At what moment does the US military separate itself from the government when thinking the Soldiers creed and oath of enlistment ?

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 16 Jan 2021 23:34:58 -0500

Is there a moment where the US armed forces not partake in decisions made by congress when things get to political? What if they are wanting actions to occur by our military when they go against the people and the constitution? Is it even the us military anymore at that point? Question stems from an uncertain near future with the new “leadership” that we now have. Just asking out of curiosity

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 12:11 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 00:11:55 -0500

I remember when I was serving in RA some discussions under some lonely conditions. They were gut wrenching conversations with no answers.

Response by Capt Gregory Prickett made Jan 17 at 2021 12:26 AM

Capt Gregory Prickett — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 00:26:02 -0500

SSG Private RallyPoint Member, first President-elect Biden (soon to be President Biden) is not "leadership" with scare-quotes, he is the incoming commander in chief and national command authority. You owe him the same duty and obedience under your oath of enlistment as you gave to President Trump, and you are obligated to follow his orders just as you were obligated to follow the orders of Trump.

It will always be the United States Armed Services (or Uniformed Services), and while in active service, you follow all lawful orders. Period. There is no difference in the duty nor the loyalty that you owe to the CIC/NCA or his subordinates just because there is a different occupant.

Do not mistake the free conversation and discourse for grounds to step away from your oath and obligation. We all have to serve under presidents with whom we disagree. Under Jimmy Carter, my airborne unit cased its colors and became an engineer battalion and an armored cav squadron, both of which were horrors for a light infantryman. But I sucked it up and drove on, becoming a cav scout and a mech infantryman, and later an Air Force officer. I didn't criticize the president during that time, nor wonder about what he might or might not do, and you shouldn't either.

Response by MSgt Steve Sweeney made Jan 17 at 2021 12:39 AM

MSgt Steve Sweeney — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 00:39:46 -0500

"... when they go against the people and the Constitution". And how do you propose to make that assessment?

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made Jan 17 at 2021 4:36 AM

SSG Robert Perrotto — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 04:36:02 -0500

tough question to answer. Our first priority is the Constitution, our second priority is to obey the orders of the office of POTUS. Who ever holds the office. We have court systems, and laws, that will determine if, what the Person who is holding the office does with their executive orders, is constitutional or not. Just like the last idiot in the office, this idiot will try to make do on what he promised. There will be advocacy groups that will challenge his executive orders, and courts will determine. Keep in mind that individual states have the power to defy those executive orders to a degree, and even ignore certain laws put forth by Congress.

Case in point - Illegal immigrants or undocumented immigrants - depending upon which term you support.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 5:44 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 05:44:06 -0500

I started under Clinton and am still serving now. Every single time we change an admin some kid comes asking the same question, "What happens if we are asked to fight against the American people, or When should we not follow the leaders". When I was a BN XO had a good Brigade Commander who told me he took everyone's opinion until it got time to get in the fight....."at that point I am going to tell you to shut the F#$^ up and color". Same goes here, the President will set the admin and they will pass policies. While Congress rarely gets involved directly (they control the purse strings and with things like the Army Cross-Fit Test get directly involved). Either way it is coloring time or time to get out or follow orders.

Response by MSG Greg Kelly made Jan 17 at 2021 7:47 AM

MSG Greg Kelly — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 07:47:38 -0500

I think it should have already. The military should not even be at the capitol. They were not called out to protect the people from Anitifa and BLM riots while cities burned.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Jan 17 at 2021 8:22 AM

SPC Erich Guenther — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 08:22:08 -0500

Yeah so I am confused a little by your comments: "Is there a moment where the US armed forces not partake in decisions made by congress when things get to political?". So it is not the Congress that gives you orders it is the civilian Secretary of Defense, usually at the behest of the President. So it is entirely the Executive Branch. Your scenario is also probably never going to happen. Why would I say that? The decision on if the order by Secretary of Defense was lawful or not would be made far above your level. Highly unlikely an NCO would make that call. Only time you would be concerned with a lawful or unlawful order is if your LT or CO decided to take matters into their own hands and issue their own special orders. Otherwise I do not see your scenario happening. Unless you can lay out the scenario in more detail in which I could be persuaded it might happen?

Response by CPO Nate S. made Jan 17 at 2021 8:40 AM

CPO Nate S. — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 08:40:59 -0500

Interesting question with an equally interesting discussion. I am finding some responses here by some RP members very different regarding the incomining CIC/NCA than their stances on the same relative topic titles (aka similar questions) regarding the outgoing CIC/NCA. Just an observation........

Response by SSG Byron Hewett made Jan 17 at 2021 9:24 AM

SSG Byron Hewett — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 09:24:33 -0500

Capt Gregory Prickett - Sir I wish that you had shown the same courtesy in yours and mine discussions about President Trump. I need not remind you of what was said and how unfair your accusations of President Trump were. But I do agree with your Comments to SGT Cody Thompson, they were fair and very respectful to both side of the isle and supporters and non supporters. the only thing I think would help would read and think about what is being said before you reply with knee jerk reactions to others questions and posting, I am not perfect either, but before I answer anybody I try to think about what's being said and try not to answer with knee jerk reactions and I try to deliver a response or answer to comments and or posting that apply or formulate around what was asked or posted instead of veering off on something way off of the subject, Sir all I'm asking is take your time and thoroughly read what's being asked or posted I do know that some of our conversations would have been less heated if we both would have taken that pause to read and think about our responses.
thanks Sir

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 9:50 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 09:50:27 -0500

I see a Court Martial in your immediate future.

Response by MSG Daniel Talley made Jan 17 at 2021 10:15 AM

MSG Daniel Talley — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:15:16 -0500

Excellent question. I was trained to disobey unlawful orders to maintain order, discipline, and protect and defend Americans, America, and the constitution.

Where is the line? At what level will said decision be made? More great and scary questions. We saw 50+ generals "retire" under our last democrat president. And our nations dedication to "moral relativism" shifts and blurs the "right/wrong" line weekly.

I'm retired. So I will pray for our professionals in uniform for wisdom, courage, and persaverance. And consider them each time I vote.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Jan 17 at 2021 10:52 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:52:45 -0500

The Armed Forces are under civilian authority. Military members are obligated to obey lawful orders and to support and defend the constitution. Senior military members engage with political leadership giving their best advice. Civilian leadership then makes policy decisions. The military leaders have the choice as to how to execute the policy. Unfortunately some civilian leaders choose to micromanage the military. This often leads to strategic failure as we saw in Vietnam.

At your level, SSG Private RallyPoint Member, follow orders, take care of your Soldiers, do the mission. Your alternative is to resign.

Response by Wayne Soares made Jan 17 at 2021 11:11 AM

Wayne Soares — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:11:09 -0500

Thanks for the question Sgt. Thompson

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 11:19 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:19:21 -0500

if you have a problem or question this statement then the military is not a place for you.

"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."

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 11:36 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:36:09 -0500

Go read the oath. If you know an order is unlawful and can back up it's unlawful, you don't obey it. It's that simple. Also read your contract again too.

And you said "uncertain near future with new 'leadership' that we now have." Why is leadership in quotes?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 17 at 2021 11:54 AM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:54:10 -0500

Above all the constitution should be protected because it prescribes democracy and how it is maintained. It defines the roles and responsibilities of the three branches of the government. It also illuminates the election process.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 12:19 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 12:19:58 -0500

If you mean "separate" as no longer obeying lawful orders from duly appointed civilian authority, that would be known as a military coup. It's in the Oath you took. Not fake news, deep state, QANON, but lawful under Constitution, and enforceable under UCMJ.

The Oath of Enlistment (for enlisted): "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."

The Oath of Office (for officers): "I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) 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 or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations 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."

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2021 3:03 PM

SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 15:03:10 -0500

This is a very deep and serious question to reflect on. We all took an oath to uphold the constitution. We do not work for congress but we do report to the president. There will be a time where you will be asked to do things that go against your moral code. At that time you will have to choose, be a traitor to your conscience, your nation and your god, or be a traitor to the military of which you serve. Either way, you will be branded. The question is, which brand will you wear?

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Jan 17 at 2021 5:21 PM

SPC Erich Guenther — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 17:21:47 -0500

I think a quick review of the questioning orders law is appropriate here since there are so many misinterpretations below by veterans and one by a self described lawyer. The law stems from the Nueremburg Trails specifically I believe (so called Nuremburg Defense). In which case the subject area is very narrow and involves around the commission of war crimes specifically on a battlefield. In my view the law has EL ZIPPO to due with low ranking individual soldiers determining Constutionality of said orders at a National Level. Active Duty Army is not responsible for Law Enforcement under Posse Commatatus act, so the presented scenario to begin with is very highly hypothetical. I would think Constitutionality of Orders determination would end at the Flag Officer level for Active Duty Army if they were charged with law enforcement and not under the direction of local Law Enforcement. Constittutionality should be determined at a higher level than paygrades E1-E5. Additionally the order has to be fairly obviously recognizable as unlawful in order, in regards to the laws of warfare (which have nothing to do with law enforcement)......... for the soldier to be charged with a war crime. This whole extension that it means a Soldier can disobey any order based on their interpretation of the law.........complete bullshit in my opinion. The Nuremburg directive is clear that individual morals come into play here as it relates to avoiding battlefield atrocities. Likewise the IDF has a similar reference to the Soldiers morals. Now a Police Officer is a different story as they are charged with enforcing laws and in their case they do have to determine the Constitutionality of the laws they are asked to enforce. I don't think a Soldier should be dong that at such a low paygrade. Someone should get a representative of JAG involved with this discussion. This guy is getting a LOT of bad input from overly political posters here that are not looking at this objectively.

