there is absolutely no part of me that would ever "sell out" or allow me to fall to peer pressure, so to speak.
That makes you a gentlemen and an honorable man. My hat's off to you, sir.
+1 Aaron hope you rub off on set a fine example for your peers.
Thanks. I would much rather have our civil liberties than national security - especially if the increase of national security starts infringing on our civil liberties. It is up to us, the people, to become our own security.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

bomber wrote:
because they are not trained to think, they are trained to kill.
While this is primarily correct, it is not entirely true for certain branches.

Take the Air Force for example.


I had the privilege of attending a graduation at Lackland with one of my buddies from Fort Hood. We were there to watch his brother graduate.

Clearly, and evidently, just by cruising the barracks there ,and watching the TI's in action, mental preparation for killing, is not the main dish. There was a ton of discipline, no doubt. Those airmen were tall, proud, and definitely ready to do whatever task needed to be done. Besides incessantly saluting a Specialist (I guess Army Class A's are confusing to them, so much bright and shiny crap), and me spending half my day saluting back with "Not an officer", I learned a lot about them.

I guess what I am saying is, all branches new recruits are not created equal.


Marines get the most headshock I think, and rightly so. As the 'first to go, last to know' role dictates, you better be the most confident, cocky, headstrong sonovub**** out there if you want to live. Everything needs to be instinctual.

The Army is second, easily. I only say second because while the curriculum is similar (Actually, the Marines jack Army curriculum for their training and maintenance), the mind game is stepped up a notch with the Marines. Also, Army training while being standardized from post to post, will differ say between Jackson and Leonard Wood (Leonard Wood is where most infantry guys go, and is not co-ed. Not to my knowledge anyways. This training will be more mindshocking than others because of the nature of the role.)

Navy, I have never witnessed in action other than on TV, or through asking friends in the Navy about the experiences. They seem to be close in stature to the Air Force. Very task oriented.


This is just my short, limited perspective.
 
Top