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

SGT Mary G. - Yes both parties corruption is a problem but only one party wants to change our government from free to socialists' as can be seen in the politicians comments and what has been said the agenda is for the democratic party.
As to nepotism or actual harm to someone because of their beliefs or which party they stand for, it is up to that individual to stand up for his or her rights. It is also up to others to aid them. To be a sheep is to be lead around without any say in anything. These people need to change their beliefs if they want to be free.
As to showing favoritism by increasing the price then they should not be buying from those type people. If someone tries nepotism then I just say you just lost a sale or if it from some governing body I get them voted out or try to. I will also go over that persons head about it. I am not scared of anyone including the government.
I am a individual and do not believe in any of the parties as a whole. I am independent but do not believe as the independent party believes either. To belong to any party says you believe as they do be it Democratic, Republican or Independent. I vote for the person nearest my beliefs no matter the party.
In this last election there was no democrats that had anything close to my beliefs. So I choose the lesser of the two evils because at least the republicans were not trying to change our constitution through circumventing it by making laws that goes against the constitutional laws..

SPC Curtis Underwood - I understand your p.o.v. and agree with a lot of it. However, dealing with nepotism and harassment is easier said than done - some places more than others. When there are no laws to prevent it, anyone who does not support it becomes a problem whether or not they speak up about not supporting it. With no trustworthy oversight, going over someone's head is fruitless even when one is willing and able to do so. I suppose the gamble is how realistic one is about how much and what type of abuse will occur due to speaking up, and whether or not one is willing to be the target of it. Without laws, and without enforcement if there are laws, I am unwilling to be the target of predictable vicious abuse, since any amount of pushing is considered to be an invitation to some abusers. Imo, we don't have functional nepotism laws where I live. I also support much stronger federal laws addressing nepotism than we have, currently. The current laws could be more functional IF merit was required to take priority over nepotism.
I have the luxury of believing advancement in the military, comparatively, seems equitably based on merit rather than nepotism of any type. I don't know if my opinion would have been somewhat different had I stayed until retirement. What I do know is that I would not have paid as much attention to politics, at least would have not spoken up about politics, while serving. Encouraging SM to keep a low profile, politically, is probably a good idea. Plenty of time to take that route after serving, as an obligation of being a good citizen, in part to try to encourage government to not use and abuse the military.
I don't register as an independent voter, partly because there IS an Independent party and I do not want to be considered to be supportive of that party either.

SGT Mary G. - I can understand your view. I also understand why you have this view. Military regulations, people you have to work with etc. has a great influence on us and our views.
As was said by a much smarter man than me "To see evil and do nothing makes you as bad as the evil itself.". If we see evil no matter what form it takes and do nothing it grows. When we have allowed that evil to continue without taking a stand against it that makes us just as evil.
If our forefathers had set back and done nothing we would not be free today, to openly discuss this.
This is my view and the way I try to live, but not everyone has the fortitude to do anything because of they way they were raised, taught in school and the people they were around.
This is the whole reason we are in this discussion today. People saw what was happening and said nothing, did nothing and continued to vote in the corrupt because they were party minded.

SPC Curtis Underwood - All true enough. I have been living that way too, actually, for the same reasons and have been in trouble repeatedly my entire adult life for speaking up (except while in the military, lol). My fortitude has started to tire after more than five decades of being a responsible, accountable adult!
Since the internet has become somewhat universal the "trouble" happens faster, more frequently, often with a lot of more viciousness and a lot more vulgarity. Few places remain for decent discussions that are respectable exchanges of opinion.<sigh> Older and younger generations can learn a lot from one another - as it probably always has been.

The only things I remember soldiers complaining about was pay, chow, and mail. Outside of that there was nothing else. In the civilian world, the left is louder even though they are fewer and the conservatives are called the silent majority because we sit back and tolerate liberals and their radical behavior until it gets to be too much. When we stand up to them, they take that as an insurrection, unarmed albeit an insurrection. How dare they stand up to us they say. We'll just have to show them a lesson. For this, they will frame the issues most beneficial to their agenda and have the media and high tech to act as their megaphones to make it more believable.

That is what is happening in the military today. The liberals in the military see what their civilian counterparts are doing and they are doing the same. They are trying to shut down those in the military who decide to stand up and present a different opinion. I'm really worried when this is taking place in the military. We had the Obama administration that weaponized the alphabet agencies and used them to spy and to malign the opposition. They spied on the incoming administration and attempted what any sane person would call a Coup. They did this for four years and failed every attempt. I was always of the opinion that the military would take the side of the Constitution and the American people. Now with the caliber of some officers in the Officer's Corp and some of their comments on this subject, different thread, I'm really concerned that what used to be my impression may no longer be the case, and that is a terrible feeling.

Sgt. Martinez, very well written. You covered more and addressed issues with great depth and clarity. Nicely Done Sgt.

SFC Domingo M. - Know your enemy. Know who the liberal Officers are and when the time comes for direct action...

SFC Martinez, I offer to you my sincerest apology for addressing you as Sgt. and not SFC. Please forgive my mistake and understand no disrespect was intended. Thank you.