The DC National Guard is under direction of local law enforcement and local law enforcement unless compromised should be making the Constututional calls on what laws are Constitutional.

Response by SPC Kevin Ford made Jan 17 at 2021 9:01 PM

SPC Kevin Ford — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 21:01:46 -0500

The military has absolutely, positively, no role in making political decisions or in making any decisions about if a election was legitimate. That is the role of our civilian authorities and those authorities have done their thing. The military takes their orders from the elected civilian government.

Outside of illegal orders, it is your duty to carry them out. To be clear "illegal" orders are not based on your personal interpretation of the Constitution. If you are not comfortable with that, it's time to get out because you should not be serving.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Jan 18 at 2021 6:51 AM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Mon, 18 Jan 2021 06:51:35 -0500

Our allegiance is to the Constitution

Response by 1SG Michael Farrell made Jan 18 at 2021 3:48 PM

1SG Michael Farrell — Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:48:17 -0500

The military you seem to be yearning for is The Army of the Confederacy.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2021 4:36 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:36:32 -0500

Good thing I asked this question out of curiosity. Some of y’all kinda came of the rails flying at me but a lot of responses have been good, educational, and in depth. I could voice my personal opinion on what has been going on in this country, but I don’t want to get politics involved on this platform like it’s the norm. From the multiple responses I’ve seen , I think it’s good I’ve asked this question so that others who are kinda confused can see this, and make a decision afterwards. And again, if your gonna get hostile with me....message me, or I can give u my number and we can settle differences that way. So please if your gonna get nasty and hostile, just don’t even comment.

Response by SGT Mary G. made Jan 20 at 2021 12:04 AM

SGT Mary G. — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 00:04:24 -0500

We might want to remember that our Constitution is intended to make divisive and violent transitions in government totally unnecessary. Every four years we elect a president. And there is no need for transition to be full of enmity nor reprehensible polarity, let alone violence - no need. Only peaceful transitions are Constitutional, imho, so we support and defend peaceful transitions.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Jan 21 at 2021 1:57 AM

SGM Bill Frazer — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 01:57:50 -0500

1. Other than voting and calling/writing your elected officials- you are out of any decisions unless it results in illegal orders. 2. Our oath is not to an Official, Party, or Branch of Government, but to the People as a whole to defend the Constitution which is for all.

Response by 1SG Ken Bedwell made Jan 24 at 2021 10:45 AM

1SG Ken Bedwell — Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:45:26 -0500

The military is apolitical. You follow all lawful orders, period. As has already been stated, the Commander in Chief is now President Biden. Trust the separation of powers created in the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court will settle any differences between Congress, the executive branch, and the law.

Response by LTC Ken Connolly made Jan 24 at 2021 9:28 PM

LTC Ken Connolly — Sun, 24 Jan 2021 21:28:04 -0500

Must follow all lawful orders.

Response by SSG Dave Johnston made Jan 25 at 2021 11:59 AM

SSG Dave Johnston — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:59:08 -0500

Not in our nations history, ever... even the war of 1861 to 1865, which was politically motivated, over the interpretation of the US Constitution. The Military had to choose which side of the of the political debate at the time to be on... And it was an individual decision that each officer and enlisted service member had to make...

Ethos, yours vs theirs

Response by SPC Michelle Greenwood made Jan 29 at 2021 6:35 AM

SPC Michelle Greenwood — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 06:35:25 -0500

The oath is to uphold the constitution.

Response by MSgt Gregory Balint made Jan 29 at 2021 5:16 PM

MSgt Gregory Balint — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:16:40 -0500

We as service members swear an oath to defend the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. Can not and do support former president trump with his rally call to storm and take the capital building. At that point in his presidency he became an enemy of the Republic.

Gregory Balint
USAF (Ret. ) E-7.

Response by SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman made Jan 29 at 2021 8:25 PM

SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:25:12 -0500

We have 3 separate and coequal branches of government, and the military is not one of them. Our founding fathers created the Executive, Legislative, and judicial branches and it is their responsibility to provide the coequal leadership.

Response by CSM Tim Bebus made Jan 29 at 2021 9:10 PM

CSM Tim Bebus — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:10:03 -0500

If I am reading this correctly I believe your concern is the current troop positioning in DC. Does it concern me as a citizen? Yes. Is it unlawful? No it is not. The National Guard can police inside American borders where as the Active service and Reserve components cannot. Here is the thing, over my career I have served in many areas where I probably had my opinion whether or not it was wise. With that said I wasn't elected to office to make that call. So as a Soldier I followed orders. As long as an order is LAWFUL its your duty to execute. President Biden was elected to be Commander and Chief whether you voted for him or not makes no difference, he is in Command.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 29 at 2021 9:57 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:57:14 -0500

This is for you SGM Mickel. I see not only that you possess a low mental acuity but you also want to portray yourself as an unmitigated prick who says nothing of value.

Response by SSG Bobby Richardson made Jan 30 at 2021 12:55 PM

SSG Bobby Richardson — Sat, 30 Jan 2021 12:55:40 -0500

I see a number of things to unpack here.
First "Is there a moment where the US armed forces not partake in decisions made by congress when things get to political? What if they are wanting actions to occur by our military when they go against the people and the constitution?" We take an oiath to protect & defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic; and to obey the lawful orders of those appointed over us. Prioritizing one's 'Politics' is for civilians who have not sworn to duty. If we reach a point where our conscience can't let us uphold our oath, then it is our responsibility to end our association with the military.

Second; "Is it even the us military anymore at that point?" The US military will *always* be the US military; whether or not it is the *same* military will be an open question. "Against the people and the Constitution" is sometimes subject to personal interpretation, which is why we have the Supreme Court. And even then, over decades, the interpretation can change to some degree.

Third; "Question stems from an uncertain near future with the new “leadership” that we now have. Just asking out of curiosity" There will always be questions about "leadership", civilian or military. There are people in authority who are not leaders and people who have no authority who are leaders. When equating "leadership" with "authority" see above, regarding 'lawfully appointed".

Regarding the current transition of Presidential power, 60+ courts - many with judges appointed by the outgoing President - have received no evidence that anything was done to alter the election results. Continuing to shout "There are questions!" because you don't like the answers you've already received implies an agenda that goes deeper than just getting to the truth.

Response by SSG Bill McCoy made Jan 30 at 2021 1:50 PM

SSG Bill McCoy — Sat, 30 Jan 2021 13:50:31 -0500

Great question, and one that should concern every soldier. MP's are taught, and repeatedly reminded about the Posse Commitatus Act that basically forbids the use of military personnel to perform law enforcement duty outside the boundaries of a military installation; except in areas of "concurrent jurisdiction." Concurrent jurisdiction are areas such as state or U.S. highways that are within the overall boundaries of an installation.
What concerns me is that, a number of years ago, some soldiers/units were surveyed about whether or not they would take action against civilians. That's the proverbial "slippery slope." In my units, we were always reminded about Posse Commitatus; but again, we were MP's and though we could ASSIST the civilian police, we could NOT perform law enforcement directly. For example, we could provide them with Jeeps and MP drivers during major snowstorms. We could NOT however INITIATE any sort of enforcement; EXCEPT as a private citizen, i.e., "Citizen's Arrest;" but that depends on a given State's laws in regard to Citizen's Arrest.
For example, our patrols were permitted to stop at local 7-11's on one U.S. and one State highway. The understanding (directive/SOP) was that IF we happened upon a crime, we could take NO action, unless it was a felony like an armed robbery, or a physical assault; and then, ONLY as a CITIZEN. One patrol happened upon an armed robbery at knifepoint, and the MP's did make a "Citizen's Arrest," literally by declaring that's what they were doing, i.e., "I am making a citizen's arrest," and they detained and cuffed the actor until the civilian PD arrived. They then had to testify, in court, IN CIVILIAN attire.
As for the use of military forces - it is not unprecedented when the Commander-in-Chief directs it as did some presidents - the 101st AB to ensure that school desegregation events in the South, and other units in similar events. They were enforcing FEDERAL LAW, or Federal ACTS. In those cases, it was as much for riot "control" as anything else, and because LOCAL police (at that time in history) tended to "look the other way."
In short, LOTS OF VARIABLES. We have to trust the Generals and the Staff Judge Advocate, to ensure that deploying soldiers for civil enforcement is legally, and morally sustainable.

