Outspoken Marine officer who went viral blasting military leaders over Afghanistan is jailed

a reply to: Bunch

You know that. I know that. How many years has the Leftist media been portraying veterans as people who could snap at any moment and start shooting? There's the problem.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: Bunch

You know that. I know that. How many years has the Leftist media been portraying veterans as people who could snap at any moment and start shooting? There's the problem.

Thats because they hate the military though isnt it? And its been over 20 yrs since they started doing that to veterans right?

a reply to: yuppa

Whatever bro.

If you get into a contract without knowing what your getting yourself into then that’s on you.

a reply to: JIMC5499

Can’t argue with that.

a reply to: Bunch

I will always admire anyone who speaks up and demands accountability for actions.

Demanding responsibility, if it's a sign of PTSD, then I sure as hell hope I have it as well.

a reply to: yuppa

Closer to 40.

originally posted by: Bunch
a reply to: DINSTAAR

I understand your sentiment but again… there are proper channels to elevate this concerns. Even as a Lt Col if you feel that you don’t rub elbows high enough to impact policy and decision making you have ways.

Read on the story of Col. “Ned Stark”. He wrote a series of well thought out articles for the AF Military Times a few years ago. As a Colonel he had something to say and put pen to paper and published under a pseudonym. He thought if he would had come out with his real name he would be court martialed instead he got an invite from CSAF and was able to impact policy and decision making.

Once again I don’t disagree with Lt Col Scheller position, he made great points but he had other avenues and then to not follow a direct order on top of that?! I don’t know.

It’s sad he has lost everything he had worked so hard to include his family and kids. I wish he had sought better advice.

Source: www.airforcetimes.com...

Did Ned Stark move the needle? I would think not if we are where we are now. It seems like USAF decided that it would be good optics to look like they care about what their critics say and that’s all.

Our current system is not designed for criticism as they know they have less control than they want over the hearts and minds of their own people. The system is volatile so it will try to crush any who criticize effectively. This was better under Trump as he was able to straddle the line of the “official” position to one that is highly critical of the official position. I am not a Trump supporter but he embodied the pluralism of America better than this administration. The current regime requires totalitarian control of information as they are very insecure and have many reasons to be.

Our military leadership is an existential threat to all of us and they have gone too far down this road to change without tearing the fibers of the entire complex. It is like being stuck in a lie that is growing in complexity and consequences and they need to be broken to realign it with reality.

There are always consequences when dealing with evil, but it doesn’t mean the work shouldn’t be done. I would be surprised if he didn’t know how this would end. Maybe he’s stupid but he has made quite a stir that cannot be ignored.

-D

a reply to: DINSTAAR

Meh…

I’ve been serving long enough to know people will use military issues to fit their political agenda.

When we invaded Iraq the second time many left leaning troops refused to go to war citing it was an illegal order. Conservatives wanted these troops executed on the spot, hanged, call them traitors. The left hauled them as heroes, help them seek refuge in Canada (many of them can’t still return the US)

Now is reversed, many on the left crucifying this officer and the right elevated him to Jesus like status.

I prefer my military apolitical, we serve a bigger purpose than the idiotic political waves of the USA.

He was hit with a gag order, rightly or wrongly doesnt matter he violated that and he knew he would be put in jail he is hoping it generates enough outrage to help whatever his overall agenda is.

I still credit the guy for showing integrity, but his arrest... that was his choice.

a reply to: Bunch

The military is political. Preferences to the contrary are inconsequential.

We have blurred the lines between the martial and civilian worlds. We no longer go to war, yet are at war constantly. We have been abusing our military by making them the enforcers of the ruling cabal giving them missions with no clear objectives while we train and arm the next version of enemy we will be fighting. Is this the bigger purpose you’re talking about or are you still hung up on the idea that they hate our freedom?

I think that current military leadership belongs in GitMo, but I have thought that for years.

I would feel bad if this was an E-2 or something catching this kind of heat but this guy isn’t a dummy and has spent over a decade as an officer. He knew what he was doing and I respect that. The world needs more people like him.

-D

a reply to: Bunch

How is demanding accountability being political?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Bunch

How is demanding accountability being political?

Questioning the official narrative is being political these days.

I wonder how long it will be for a group of Vets to bust this guy out like Americans needing to leave Afghanistan?

originally posted by: vance
yep whether he was right or wrong in his content, doesn't matter much. He immediately disobeyed a direct order. As you know. I agree on all your points in this matter.

a reply to: Bunch

I am sure we can all agree it is ok to disagree with an illegal order. We were taught in ROTC, you have to step up and answer the call when an order that clearly violates our COTUS such as forced vaccines or get Courts Martial proceedings. He might as well stand up for truth, he was going to have to take the shot or get the Military arrest.

a reply to: Bunch

You know he should have done that, and elevated it to the people at the top .. who were making the decisions. Oh oops those were the people who screwed up and wanted to cover it up.

a reply to: Guyfriday

We’ve always had an official narrative but it has had enough room to allow for vastly different views. Today, we have a narrative that constantly needs to change and create moral panic in order to maintain dominance. As the obfuscation continues, it sheds followers and must contain this breach by accelerating the panics.

I don’t think that the military is beyond help but the edge is not far from here. Good people will be tested and I hope they pass for their own sake.