SPC James Drury - True. I voted this last time for who I thought represented my values. It happened to be mostly republicans which was the least of two evils

SPC James Drury - Regarding leaving the ballot blank. I came across an interesting group called "the league of non-voters". Their recommendation was to never leave a ballot section unmarked because someone who later handles the ballot could mark it with his choice. Instead, mark two or more candidates thus rendering that portion of the ballot, invalid. What it also does is provide input to the statistical results. For example: lets say candidate 1 received 48 votes, candidate 2 received 47 votes, and there were 5 "non-votes". Candidate 1 would be declared the victor, but would be unable to claim that he was the choice of the majority of votes cast. Keep in mind that "non-voting" one section of the ballot does not invalidate the rest of the ballot.

SPC Curtis Underwood - There's a saying, "Republicans think the Democrats are fools, and Democrats think the Republicans are evil."

SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman - Larry, excellent points. I'd like to bring up one thing on "... not leaving a vote blank." I've been told that writing in a candidates' name or voting for multiple candidates will kick the ballot out and it becomes more likely than not your ENTIRE ballot will be thrown out by the vote counters.
They thrown them out because they don't want to be bothered straightening it out or recording and tracking write-in votes.
Don't know how true this is or not, but I opt not to take the chance and leave it blank.

SSgt Michael Bowen - Yeah- argue with me and prove that your GT score was in the gutter. Comprehensive means, integral, wide-ranging. total, all-encompassing- yeah, but what do I knowm having graduated in journalism/comunications, having an English language consultant for 20 years, and a contributing writer for a professional journal for English service providers based in the UK. Let me guess- 11 bravo, eh?

PFC John Roscoe - LMAO You can always tell when some one is butt hurt when they go on a rant trying to tell you just how smart they think they are all while being condescending and dismissive of some one else Knowing nothing about them . Comprehension is also understanding what you read or are told or even see . But then with all that self serving promotion of yourself you did, you should know that as well . And if you didn't so much for all your so called education and experience . And if you did you willfully ignored that fact in an effort to falsely support a false narrative . For a deceptive and dishonest self serving purpose . Either way it does not bode well for you . BTW in the context it was used comprehensive reading is the correct term . But then with all that Journalism and communications Training you claim to have you should have known that also . And communications as two m's not one Journalist . Just saying

can't read can you, sargie- comprehension and comprehensive to different words- see, suffix, parts of speech. Wow- impressive vocab, "Butt-hurt" Man, you`re lucky that the Army still permits idiots to make NCO. Ain't it time for you to supervise that latrine detail- drive-on sargie.

PFC John Roscoe - Oh now you turn to the last vestige of a weak mind name calling . Again Context . even a suffix is taken into consideration based on the context in which it is used . I am starting to question your self proclaimed qualifications . That too you should also know . As for vocabulary Butt hurt is descriptive and isn't any worse then Ain't . And your childish attempt at being both condescending and dismissive was just juvenile . Not something one would expect to come from some one so educated as you claim you are . So once again Comprehensive reading is still the correct term . Get over it .

Lt Col Timothy Cassidy-Curtis - Not quite; the first few years I had to salute and request to kiss the Captain.
Lots ad lots of great stories.
Miss my She.

1SG James Kelly - Heh, heh. Those first few years must have been fun! I met my wife when she was a 2LT (AF). That was the first time. The second time, she was just a few months away from 1LT, but when we were introduced, I COULD NOT REMEMBER HER NAME. (...oops...)

She got me back. At our wedding I met her at the alter, she had the bouquet in one arm and me in another arm. We were about to climb the low, broad steps to the alter when she said "Uh, oh. I don't think this is going to work." I decided to wait until I heard her say "I do." Then, it would be the best joke of our married lives. Little did I know, my mom heard that remark.

1SG James Kelly - No 1st SG I am truly sorry for your loss.
I am not looking for any argument, I Understand because the majority of civilians have no honor. I was just saying there is a few honorable civilians left and the majority of them is ex service members. The industry , government and science with it's lack of morals is I believe the cause of them not having honor.

SPC Curtis Underwood - Thanks for clearing that up.
:)

Who? Just kidding.

SFC Domingo M. - When Oliver North took up a position on the National Security Council, he stepped out of official military status and became a politician. As such, he was not held to the standards of the UCMj and not subject to the "lawful order" requirements. Instead, his felony convictions were based on civil law

LTC Ken Connolly I retired a couple of years after Congress tried to hang LTC North for that incident.

SP5 Larry (Lawrence) Pitman - Interesting. In any case, military maybe tried in civilian court and under the UCMJ for the same crime, but the charges maybe different.

Lt Col Jim Coe - I know I was just saying, Had to give you a little ribbing over it all in good fun sir. >80)

Sir you are correct up to a point, But your statement is wrong "At your level, SGT (Verify To See), follow orders, take care of your Soldiers, do the mission.)". The individual soldier (no matter the rank) is required by regulation to evaluate every order. If he does not then he can be prosecuted if the order is illegal and he follows it. When an order goes against the oath he took to protect the constitution then he is required by regulation and by his oath to disobey that order.
What your were stating is for him to follow orders blindly.

Lt Col Jim Coe - What you say about civilan authority is more or less the "song I sing" to folks who want to rant at me (because of being a veteran) about how "evil" the military is. I put it back where it belongs - on civilians, collectively, who are not doing their job well enough to prevent the military from being used and abused. The first sacrifice all SM make is to trust the civilians to do their part.

SPC Curtis Underwood - I agree, in principle. However, the hell-raising, after on "evaluates", right or wrong, can be real. Although it depends on what the result of one's "evaluation" is - like whether or not it can be handled at the company level without damage to anyone. Folks with huge but fragile egos are likely to react negatively and retributively (military circumstances and otherwise).<sigh>