Response by PO1 Jeff Childs made Jan 31 at 2021 9:50 AM

PO1 Jeff Childs — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 09:50:08 -0500

Our oath is to the Constitution, not Congress, and not to the President. Obama knew this. That is why he attempted to change the oath during his presidency, which caused quite an uproar. It is also worth noting that elected officials also take their oath to the Constitution. That they violate it does not demand that the military violate their oath.

Response by CPL Richard Sawyer made Jan 31 at 2021 10:07 AM

CPL Richard Sawyer — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 10:07:36 -0500

When our American constitution is threatened by internal government forces, then loyalties to America MUST come first, not tp those that attack our constitution and the republic.

Response by LCpl Kenneth Heath made Jan 31 at 2021 6:45 PM

LCpl Kenneth Heath — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:45:13 -0500

We swore to uphold the Constitution and obey LAWFUL orders of superiors. We must uphold the Constitution FIRST, and then process orders as lawfully applicable.

Response by PO1 Todd B. made Jan 31 at 2021 9:41 PM

PO1 Todd B. — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 21:41:55 -0500

I live by this creed and my oath.. I will support and defend the US Constitution, I will abide by order from my superiors... as long as they are NOT immoral, illegal, and unconstitutional. And I will abide by NO orders issued by anyone outside my chain of command like Congressman or Senators.
IF, IF for example, they come for the 2nd Amendment, I will NOT abide at all.. and in fact if it comes to it, I will literally uphold my oath to defend the Constitutional Rights therein.
3/4 of the people in this country own firearms.. A political and biased congress and senate does NOT represent that and in fact, right now as far as I am concerned, are all as corrupt as the year is long.
Today the government in power, is NOT the government we should have... They have corrupted and nearly destroyed the intent of the founders for this Republic in the last 70 years.. From using EO's to quietly passing laws that strip away rights by word playing, from holding power to two parties and more, I very much doubt this country will continue many more years without a reset.... civil war or revolution against this corruption...
For those that have studied and know history, you know this is NOT at all what the founders wanted... and if you don't believe that, go READ the federalist documents and personal letters of the founders.. it will make it VERY clear what the intent was and is.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2021 10:18 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 22:18:18 -0500

This is a silly question. Go back and read your oath of enlistment or commissioning. Your answer lies within the words you spoke with your right hand raised.

Response by CPT Michael Theimer made Jan 31 at 2021 11:32 PM

CPT Michael Theimer — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 23:32:25 -0500

As long as orders are legal. Your oath is to defend the Constitution of the United States. You should NOT obey illegal orders.

Response by SPC Edward Abney made Feb 1 at 2021 9:54 AM

SPC Edward Abney — Mon, 01 Feb 2021 09:54:04 -0500

SGT, I suggest that you take your political beliefs and stuff them in your foot locker and focus on your duty as a sworn member of our Armed Forces!

Response by PO2 Mike Shorey made Feb 1 at 2021 10:20 AM

PO2 Mike Shorey — Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:20:51 -0500

You answered your own question. When the orders go against the constitution they are unlawful. You do not have to follow unlawful orders.

Response by Maj Dale Smith made Feb 1 at 2021 1:53 PM

Maj Dale Smith — Mon, 01 Feb 2021 13:53:11 -0500

Something to ponder: For enlisted troops once every 3-4 years, or for officers at commisioning: you raised your right hand and repeated an oath that included, "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...". By reading and knowing the constitution, the Bill of Rights, the articles of the Constitution and the amendments there to, you will then be able to determine whether an action you perform is defending the constitution. Keep in mind that there are covert operations that are performed by the US military for national defense and security. These actions are to preserve the integrity of our nation. Once you find that an operation is self serving or serves a select group, this has strayed beyond the intent of the Constitution. Unfortunately in this age, even interpretation of what seemed objective, has become subjective. The lines are murkey at best. When something like this is encountered, be sure you know the Constitution, discuss it with a trusted and knowledged friend, and then seek guidance from your superior. (S)he may have the answer or will offer to get one. Talk to your JAG, your chaplin or ADC for guidance. If all else fails, there are a number of military lobbying groups such as the American Legion or VFW, your home town congressman or the congressman from the district of your military base. You will find that a political atmosphere becomes more and more prevelent as you go up the ranks. God gave us free will, and although some of this free will was checked when you raised your right hand and "repeated after me", remember that the Decleration of Independence discusses the "Right to life, liberty and the persuit of Happyness". If you decide to persue a different path from that which your superiors have set, be sure you have all your "Ducks in a row" before you do so and consider your actions as viewed by not only yourself, but your peers and superiors and whether any action you take would encrouch on someone elses right to "Life, liberty and the persuit of happyness". I would appreciate anyone with a law background to weigh in on this.

Response by CDR William Kempner made Feb 1 at 2021 9:21 PM

CDR William Kempner — Mon, 01 Feb 2021 21:21:31 -0500

Never. You take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the US, and obey the lawful orders of the POTUS, AND THE OFFICERS APPOINTED OVER YOU....." You don't get to choose whether you like them or not. As for dealing with lawful or unlawful orders, that is FAR above most of our pay grades. Stay smart, and stay informed. For a real good telling of a similar scenario, see the movie "Seven Days in May" with Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster. Might answer a question or two.

Response by SSG(P) Danielle Birtha made Feb 3 at 2021 4:54 PM

SSG(P) Danielle Birtha — Wed, 03 Feb 2021 16:54:34 -0500

CHINA IS THE ENEMY! CONGRESS IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW! ARTICLE THREE, SECTION 3!
RUSSIA IS THE ENEMY! CONGRESS IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW! ATTICLE THREE, SECTION 3!
THE JOBS OF THE U.S. BELONG TO WE THE PEOPLE, NOT OUR LEGISLATURES... TO GIVE TO OUR ENEMIES. Preamble: PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE... ARTICLE THREE, SECTION 3!
INVADERS ARE THE ENEMY! CONGRESS IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW THAT DEMANDS THEY REPEL INVADERS AND PROTECT U.S. FROM INVASION! --> ARTICLE THREE, SECTION 3 & ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION FOUR!

Article Three, Section 3: "Treason AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, shall consist ONLY in levying War against them, OR in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
--> U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 115 › § 2381 TREASON: "Whoever, OWING ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES, levies war against them OR ADHERES TO THEIR ENEMIES, giving them AID AND COMFORT WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR ELSEWHERE, IS GUILTY OF TREASON AND SHALL SUFFER DEATH, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.")

Article Four, Section 4: "The United States SHALL GUARANTEE to EVERY STATE in this Union a REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT, and SHALL PROTECT EACH of them AGAINST INVASION; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE."

Article Six: Clause 2. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all TREATIES made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, SHALL BE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND; and the Judges in EVERY State SHALL BE BOUND THEREBY, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary not withstanding."

Clause 3. "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, SHALL BE BOUND by OATH or AFFIRMATION, to SUPPORT this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

THEY SWEAR TO OBEY!
THEY ARE GIVING UP OUR PROSPEROUS MANUFACTURING, INCLUDING OUR FOOD, BY TREASONOUS LAW, TO ADHERE TO, AND GIVE AID AND COMFORT TO, CHINA... THE ENEMY!!!

Still don't understand what is happening?
PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR #$$#$ AND READ WHAT THE LAW SAYS... LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING!!!
(I have posted the COMPLETE Constitution, with all Amendments applied where they belong in the Constitution... as it sits TODAY... with all the definitions you need to understand obscure olde world terms like "ex post facto law"... READ IT! ... IT SAYS:
THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DICTATE U.S. AWAY TO OUR ENEMIES!!!!
Regardless of what enemies to our Nation say here, or on Facebook.
WAKE UP.
our public elected servants are serving our enemies, and hiding it under nazi politically correct speech, and dictated laws that we the people were not allowed to vote for or against.
Democracy? NO >(
Freedom? WE ARE UNDER HOUSE ARREST... AND MARTIAL LAW HAS STILL NOT BEEN INVOKED!
WHAT HAVE WE THE PEOPLE DONE THAT IS CRIMINAL TO BE UNDER MARTIAL LAW HOUSE ARREST???'
--> We are FREE. We WILL rise up and arrest, try, and execute them for their Treason, IF they allow U.S. to compare notes that ADD UP TO TREASON AGAINST U.S.!

Conspiracy Theory? Insurrection?
WE HAVE THE INALIENABLE RIGHT TO ARREST AND TRY OUR CONGRESS FOR COMMITTING TREASON AGAINST U.S.!!!

The FACTS don't lie... they ARE committing Treason to aid our enemies.
The WORLD is witness to their Treason.
Their Signatures on those Acts of Treason are THEIR CONFESSIONS IN THE OPEN COURT OF THE WORLD!!!
YOU can choose to be Free ... or you can CHOOSE to allow the Traitors in our Public Servant Offices to Oppress YOU into Abject Poverty, and Slavery, BY LAW... IF YOU SO DESIRE.
BUT... EXPECT me to be armed and ready to shoot YOU, when you try to take MY FREEDOM from ME >(

Accepting Censored Propaganda is easy.
Accepting the Truth... is it REALLY that difficult to understand?
The Constitution is simple, and concise, in it's directives to our Servants who volunteer to protect U.S. from our enemies... read it... or don't complain when you find yourself on your knees to the Crowns of the World... BY LAW >(
--> World Trade Organization Law... 164 Crowns and Dictators... now Command YOU to get on your knees, to the Flag of the U.S. ... AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
Will you get on your knees and be good little slaves?
OR WILLYOU FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM?
Reminder: You signed up to fight for our freedom.

