Are we required to honor, respect and generally concur with the POTUS?

Active duty service members ARE required to respect the commander in chief in public, to disrespect him verbally is insubordination according to UCMJ.

"DISRESPECTFULLY TREATS" includes any verbal or nonverbal expression of disrespect, I served under Bill Clinton, and as much as I abhorred his treatment of the women that worked with him, his politics, and his views - MY CO would have written me up if I'd expressed it on the job or in any public venue. We all got that talk when we were assigned night duty counting toes in the male only barracks due to "don't ask, don't tell" - we had to assign watchers to make sure no men were in bed with other men. I had to wait until I was a civilian again to speak out against Bill.

The precise definitions of different types of insubordination are contained in Articles 89-92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). In general, a service member is guilty of insubordination against a superior officer (commissioned, warrant, or non-commissioned) if he assaults, disobeys, or disrespectfully treats that officer, regardless of whether that officer is in the same branch of the military or even within that service member's direct chain of command.

Perhaps a comprehension problem. Read my statement again and try to understand what "No we are citizens and have the same rights as anyone with those exceptions noted in the UCMJ." What was difficult about that?

Roger, you seem intelligent. I am as well. I remember your initial post verbatim, it was only 12 hours ago that I read it.

MY post was clearly designed to help those still on active duty who might not realize that YOUR original unedited post was 1) inferring a reference to UCMJ (*which most service members have not read in it's entirety) or 2) intended for a civilian or post military audience. You see, aside from the UCMJ which governs punitive actions in the military for failure to comply with it's rules and regulations, there is also a code of honor and accepted standards of behavior which do not commonly fall under UCMJ. Responding to a literally correct and helpful post with sarcasm, insult or derision is not a professional way to deal with your embarrassment at having erred.

Furthermore, editing your posts so that you seem more correct is rather a childish way to address your errors. (*I also have 98% retention of read materials and remember that your ORIGINAL post did not include the phrase "with those exceptions noted in UCMJ.")

I do apologize for the rather brash manner of my post, but I honestly don't like to be corrected by someone who has altered their original post to make it appear I was in error - rather like a Chicago politician of you! On the 2% chance I am in error on this topic, please accept my apology and realize that even were you correct in your post, it was still likely to mislead ACTIVE DUTY personnel and the clarification was intended to help them - ergo not worthy of a rebuttal, flame or troll.

Those of us who are retired or former military owe a debt to those who follow in our footsteps - a debt of honor and duty, no less binding upon us than our initial oaths of office. That debt requires us to help and guide them in their endeavors to the best of our ability. If just one soldier reads my post and avoids trouble as a result, I will be pleased with the effort I expended to write it.

Finally, I will quote you to show you your errors:
"Perhaps a comprehension problem. Read my statement again and try to understand what "No we are citizens and have the same rights as anyone with those exceptions noted in the UCMJ." What was difficult about that?"
Your errors? 1) Not all soldiers are citizens, 2) ALL US soldiers relinquish certain privileges of citizenship when they take their oaths. (*They swear to abide by the UCMJ, and the orders of their superior officers. and that they will bear true allegiance and fealty to them - something CIVILIANS do not have to do. and THIS is the heart of the initial question of this topic. How can you show fealty and allegiance without showing respect, or while exhibiting disrespect - regardless of the UCMJ rules against such behavior?)

Your edited post is still in error in regards to the initial post on this topic:
"Are we required to honor, respect and generally concur with the POTUS?"
Your answer:
"No we are citizens and have the same rights as anyone with those exceptions noted in the UCMJ. We took an oath of Enlistment that didn't include those points."

The question to which you replied was posted by an ACTIVE DUTY Col. We, therefore includes active duty service members. ANY "NO" response to that question is misleading, regardless of clarifications you make later (or edit into your response at a later time).

A more helpful response to the active duty service member asking if he is required to respect POTUS would be: YES, until such a time as you are no longer bound by UCMJ (retired, or a veteran). Furthermore, you can't disrespect him once he no longer holds the office, for it can be construed to be a violation of UCMJ to show disrespect to the POTUS, even once he has left office.***

In conclusion, I leave you with the current oaths our servicemen and women take upon joining our military forces.

The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

"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. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)


***(Although a really witty service member might get by with NOT showing respect, as long as they didn't get caught showing disrespect, but that's a fine line to walk.)

CPT Brent Ferguson - There are so many inaccuracies in this response it's not worth my efforts to list them and point them out. Nothing you noted was related to the basic question. I stand by my original UNEDITED statement.

Yes, you are right about showing respect - but you CAN vote, write your congressman, senators, and your POTUS and (respectfully) request policy changes to help our nation remain great. You still have power. When I served under Bill Clinton and had to serve double watches to make sure there were just 10 toes in each bunk (due to don't ask don't tell) I felt powerless. My officers were more about maintaining obedience to orders than empowering their soldiers. If you don't agree with policy, write a letter and say so!

If you are uncertain of your ability to do so with respect, have a family member write the letter and send it in their name. Heck, have a hundred family members do it!

I'd probably hate Bill less if I'd been able to get it off my chest and didn't have to keep my anger with him to myself for so many years. (*I still want to hire his daughter and write Bill a note asking for advice on how to treat my female employees!)

Both my wife and I did get a hoot when Bill sent us a personally signed letter consoling her on the death of her lifelong friend and companion, Kiboso Rojo. (!Her horse!) If he'd spent as much time with Hillary as he did signing junk mail he'd probably have avoided the whole Lewinski thing.

PV2 Scott Goodpasture - That is the hard part and what we agreed to live with when we join the service. We can all disagree with some policy or another but we can't express it when it comes to military policy.
Bush Administration - Many servicemembers have problems with the Iraq war, but refusal to deploy is not one of the choices. Servicemembers had limited opportunity to express against the war.
Obama Administration - Many servicemembers disagree with the lack of action in Foriegn Affairs or the Executive actions in domestic affairs.
Express them through the democratic process by voting and civilly advocating for your party or position.

LTC John Shaw - Voting. Haha. Check here for idiot A or here for idiot B

PV2 Scott Goodpasture It is amazing how passionate people get for 'their' idiot.

Whether you agree or disagree with his actions, policies, and beliefs - you CANNOT exhibit disrespect for either the man or the position of POTUS while you are subject to UCMJ. It only takes one person to overhear you and take offense to land you an article 15.

1) POTUS is a superior officer to every service member in our armed forces
2) showing disrespect to a superior officer IS a violation of UCMJ.