-D

a reply to: Bunch

And i still think you are in the wrong here. The pussy Obama/Biden leadership like Milley, etc, have politicized the military. That is wrong. They stopped all military operations for 6 months to look at every transaction and social media post of officers and enlisted personnel in our Armed Forces. The Secretary of Defense, another pussy cat communist bastard claimed the unprecedented move was to deal with "extremism" and he claimed that any enlisted personnel or officer that has ever bought certain political items would be let go of the U.S. Armed Forces...

This is what every socialist and communist dictator has ever done. They vilify their political opponents and claim those political opponents are a threat to the "collective" and the goals of socialist/communist bastards. Lloyd Austin went as far as claiming that what happened on January 6th was "an example of extremism," but of course Antifa, BLM, and far leftists doing worse, including injuring thousands of police officers and murdering dozens of police officers, business owners and political opponents meanwhile they burned, stole, and caused chaos throughout the U.S. is not "extremism" and democrat leaders have claimed these people are the real "patriots..."

You don't seem to see it because you are one of the brainwashed victims of this politicization, but this is what socialist and communist dictators do to their military. You have been indoctrinated into accepting this as the new reality.

Not to mention that they are doing something similar to police departments as they want to defund all police departments to get rid of every present police officer that will not follow the unlawful orders they will give in the future. The police is being defunded to put in place of them far leftist extremist loyalists that will gleefully attack unarmed civilians, and even shoot unarmed civilians when the time comes, and it will come to that.

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

BTW, in the U.S. military you have a right to refuse following an order you think is "unlawful." It is part of the uniform code of military Justice.

Article 90 states military personnel have to "obey lawful orders of his/her superior." You have a right not to follow unlawful orders such as those that go against the U.S. Constitution.

Yes you do.

No actually you don't have the "right not to follow unlawful orders"

(Presumption of Lawfulness)


Orders from superiors requiring the performance of military duties are presumed to be lawful. MCM, pt. IV, 14c(2)(a)(i); United States v. McDaniels , 50 M.J. 407 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (order to not drive a personal vehicle after diagnosis of narcolepsy); United States v. Nieves, 44 M.J. 96 (C.A.A.F. 1996) (order prohibiting discussions with witnesses); United States v. New, 55 M.J. 95 (C.A.A.F. 2001) (order requiring a soldier to wear United Nations blue beret and insignia).

To sustain the presumption, the order must relate to military duty. It must not conflict with the statutory or constitutional rights of the person receiving the order. Finally, it must be a specific mandate to do or not to do a specific act. In sum, an order is presumed lawful if it has a valid military purpose and is a clear, precise, narrowly drawn mandate. United States v. Moore, 58 M.J. 466 (C.A.A.F. 2003). The dictates of a person’s conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot excuse disobedience. United States v. Stockman, 17 M.J. 530 (A.C.M.R. 1973).

(When Can a Soldier Disobey an Order?)

But it’s not enough to assert that soldiers must follow all lawful orders and disobey unlawful ones. Not every case is clear-cut. Soldiers taking orders in combat must act quickly and don’t always have time to calmly deliberate on every decision. Asking soldiers to make fine legal distinctions in combat or else face court-martial is akin to asking them to sail between Scylla and Charybdis.

This tension is resolved by rules contained in the Manual for Courts Martial. The manual is an executive order that augments the Uniform Code of Military Justice by setting forth procedural rules and providing guidance based on case law for interpreting the code. Rule 916(d) of the Manual for Courts Martial says:

It is a defense to any offense that the accused was acting pursuant to orders unless the accused knew the orders to be unlawful or a person of ordinary sense and understanding would have known the orders to be unlawful.

My point here is that it is not a RIGHT to disobey unlawful orders. It is an OBLIGATION to obey orders unless they are PALPABLY UNLAWFUL.

PALPABLY UNLAWFUL does NOT include personal preferences for tactics or strategies, nor does it include personal political or religious choices.

Read the articles linked hereon for more detailed explanations.

a reply to: rnaa


You are contradicting yourself and proving I was right...

From your own excerpt...

...
To sustain the presumption, the order must relate to military duty. It must not conflict with the statutory or constitutional rights of the person receiving the order. Finally, it must be a specific mandate to do or not to do a specific act.
...

You should read it again...

a reply to: JIMC5499

Now who determines if you were right and the order was illegal? There's the Catch-22

Your Court Martial of course.

The procedure is spelled out in the Manual for Courts Martial. Rule 916(d) says:

It is a defense to any offense that the accused was acting pursuant to orders unless the accused knew the orders to be unlawful or a person of ordinary sense and understanding would have known the orders to be unlawful.

So, for instance, if you are accused of gunning down unarmed villagers in Viet Nam, it is a defense that you were 'just following orders' UNLESS you knew that your actions were murder. Lt. Calley played the 'just obeying orders' card in his defense and it didn't work for him. His actions were palpably illegal, and was OBLIGATED to refuse such an order (his Commanding Officer was also Court Martialed and found not guilty, by the way).

The decision to go to war is a political decision and not subject to judicial decision. If you refuse to deploy because you think the war is illegal or immoral or whatever, you are disobeying a lawful order and you will likely get deployed to Ft. Levenworth like Dr. Lakin.

Outspoken Marine officer who went viral blasting military leaders over Afghanistan is jailed

The Vindmans,Milleys can do whatever they want.

But don't a marine be a god damn marine.

The real meaning of the Few. The Proud. The Marines.