GENERALS OF THE U.S. ARMED FORCES... WHY ARE YOU ALLOWING OUR SERVANTS TO TAKE OUR FREEDOM FROM U.S. ... TO GIVE AID AND COMFORT TO ENEMY CHINA... WHILE WE DIE TO PROTECT ENEMY SAUDI ARABIA, WHOSE 19 PRINCES ATTACKED AND KILLED OVER 3000 U.S. CITIZENS ON 9/11/2001???

GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD HANG ALL OF YOU >(

Response by SPC C. Michael Morrison made Feb 6 at 2021 4:19 PM

SPC C. Michael Morrison — Sat, 06 Feb 2021 16:19:15 -0500

Just as when I was in the Navy, and then Army, I always respected the Rank and Uniform of those appointed over me. It did not mean I respected the person.

The same is now true. I respect the Office of the President, but have zero respect for the person in that office.

Respect is earned, not demanded or forced.

Response by Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis made Feb 8 at 2021 6:18 PM

Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis — Mon, 08 Feb 2021 18:18:27 -0500

I have served under several US Presidents, all of whom had their good points and their bad points. I continue to serve as a Civilian Employee of the DOD. My service started in 1979, under Jimmy Carter. (Bless his heart, he tried hard. However...well), my service continued under Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton (who successfully used Air Power to succeed in an international conflict), George H. W. Bush, Barak Obama, Donald Trump (who made me a millionaire), and Joe Biden. For some, I had to grit my teeth. For others, it was a breath of fresh air. I won't tell you who is whom. The point, here, is that each and every one of them is Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces, by the power of the Constitution. They deserve your respect, even when out of office.

Now, it is theoretically possible that you could get an order from the President that you think is illegal. (Mind you, the President has a bazillion lawyers to advise him of this, so the chances of this are so remote that you'll find this only in fiction...with that said, however, you'll find some intriguing examples in such shows as "Designated Survivor" and "The Last Ship.") However, just for argument, let's say you think it has happened. The answer to you is this: Talk to the First Shirt. Talk to your Commander. Follow their directions. They have much more on the line than you, and will give you the best that they have.

Stay sharp. Keep clean. Grit your teeth if you must. Good luck.

Response by 1SG James Kelly made Feb 8 at 2021 7:54 PM

1SG James Kelly — Mon, 08 Feb 2021 19:54:05 -0500

When the orders are illegal.

Response by 1SG James Kelly made Feb 8 at 2021 7:54 PM

1SG James Kelly — Mon, 08 Feb 2021 19:54:43 -0500

When the orders are illegal.

Response by PFC Kimberly Staiti made Feb 8 at 2021 8:32 PM

PFC Kimberly Staiti — Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:32:41 -0500

You are asking now? Did it occur to you to ask when the POTUS had privately translated talks? When he ignored the Emoluments Clause? How about when his (totally unqualified) family members were put in key positions? Jared "overlooked" more than twenty facts on his clearance review/s. If you or I had been off by ONE, we would have been disqualified for a Top Secret clearance and depending on how big the "slip in memory" was we would have been at the mercy of UCMJ punishment.

What about the very peaceful crowd in Virginia who was attacked by self-proclaimed Neo-Nazis and ended with a woman killed?

How many people have to die because of his incompetence for lawful leadership or his racist, sexist actions?

Did you wonder when he told the Active Duty military he had just pushed through for the biggest pay raise ever and did a fundraiser for veterans that went to him? It was discovered and he had to replace the funds.

If you didn't ask about this after blood was spilled in the US Capitol Building, perhaps you should think through it all the way. Please remember that the number of Americans killed in the Civil War is still less than all the KIA put together from all the armed conflicts since then: Spanish American War, Korea, Nam, and WWI/I, Panama, Grenada, etc. I have family members who are hardcore Trumpists and some who adore AOC. I don't know if I could be violent to any one of them. We ~must~ demand the rule of law for every single one of us. Including POTUS, the House and Senate, and all the POWERFUL folks who fund them. No matter what party.

We are AMERICANS.

Response by PO2 Lawrence Smith made Feb 16 at 2021 2:16 PM

PO2 Lawrence Smith — Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:16:19 -0500

Unless I've gone brain dead the oath I took was to prorect the Constution against all enrmies both foreign and domestic.

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Feb 18 at 2021 10:02 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Thu, 18 Feb 2021 22:02:14 -0500

About the only thing i have found out here is that current and former officers have a strong tendency not to like their opinions being questioned especially by former enlisted . So they get mad and make it personal . First by touting their own education while questioning your education , intelligence , reasoning . and even your comprehensive ability . And only because you dared have an opinion other then theirs and have dared questioned theirs . And then call you an asshat ( really Mature ) and block you but only after they make sure they have the last words and it will be the the last words you get from them because they will then block you and you will not be able to reply . Right Capt: Greg .

Response by CPT Kevin Connolly made Feb 21 at 2021 6:00 PM

CPT Kevin Connolly — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 18:00:36 -0500

Yiou sound like an emergent traitor to me. Don't re-up ('cos you can't swear i good faith to uphold the Constitution). Numerous domestic enemies are recruiting. I'm sure you'll fit in better with any of them. Hail victory phooey.

Response by SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman made Feb 22 at 2021 1:22 PM

SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 13:22:58 -0500

Everyone, either civilian or military, must be guided by the founding father's concept that we are to be governed by those who are elected by everyone ("We the people"). The military, specifically its leadership, is not elected by anyone.

Response by SSG Russell Busicchia made Feb 23 at 2021 3:19 PM

SSG Russell Busicchia — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 15:19:54 -0500

The military must obey all lawful orders from anyone in the chain-of-command. We are bound by our oath until they make unlawful orders, i.e.: kill unarmed citizens for no reason. If you do not understand this concept go back to PLC.

Response by Charlotte Moss made Mar 2 at 2021 3:51 PM

Charlotte Moss — Tue, 02 Mar 2021 15:51:02 -0500

I understand the question. Biden is not mentally with it. They knew this when he was running. However, they wanted it so badly that they cheated everywhere. Just because the Supreme Court won't hear the case, does not mean it wasn't real. However, when it comes down to the oath, and from Foreign or Domestic Terrorist, well, will the military protect us from a tyrannical government, or does it mean that you will not?

Response by 2LT Mark West made Mar 3 at 2021 9:31 AM

2LT Mark West — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 09:31:27 -0500

Very good question especially considering the recent house bill in regards to the 2nd amendment. The leftists want to ban all weapons and expect someone to go out an confiscate these weapons. Military and LEO’s take an oath and I for one believe my oath is to the constitution before any elected officials.

Response by SPC Chris Ison made Mar 3 at 2021 12:28 PM

SPC Chris Ison — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 12:28:07 -0500

As a planner we have to interpret the code and other laws regarding the use of land.

My first planning job the city planner told me"I want you to be loyal to the code, not to me."

We swear allegiance to the CONSTITUTION not the president, not the general's, not congress.

I would expect a sergeant to know this.

Response by SrA Jose S. made Mar 4 at 2021 2:05 AM

SrA Jose S. — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 02:05:50 -0500

If he goes against Constitution you can disobey him.

Response by SrA Jose S. made Mar 4 at 2021 2:10 AM

SrA Jose S. — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 02:10:47 -0500

Never go against the people with political orders. Always follow Constitution. Meaning no confiscation orders like they did during hurricane Katrina where they had military confiscating firearms from law abiding citizens. Follow Constitution that is the first thing.

Response by SFC Zohn Tennyson made Mar 4 at 2021 7:27 AM

SFC Zohn Tennyson — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 07:27:38 -0500

As you’ve probably learned by now with all the officer “blah, blah” on here, pretty much nope. If you’re in uniform, you’re bound by duty and oath to follow orders, even from a complete fucktard like the idiot in office now. Only deviation would be obviously illegal or compromised orders. Keep asking questions though, as it’s the best way to learn.

Response by Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis made Mar 4 at 2021 12:47 PM

Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 12:47:23 -0500

At this point, it seems clear that the answer is:
You are bound by your oath to obey all orders from the POTUS and the Chain of Command.
If it is an unlawful order, however, you are not bound.
The question might then be "What is an unlawful order?".
Most of us seem clear on the obvious stuff. LOAC rules provide guidance. Killing unarmed civilians is an obvious example. Implementing ordinary orders from "above" (using "quotes" to make the term more generic) is another obvious example.
I think the discussion might hinge on examples that are less than obvious. I am wondering if respondents could consider if this might be the crux of disagreement in this discussion. What do y'all think?

Response by SGT Jon Goldsberry made Mar 4 at 2021 5:18 PM

SGT Jon Goldsberry — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:18:35 -0500

As a former NCO, I would advise you to be very careful with what you put out there. It is your duty to obey every lawful order, no matter the occupant of the white house or who is in charge. That being said, you took an oath. Having service members retake the oath now just because some supported a different administration is akin to having political purity tests. There have always been extremists in the military. They arr largely weeded out. But once the Major in Texas shot several service members after he was radicalized, was there the need for all to retake the oath. I am offended by the thought there is a need. My oath still stands! I was abhorred by what happened at the capitol. But those were the actions of a few and now every service member has to pay the political purity price for the actions of a few. If I were still in, I would have to seriously question this. If my first oath wasn't enough, why would a second be?

Response by LT Tom Grugle made Mar 4 at 2021 6:21 PM

LT Tom Grugle — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 18:21:36 -0500

That would be a military coup.

Response by SGT Scott Henderson made Mar 4 at 2021 8:13 PM

SGT Scott Henderson — Thu, 04 Mar 2021 20:13:28 -0500

The moment the government starts using you to enforce things that are unconstitutional and would require you to violate your oath of enlistment. Remember, "support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America" comes before "obey the [lawful] orders of the President and the officers appointed over me" for a reason.

Response by PO1 Michael Garrett made Mar 5 at 2021 12:22 PM

PO1 Michael Garrett — Fri, 05 Mar 2021 12:22:12 -0500

Whether anyone wishes to hear it or not, SGT Cody Thompson, raises a valid question which should not be so quickly dismissed. Before I begin, let me say that I served under Reagan and every president up to 2008. While I did not agree with the election of some presidents during my time in the Navy, I proudly served and did my duty. Fortunately for me, our nation was not as polarized back then as it is now. My response here may (or may not) get me kicked from this site. If that is the case-then so be it. Until my 1st Amendment rights are stripped from me physically, I will continue to speak out as a civilian. I first heard this question asked when I served under GHW Bush (41) as a theoretical question. This time, the question has returned but with more urgency.
Why is this question being asked now?
This nation is becoming more polarized with each passing month. Many of you noticed that Americans are viewing each other with increasing hostility. There is very little or no compromise on issues which would not have divided us in the past. Just last year, this nation saw nearly year-long violent demonstrations by rioters who supported ANTIFA and BLM. The results of the elections, further exacerbated tensions.
There is historical precedence, where this nation had to answer this question. The Civil War in 1860 split this nation along geographical and cultural lines. Each officer and soldier from the South, had to search their hearts over the potential breakup of the US. Each soldier in the North had to ask the ultimate question as to whether they would fire on those soldiers from the South. For most southerners, this was not an easy decision, to turn away from their nation and side with their state. They knew what could very well (and did eventually) happen. We stopped seeing each other as Americans but instead as complete strangers.
We are now at a similar point in history. With the election of each political president, both sides have become polarized and instead of compromise, now see the opposite side as a danger to the country. This belief has filtered into the ranks of the military. A wise Master chief once told me that the military is a microcosm of American society. It reflects the hopes, dreams, values, instilled in it by that society. With each incoming administration, the military has been modified (to varying degrees) to reflect the desires and goals of that administration. This modification of the military is now occurring with accelerating frequency.
But let us look to the oath that we all took at some point in our lives.
Military Oath of Enlistment/Service
I, (state name of enlistee), 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)."
As some here have so aptly stated, the ultimate duty we took in the military was to defend the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. We will obey the orders of the POTUS and the orders of officers appointed over us according to regulations and the UCMJ. This raises a question of what is a lawful order? Who determines what is, “lawful”? How far is the military to go in the fulfillment of those orders? What happens if the leaders are misguided? What one side may see as legal and constitutional can be seen by others as purely undermining it.
I have read many responses on this post and I can see that politics is playing a very significant role on who should follow the order of the President. I would like to explain this another way. If it gets me kicked off this site-so be it. Without trying to be political here, let me play Devil’s Advocate. I have read some of the statements here by others who feel that orders from the current Commander in Chief, should be absolutely obeyed. Would you have felt the same way of those orders had come from the prior CIC?
We are taught in basic training to follow orders unquestioningly. We understand that unit cohesion and obedience to duty in the protection of our Constitution, is the sole purpose of our service. But we are also a Constitutional Republic. Our military is NOT comprised of unthinking and unfeeling machines whom we call soldiers, sailors, and airmen. We are taught from birth, what our country stands for. Most of us grew up idolizing a military life. I know I did. The best way we felt that we could express our love for this country was to join the military in defending it.
When former President Trump cancelled transgender people from serving, how well did that go with those who support it? There were many who called for the military to overthrow (then) president Trump) Now, the Secretary of Defense has ordered a 60-day stand-down for the military to address extremism in the ranks. A little research shows that this stand-down will focus almost exclusively on right-wing extremism. How is right-wing extremism defined and more importantly, WHO defines it? Ultimately the events of the past 13 months are why you are hearing this question with increasing frequency and urgency. The military HAS been impacted by what is going in society. It is being divided which I believe is intentional.
Will my response answer anyone’s questions? Probably not. I am not here to advocate for or against anything. However, this question this question is not going away. If it is swept under the rug-then we may see a repeat of the events of 1860. God forbid that should happen.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Mar 5 at 2021 1:41 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Fri, 05 Mar 2021 13:41:42 -0500

I took a moment to think about this. The Civil War lends itself to shedding some light on it. The major difference was the difference of the strength of a strong central government, over a decentralized form of that era. General Lee turned down the chance to be Commander of the Army of the Potomac. Numerous other officers chose their state over the Union. Lee's allegiance was to his state. Today, outside of the National Guard, we do not swear an oath to a state. If we don't like a leader, does that give us the right to not follow the POTUS? If it isn't illegal or immoral, we are obligated to perform those functions.

Response by LTC John Griscom made Mar 5 at 2021 2:53 PM

LTC John Griscom — Fri, 05 Mar 2021 14:53:38 -0500

When the government no longer follows the Constitution.

Response by CPT Kenneth Rankin made Mar 5 at 2021 2:55 PM

CPT Kenneth Rankin — Fri, 05 Mar 2021 14:55:19 -0500

To clear up something stated...SCOTUS and all the other courts did NOT RULE on any of the election cases...All of them chose to NOT hear the cases, so zero evidence was able to be presented! So essentially all of them turned a "blind eye" to the question and there was NO "Day in court". Which clearly does not settle any question of our election process being open and fair. This fact alone will be a "blister" for our society which when it "pops" will be a tragic event in our history. In my opinion, it is our a mix of our failure as the "People" that has allowed the subversion and corruption of our representatives and the decline and corruption of the media in this country. It's unfortunate, but this country is on a "downhill run" at the 2nd civil war and there doesn't appear to be any brakes on this ride. When the ballot box fails the people, the people's only choice is the cartridge box.

Response by SPC Mark Stevens made Mar 6 at 2021 1:44 AM

SPC Mark Stevens — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 01:44:26 -0500

You just continue to follow orders until an Unlawful order is given. You'll know it when you hear it. All the second guessing and supposition you are engaging in is useless speculation that is a waste of your time and energy, detracting from your ability to do your job and carry out your mission. Your command will do 99.9% of the heavy lifting on that particular subject, anyways, and they get paid to do exactly that. Remember what the job of the Non-Com is: getting the mission accomplished, not deciding if the mission needs to be accomplished. Trust in your chain of command.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2021 11:21 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 11:21:56 -0500

If there is a conflict between orders, and the constitution, the oath you took is the deciding factor. An example in the real world was the National Guards involvement in gun confiscation during hurricane Katrina. That was clearly a violation of the oath.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Mar 6 at 2021 11:48 AM

SSG Edward Tilton — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 11:48:56 -0500

It is called a discharge, it indicates that you have completed the obligation to took an oath to complete. It is in your enlistment contract

Response by SPC James Drury made Mar 6 at 2021 12:58 PM

SPC James Drury — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:58:40 -0500

Lawful Order: "March them into the Gas Chambers!" Response: "Just following orders."
Turning on American Citizens, no matter the order or from whom, would be something soldiers should consider thoroughly, carefully and deeply.

American Soldiers were once civilians and will be so again (hopefully) and they should be (and usually are) aware of the highly charged, misleading and often false political speech of our so called leaders, many of whom's only ambition is to hold and retain power at any cost. RE: the 2020 Election.

In the end soldiers alone and together must decide when to obey orders or when to walk away. We do not want Robots for American soldiers. We want American Soldiers who have moral and ethical values and obey them first and foremost.

Response by SFC Randy Hellenbrand made Mar 6 at 2021 8:20 PM

SFC Randy Hellenbrand — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 20:20:08 -0500

Our constitution is for Democracy. The GOP is for Fascism. Easy decision.

Response by SPC Christopher Perrien made Mar 6 at 2021 8:23 PM

SPC Christopher Perrien — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 20:23:50 -0500

I got out (did not re-enlist)when Bill Cllinton was elected. I was not going to serve under a commander who would not do the same themselves. Seen enough dud-ass commanders by then at lower levels and they were actually in the military. I was not going to suffer such a pultroon as well.ETS-1993 and I have not seen anything better since. No I tell young people,not to join the military, unless I think it their best bet/benefit to become a well-fare/job corps dependant such as the military now is.

Fighting for your country? LOL This country ain't your country no more, and dying for it or getting F'ed up over it ain't worth it no more. I have to wonder if it ever was after 1861, maybe even long before that.

Response by LCpl Sidney Green made Mar 6 at 2021 9:26 PM

LCpl Sidney Green — Sat, 06 Mar 2021 21:26:56 -0500

Technically no, since congress has the power to write law to grant them the necessary power to accomplish their needs. If you're referring to Posse Comitatus, even the president has the authority to command troops inside U.S. borders against the people in severe cases and under extreme circumstances.

Response by LTC Ken Connolly made Mar 7 at 2021 10:40 AM

LTC Ken Connolly — Sun, 07 Mar 2021 10:40:31 -0500

Pretty sure that decision affecting the entire military is not made at the Sgt's level. However, there maybe a time as in individual, where political decisions appear to you to be wrong. So, the best thing for anyone to do is write your Congress Rep voicing your opinion, and/or request to be discharged or formally resign from the Service. To do anything else can get one into more trouble than he or she can personally handle.

Response by CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana made Mar 7 at 2021 7:37 PM

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Sun, 07 Mar 2021 19:37:29 -0500

Look SSG Private RallyPoint Member, it is, very simply put, The POTUS is the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces and the Command Authority of the Country. As such, when we take an Oath to do our duties, to honor others and to respect our Country, we include in this framework the POTUS. Therefore, giving respect to Country is honoring your Commander in Chief in your commitment to your Oath. Biden or Trump; Clinton, Bush or Obama, the size and color is immaterial, because the Armed Forces in it's commitment to defend our Country is apolitical, yet it's orders are from the POTUS.

Response by LTJG Richard Bruce made Mar 7 at 2021 11:12 PM

LTJG Richard Bruce — Sun, 07 Mar 2021 23:12:00 -0500

No one is forcing a serviceman from following any order, but there are consequences. Aboard ship, I was in charge of one of our motor surf boats for abandon ship billet. I brought along a M16. A crewman asked me if the gun was to shoot sharks. I said, "No, it's to shoot you if you don't follow orders."

Response by PFC John Roscoe made Mar 8 at 2021 6:15 AM

PFC John Roscoe — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 06:15:52 -0500

Gee, Sarge- obviously not part of MI or CID, are you....or are you? Here we have a junior NCO asking about loyalty to the US Congress, the FIRST of three co-equal branches; a bare 2 months after Congress was ransacked by supporters of the former "leadership" (Did you see Trump appointee Federico Klein at the forefront calling for reinfocrements to force the breach?) and the military waited 3 hours and 19 minutes to deploy. So My question for you, sarge, is don`t you think the FBI, CID, NSA are all curious about military people who are curious about where their loyalty to a democratically-elected government, to the judiciary and legislative ends? Then again, if I was working for them I would be infiltrating forums like this one to smoke out people who had those questions- so which are you, then: the hunter or the prey?

Response by SPC James McKenzie made Mar 8 at 2021 9:05 AM

SPC James McKenzie — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 09:05:11 -0500

Horse shit . You ARE NOT a leader, just a mime. Only OATH I EVER SWORE to was to defend the Constitution, regardless of who is attempting to step on it. I hope most in service are NOT like you. Be a shame to have to kill them

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Mar 8 at 2021 2:21 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 14:21:40 -0500

Maj Ken Kind of weak to post to some one and they can't reply because they are blocked . Or is it that you just don't lke being questioned or your opinion being challenged .

Response by SFC Howard Holmes made Mar 8 at 2021 3:04 PM

SFC Howard Holmes — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 15:04:06 -0500

It's really becoming more difficult to understand the military's roles and missions. ROE's can be more aggressive against American citizens than they ever were against Afghan Taliban, or Iraqi insurgents. There are more senior officers that are bringing politics in to their duties as well, just look at Lt. Col. Vindemann (sp??) He was completely out of his realm as a military leader during his Congressional testimonies. He was buddy, buddy with the Dems, but when a Republican addressed him as sir, he said, Address me as Lt. Col. He lost his role as a military officer and became a military hack. It was a disgrace. There was a point in the military when you took your orders and the mission was oriented to achieving the goals of the objective. I NEVER knew any of my fellow soldiers' political stance. I NEVER knew any of my commanders' political stance. That's a bit different in the Guard and Reserve, but never on active duty. During Desert Storm it was quite obvious who the tactical and political generals were. Scwhartzkopf(sp?) was the tactical, while Powell was definitely the political guy. The necessity for the highest of the upper echelon to play these games, but field commanders and operators are playing the politics game, and that's dangerous.

Response by PO1 Franklin Fischer made Mar 8 at 2021 5:42 PM

PO1 Franklin Fischer — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 17:42:09 -0500

I agree it doesn't matter the president. What does and always has, are the orders legal and lawful. If they are you follow them, evwn if you don't agree with them.

Response by SP6 Bruce Kellar made Mar 8 at 2021 5:51 PM

SP6 Bruce Kellar — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 17:51:10 -0500

When the POTUS expects the military to stand against the citizens the upbringing and allegiance to the nation will reflect their actions. Many of us with at least the same qualifications with an experience factor few to none of todays soldiers have, are willing to oppose anyone that violates our constitutional freedoms which is what the military is sworn to do. On your feet. Old guys on your ATV. Let the dance begin

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2021 8:15 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 20:15:56 -0500

At no point

Response by CWO3 Jim Grindstaff made Mar 9 at 2021 10:39 AM

CWO3 Jim Grindstaff — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:39:01 -0500

There is NO moment that you describe. Decisions made by Congress, should they go "against the Constitution" will be ultimately decided on by the Supreme Court and/or the voting citizens of the US. The new "leadership" you seem to abhor will still be the Commander in Chief and our President. Your oath is not limited to obeying those officers and Presidents you like.

Response by LCDR Randall Haney made Mar 9 at 2021 10:53 AM

LCDR Randall Haney — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:53:08 -0500

My oath is to the constitution and not to the leaders I serve under.

Response by SFC Howard Holmes made Mar 9 at 2021 3:10 PM

SFC Howard Holmes — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 15:10:13 -0500

I think the separation was quite apparent yesterday when the Commander in Chief didn't remember the name of his appointee and the position of the Secretary of Defense. The separation was finalized when he couldn't remember the name of the building, you know, the Pentagon. "I want to thank Sec-, the former general, I keep calling him 'General.' My - the guy who runs that outfit over there," Biden said, before quickly adding, "I want to make sure we thank the secretary for all he's done." (Ibetson for Mainline, 9 March, 2021).

It's really going to be fun times if he decides to play around with the nuclear football and doesn't have any idea what it is. So yeah, as long as Biden's POTUS, don't worry about politics and the military. If Biden steps down, Harris will probably dismantle the military unless the payoffs from the military industry are substantial. BTW, the whole Biden not knowing his Sec Def, or being able to name the Pentagon is True, look it up.

Response by A1C Lloyd Box made Mar 9 at 2021 4:26 PM

A1C Lloyd Box — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 16:26:54 -0500

I remember the oath I took. I would defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic. That is what I defend.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Mar 10 at 2021 12:14 AM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 10 Mar 2021 00:14:25 -0500

What is interesting is George Washington fought the British. He was cognizant that the presidency should not have too much power considering Americans fought the yoke of the English monarchy.

Donald Trump fought the constitution and democratic principles to include attacking votes. He became everything Washington tried to prevent by his example of pure intentions and treating democracy as a hallowed institution. Trump acted like a dictator or monarch and his intentions were far from pure. There is an ocean of difference between the two, and Trump worked very diligently to become the countries worst president. We voted in an apathetic, unempathetic, lying, careless, imprudent, caustic, unprincipled, incompetent, mentally insufficient, and narcissistic man to run the country, and he proceeded to slash and burn down the country through his pathetic leadership.

Response by SCPO Lonny Randolph made Mar 10 at 2021 1:01 PM

SCPO Lonny Randolph — Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:01:45 -0500

I think it's important to point out that the Congress doesn't issue orders to the military, the President of the United States is in fact the Commander in Chief and he directs the military via the Chain of Command. We are sworn to obey the (lawful) orders of the Commander in Chief and to protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I served under Presidents I despised - Clinton and Presidents I found to be the most honorable men in our history - Reagan. Regardless how I felt about them, I obeyed every legal order. If they had issued an illegal order I would not have obeyed. Period. Personally I believe Biden is incompetent to serve and his running mate is just as bad - I am thrilled that I am no longer on active duty but if I were I would hold my nose and still adhere to my oath. Regardless whether or not Biden is competent I reject the notion that he is trying to hurt the country - he simply doesn't have the cognitive skills to not screw up the job.

Response by SPC Matt Spruell made Mar 10 at 2021 1:33 PM

SPC Matt Spruell — Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:33:37 -0500

Of the order is lawful and they have the authority to give it you must comply. The constitution is supreme law and your supreme oath to uphold. If you are unsure if the order is lawful you should consult AG before disregarding what could be a lawful order.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2021 7:00 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 07:00:18 -0500

I have served under every president from Reagan on, did not agree with every order, and chose to continue to serve where and when I was told to. The US military has always been controlled by civilian command structure, there is a separation to prevent the coups by generals that were so common in 18th century history. This divide keeps the military apolitical, and loyal to the oath of enlistment. We swear to uphold the constitution, not to follow a man but obey the orders of the officers over us.

Response by PO2 Louis Fattrusso made Mar 11 at 2021 10:40 PM

PO2 Louis Fattrusso — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 22:40:12 -0500

Our promise was to defend our country and constitution. If our leaders willingly and knowingly con to violate the constitution, a criminal act for them, they are no longer qualified to give orders to the military. The military should never be called against the people of the United States. These issues are issues of conscience and ultimately the military leadership will have to determine the legality of the leadership and the proper response

Response by LTC John Harris made Mar 12 at 2021 1:22 AM

LTC John Harris — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 01:22:07 -0500

Doesn't mean I have to like him. He is the Commander-in-Chief.

Response by MSG Clyde Mills made Mar 12 at 2021 5:45 AM

MSG Clyde Mills — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:45:34 -0500

The main thing is you swore an Oath to the Constitution of the United States Of America. To defend this Country against Any Foreign and Domestic Enemies.

Response by MSgt Mike P. made Mar 12 at 2021 10:57 PM

MSgt Mike P. — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 22:57:46 -0500

Excellent question in today's situation! I would have to "question the legality" regarding 2nd Amendment backlash and the possible misuse, i.e., claims of illegal or improper handling of these cases. IF we were able to believe the DA's or court-issued subpoena, that would be one thing. I DO NOT trust many in the system today!!! I also feel bad for police being pulled into some of these cases.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Mar 13 at 2021 8:10 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 20:10:17 -0500

I was asking that years ago. There was a point at which Soldiers, Police, and Managers would have to take a stand. With the Government or the Terrorists. You couldn’t be a soldier or Policeman and an Oathkeeper at he same time.

Response by SPC Curtis Underwood made Mar 14 at 2021 10:16 AM

SPC Curtis Underwood — Sun, 14 Mar 2021 10:16:29 -0400

I can not say at what moment this will come. But it will have to be clear cut violation of the constitution. Clear cut meaning they are going against the constitution by direct or indirect means (circumventing the constitution by laws or orders).
I am a conservative, a Veteran and an American that takes his OATH seriously. It has been said by several that the military will not go against the people and by some that it will follow orders(meaning they will go against the people). You will be either against the people or against the government if congress, the president and senate have their way.
I don't know about the rest of you brothers and this goes for all of you left leaners or conservatives because all of you are brothers. I think the time is coming you will have to make a decision. This decision will be either to fight the people or the government.
The way I see it at this point, there is only three ways this can go if the democratic controlled government continues their agenda.
1. A military coup. Which would save a lot of blood shed.
2. A civil war of which the USA would not survive for either side of the issues.
3. Continue letting it go and learn to be a socialist/communist.

Now for me when they take away my rights, I will start shooting anyone that comes to force me. I know I will die but dam it I will die free and trying to uphold the oath I took. I am to old to go and fight them at their places so all I can do is fight from here.
You brothers will have to make that same decision. You will not be able to sit on the fences as a lot of Americans will do. You best make up your minds before it happens, so you can be prepared.

There is reasons I wish, that if it comes to the constitution being clearly attacked that a coup would happen. First off a coup would not be an out and out war. Oh there may be some fighting against some of the more active organizations that is for socialism.
Among these reasons are that if civil war happened it would be more a gorilla warfare and the targets would be anything that would hurt the government control. These targets would include the electrical grids. A document posted by someone that was in the Department of Homeland Security has stated any 2 or 3 month time period of the electrical power grid failure would cause approximately 9 out of 10 Americans to die.
You people leaning left take this into consideration in making your decisions. Because most of the gun owning Americans, veterans and good old back country boys are not going to stand for a socialist government.
There is nothing else can be said about this. If the government changes or disobeys the constitution which we swore an oath to then it is up to you if America dies, lives free or is communist.
I can see no good outcome for any of us.

Response by TSgt Lars Eilenfeld made Mar 16 at 2021 2:19 PM

TSgt Lars Eilenfeld — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:19:06 -0400

Under the UCMJ it is the right and duty to disobey a unlawful or immoral order. That being said you better have your ducks in a row if your going to do that and hopefully your Commander and Joint Chiefs have a spine to not allow you to be put in that situation but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one you may pop a blood vessel.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 16 at 2021 4:14 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:14:03 -0400

There's 2 documents that lay it out: we're sworn to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence backs it up with what we won't stand for. Give them both a good read.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Mar 16 at 2021 6:16 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 18:16:43 -0400

The exact moment: when the United States becomes Venezuela

Response by SP5 John Burleson made Mar 18 at 2021 12:55 PM

SP5 John Burleson — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 12:55:56 -0400

Somewhere, probably on a bathroom stall wall, we're told we don't have to follow an "illegal" order. If I could just find that part of the UCMJ I'd yell it from the flagpole in front of the Pentagon. I know Ive read the section but I don't remember what the UCMJ thpught was an illegal order. So we get to make our own tiny little minds up. My tiny little mind has decided that if I can't find the Constitutional prerequisite for the order, it's illegal and somebody is about to get whacked with a dead fish. So soldiers get to make up their own minds on this point> Another problem. Get ten Marines together and you get ten opinions. What a conundrum!! My personal idea of an illegal order is when Hide-in-A- Hole Joe orders his militry to clear Congress because he wants to be Premier of the Peoplz Democratic Republic of Amerika. Which is where his puppet master, Kamalean, is headed.

Response by SPC John Tacetta made Mar 20 at 2021 5:01 PM

SPC John Tacetta — Sat, 20 Mar 2021 17:01:37 -0400

I'm pretty sure there is already a separation. Your orders come from the CIC through the Joint Chiefs, not Congress. You are bound to follow all lawful orders passed to you through your chain of command, no matter what you think of the orders or the people issuing them.

Response by SFC Joel McPhaill made Mar 21 at 2021 4:23 PM

SFC Joel McPhaill — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 16:23:22 -0400

Here is the bottom line: Support the Constitution of the United States, and follow all (lawful) orders .

The oath you took: "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).

From: https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html

Oath of Enlistment - Army Values

The following is the Oath of Commissioned Officers

Response by CPL Evan Intlekofer made Mar 24 at 2021 2:14 PM

CPL Evan Intlekofer — Wed, 24 Mar 2021 14:14:26 -0400

This is a lightning rod. As uniformed US military and such, political differences aside lawful orders are what they are and shall be followed if we expect to maintain any amount of order. Look at Lt. Gen. McChrystal, the average person wouldn't have ever known he wasn't a fan his commander in chief until one wrong remark ended his career. People were saying Trump was mentally unfit for office all the time, and then you see Biden falling up the stairs. Chances are, when soldiers start to see POTUS fumbling around, the political opposition locked on to it along time ago and likely have the cannon pointed already. That's why we have congress. If POTUS starts getting a little too sketchy and the public starts to reject his actions or agenda, the political class, out of self preservation will have him removed from office. If you don't understand the oath, you probably picked the wrong career path.

Response by SP6 Greg Jetter made Apr 11 at 2021 3:23 PM

SP6 Greg Jetter — Sun, 11 Apr 2021 15:23:51 -0400

The problem is , the whole world knows that Biden is not the true president , that he was installed not elected in a COUP headed by the CIA and DOJ per Obama's instructions. The military failed to act to defend the constitution of the united states. Face the facts , a lot of high ranking officers are now more political beings than defenders of the people or their troops. The courts failed to even look at the over whelming evidence, Now we are headed to Civil WAR , The ranks are being purged of any and all patriots that honor their oaths ,You either believe and honor your oath or you do what the fake commander and chief and all his minions above you say and violate your oath to GOD , in the end it's your personal decision and you soul that has to take on the responsibility.

I know where I'm going to stand , and so do a lot of other veterans and oath keepers. you folks still on active duty are going to have to decide for yourselves , go to war with your friends , family and neighbors or draw your paycheck for your compliance in the end of the nation.

Response by MSgt Scott Gaston made Apr 14 at 2021 8:12 PM

MSgt Scott Gaston — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:12:54 -0400

Orders of those appointed over you may be unlawful, but your duty to protect the Constitution (as originally written) against ALL
Enemies, Foreign or DOMESTIC top all priorities!

Response by PO2 Mike Vignapiano made Apr 25 at 2021 10:17 PM

PO2 Mike Vignapiano — Sun, 25 Apr 2021 22:17:09 -0400

After reading this thread, I believe the question was misunderstood. IMHO, our military obeys our Commander-in-Chief PERIOD. If s/he goes against Congress, we still obey the Commander-in-Chief, NOT Congress. If the Commander-in-Chief goes "against the people and the constitution", the first part of our Oath states we are to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." It then says that we "will obey the orders of the President of the United States... according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 29 at 2021 11:37 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:37:43 -0400

So I have a question for Trump supporters. Did Trump and the GOP never lie, lied sometimes, or lied infinitely?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 29 at 2021 11:45 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:45:48 -0400

There is a big difference between BLM and the Capitol Rioters. The BLM ideology is equal justice for blacks in police custody. This was a legitimate grievance. The Capitol Rioters interfered with a democratic convention of counting electrol votes to determine the next president. Their ideology was the to fight the constitution and democratic principles so Trump could steal the election.

Now for you Trump supporters did Trump never lie, sometimes lied, or lied all the time?

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Apr 30 at 2021 1:48 AM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Fri, 30 Apr 2021 01:48:14 -0400

Maj Ken L made a gutless move posted a comment to me that won't allow a reply but here is is anyways MAJ Ken Landgren - Keep up your delusion Maj . and continue the lie . You know as well as i do the rulings were made with out allowing the evidence to be presented . They ruled on the validity of the evidence with out ever having seen it or allowing it to be presented . The Infinite lie is believing Biden with an all but non existent campaign that few people ever even showed up to won by over 10,000,000 more votes then Obama and any other president in history . They even went so far as to hold a fake side show hearing to give the pretense of "reviewing" the evidence to determine whether or not it would even be allowed in court. When they new all they were going to do is summarily dismiss every witness , affidavit , and video presented and not allow it to be heard in court . BTW as a matter of law you do a full investigation to determine the validity of an accusation and there was more then enough evidence to warrant an investigation with all the witnesses ,affidavits and videos . And it was wide spread . And Biden didn't win , Not legally . But keep repeating the lies soon they will become your truth . Or they already have . Clearly your ideology is not served by reality .

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 1 at 2021 6:44 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 01 May 2021 18:44:52 -0400

The greatest priority is for the military to protect the constitution not congress and not the president. Irony is it was Trump who was not following the principles of the constitution and democracy. He was the enemy of the constitution and democracy. Some of you gullible Trump supporters believe a man who lied incessantly over the 4 years to include lying about the risk of the pandemic that has had a significant impact to our country; and the consequences was his deceit led the US having the highest cases and deaths in the world. How rational is it to lie about a lethal pandemic? What did he do to prepare the country for such a pandemic? This is your leader who shit on the country.

Response by MSG Timothy Smith made May 8 at 2021 6:18 PM

MSG Timothy Smith — Sat, 08 May 2021 18:18:47 -0400

Re: Orders. If lawful, obey it, if not, don't obey. If in a grey area, tactfully ask for clarification. As to the C-in-C, no one says you have to respect the individual. But you do have to respect the position. Much like active duty.

Response by SGT Ronald Audas made May 20 at 2021 3:28 PM

SGT Ronald Audas — Thu, 20 May 2021 15:28:56 -0400

In 1968 hundreds of military riot squads were ordered to Chicago for the Democratic convention.Our orders were to control the crowd.We marched in line with bayonets pointing at civilians.Although we forced them into certain areas,we knew these were Americans.Try as we may to not injure anyone it happened.I dispised Lyndon Johnson.He was purely a politician without a sign of military ability.ie Vietnam the USS Pueblo and others.But we followed his orders.That's how it's done.

Response by SPC Franklin McKown made May 21 at 2021 12:35 PM

SPC Franklin McKown — Fri, 21 May 2021 12:35:20 -0400

If Trump signed the insurrection act then legally ,at that point,COG demands that upon confirmed knowledge of a coup is factual, then they (you) must act to preserve the Republic, from a rampant Democratic ,socialist, attack ,as sworn. THAT is 2 big "if's
We are waiting too.
Until further info I follow LEOs,you follow orders..."price of honor" shit.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 21 at 2021 10:04 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 21 May 2021 22:04:06 -0400

Lets look at it from a governmental point of view of checks and balances. Congress certified the electoral votes. Pence certified the elections. All the Federal and Supreme Court fraud cases were denied due to a lack of evidence. With this preponderance of evidence if I was the SECDEF I would tell the generals to stand down.

Response by PO3 Robert Buckels made Jun 7 at 2021 4:40 AM

PO3 Robert Buckels — Mon, 07 Jun 2021 04:40:35 -0400

Bottom line, and I hope someone made that clear is that if you want to challenge your leadership to follow the letter of the constitution and UCMJ, then you had better be an expert in the field of constitutional law. Two hundred forty-five years this July 4th and we are still debating the constitution and what it was meant to mean. One thing you can keep in mind about using the Military against our citizens is covered by the Posse Comitatus Act that expressly forbids the use of the military to execute civilian law unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.

Response by Sgt Jake Middlebrook made Jun 27 at 2021 11:57 AM

Sgt Jake Middlebrook — Sun, 27 Jun 2021 11:57:54 -0400

The moment comes when you our your officers decide the orders of the President and Congress do not follow the Constitution which if you notice in your oath is your first allegiance. If you win you will be a hero of the New Revolution. If you lose you will be lucky if you are only shot. The best you can hope for is a lot of good people will die and not a few people unwilling to follow the Constitution will die. That said I would save committing Munity for a time when it appeared to me the Munity will cause fewer casualties than following orders. May this be a decision you never feel required to make.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 21 at 2021 6:47 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:47:24 -0400

Hell no

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Sep 21 at 2021 6:04 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Tue, 21 Sep 2021 18:04:50 -0400

To Maj Ken L. I don't think you have any ground to stand on about being blocked You block people you don't like or agree with . You make post directed at me but blocked me so it's just a one sided opinion, yours . I very much know blm's ideology they have posted it . And i have read it . And that is just why one of the founders of blm left because it became mortally corrupt . And another has been arrested for human trafficking's and Prostitution ( pimping ) And yet another used their funding to buy a million+ dollar home in a mostly white neighborhood and a few other high end homes for family and friends . But did not help so much as one family or protested the murder of children killed in Minority communities by their own. And when the courts refuse to allow evidence to be presented it is in fact justice denied and that is just what they did . And what the Supreme court so called ruled on was that they were not going to hear the case . And their rulings were not based on fact or data it was based on their ideology and personal opinion . And there is only two reasons i can think of as to why they would do this . 1 Is they don't like Trump because he is not part of the good old boy swamp and 2 They didn't want the people to lose faith in our election system that they know has become completely compromised . Not allowing the evidence to be presented and not hearing the case is hardly making a ruling of no fraud . It just makes them complicit . It's also why democrats have done all they could to prevent an audit .

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Sep 21 at 2021 8:26 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:26:14 -0400

MAJ Ken L, Unlike you i don't block people because they disagree with me so i can keep posting to them but they can't reply . I am not the butt hurt and weak . Nor am i that Narcissistic , You ask a question i forgot to reply to when i had the chance so i will do it now . The people that had that little mini riot on Jan 6th that lasted about an hour you asked if i knew their ideology or something like that . Well that depends , do you mean the ones that were invited into the building or the antifa ,blm, and fbi that were planted to incite trouble . But it doesn't really matter i am familiar with both ideologies .

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jul 27 at 2022 9:06 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 27 Jul 2022 21:06:42 -0400

Thank you SSG Private RallyPoint Member for posting a pertinent question [I just discovered this post]
Defending the Constitution is most important - when Congress intends the military to support political agendas at the potential expense of the Constitution with the Bill of Rights which were ratified together.
My primary focus is the on Oath of Commissioned Officers
I enlisted when President Ford was POTUS in 1974 and served until President G.W. Bush's presidency ended in 2008. I permanently retired in 2016.
I consider Presidents Reagan and Trump to be the better Presidents. I did support President G.W. Bush and tolerated President Carter and President Clinton.
"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; 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 on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)
I concur with the responses of SSgt Michael Bowen Lt Col Jim Coe Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis MSG Daniel Talley SSG Byron Hewett
FYI SMSgt Lawrence McCarter MCPO Hilary Kunz CPL Douglas Chrysler MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D.GySgt Jack Wallace SPC Woody Bullard CMDCM John F. "Doc" Bradshaw PO3 Edward RiddlePO1 Jeff Chandler CPL Ronald Keyes Jr

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 28 at 2022 2:58 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 28 Jul 2022 14:58:42 -0400

The military is the keeper of the country's values. Senior generals are statesmen as well. They will look at the constitutionality, regulations, and laws to guide them to do the right thing. A jackass president does not have a free reign of the military.

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Jul 31 at 2022 5:17 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Sun, 31 Jul 2022 17:17:27 -0400

When what they are asking or demanding is for the military to conduct actions against the citizens that violate the Constitution . And when those actions are based on political agenda not laws supported by the constitution . And When a law is passed that violates the rights of the people or any of the states it is not a law it is tyranny disguised as law . And it then becomes a duty to refuse to comply .