Do you think military service members should be prosecuted under UCMJ for disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief? I say absolutely, YES!

2015-05-10T03:48:10-04:00

Response by TSgt John William made May 10 at 2015 3:50 AM

2015-05-10T03:50:24-04:00

I agree

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made May 10 at 2015 4:13 AM

2015-05-10T04:13:17-04:00

You got a lot of Veterans that are going to disagree here, but as citizens that is their prerogative. Which may be part of the reason they aren't serving anymore.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 10 at 2015 8:01 AM

2015-05-10T08:01:06-04:00

Article 88 only specifically addresses commissioned officers.

Response by PFC Tuan Trang made May 10 at 2015 8:17 AM

2015-05-10T08:17:36-04:00

I agree, that individual should get ucmj.

To my opinion, Anyone in uniform should be respect, Regarless of ranks, We are that 1%, Eat,Sleep,Fight as a team.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 10 at 2015 8:24 AM

2015-05-10T08:24:56-04:00

I would prefer that members be respectful to other people at all times period.

1) If you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it out loud.

2) Don't attack the man , attack the policy, attack the opinion, attack the decision. But going after the man is not only a logical fallacy, it's just bad form.

3) No need to tear others down. If you don't like them. Don't talk about them. Why give them any publicity?

Response by PO2 Skip Kirkwood made May 10 at 2015 8:31 AM

2015-05-10T08:31:50-04:00

It depends.

Direct, personal disrespect - telling POTUS to foxtrot uniform to his face - absolutely.

Talking negatively about the character, performance, demeanor of POTUS in his capacity as the elected leader of the country - negative. Members of the armed forces are still Americans. POTUS is not a commissioned officer, he is an elected civilian who chose to work in a political world. Politics is about personal choice and free expression.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made May 10 at 2015 8:55 AM

2015-05-10T08:55:25-04:00

Active Duty and Civilian employees are restricted with regard to political activity. If these laws and regs are violated, then appropriate disciplinary action should be taken.

Once you're no longer under these laws and regs, then your Freedom of speech is fully restored. You should participate in the political process to the best of your ability consistent with laws and good judgment. As a vet, your service helped secure the rights you are now enjoying.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 9:24 AM

2015-05-10T09:24:01-04:00

As a member of the Armed Services, I believe you are obligated to sacrifice certain things, one being your political affiliations. I think we have a responsibility to remain neutral in the public eye when it comes to our feelings about the political issues in this country. We can always vote, and that is really the most important political opinion we have anyway. As far as the question goes....maybe not depending on the circumstance. I think if we can't openly speak to each other about how we feel it takes away a certain level of mutual trust and respect. I know not all of my battles are going to agree with me politically, I think what separates our community from the civilian world most of all is that we can share those differences with each other and still have a beer together on the weekends.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 10 at 2015 9:41 AM

2015-05-10T09:41:11-04:00

I seem to remember parking quite a few of my civil rights at the door when I raised my right hand.

As more that one 1SG told me, "If the military needed you to have an opinion, you would be issued one."

Down talking anyone in your chain is disrespect at the minimum and subversion at the maximum.

Having said that .. don't ask me about the pin-head XO I had at Letterman!

Response by PO1 John Miller made May 10 at 2015 11:33 AM

2015-05-10T11:33:45-04:00

CW5 Roy Rucker Sr., just so I'm clear you are referring to all CINC's and not just the current one? I.e., would you still feel the same way if hypothetically our next CINC is a member of the opposite political party?

I do not mean to communicate any disrespect to you Sir I just want to make sure that this isn't a biased discussion.

With that said, I agree with you. While I may not support the current CINC (and as a veteran/retiree I have that right) and even speak out against the majority of his decisions (I will also say that I have supported some of his decisions) blatant disrespect to any CINC regardless of their political affiliation can and should be punished.

Response by SSgt Matthew Johnson made May 10 at 2015 11:54 AM

2015-05-10T11:54:50-04:00

NO... not absolutely yes.. I think the context matters. If it is a public act or direct to him, then Yes.. If its in private discussion then freedom of speech comes to mind. Either way, without knowing the context I cant definitively say. but I would be inclined to EXPECT a Service member NOT to be disrespectful to anyone.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 12:25 PM

2015-05-10T12:25:26-04:00

I say no and this is why. I see the biggest pillar of leadership being "lead by example" and if our elected officials did that I think there would not only be less grumbling on this topic, it may not even be a topic. As of late our elected officials continue bestowing more and more power upon themselves when it comes to immunity from things expectant of the common citizen.

Don't like taxes? Don't pay them. Don't like a subpoena? Destroy the evidence. Be a good steward of government money? Doesn't apply to me. The no bad mouthing the Commander in Chief comes with a direct correlation of responsibility BY the Commander in Chief to do what's right. Being a man of high moral caliber, integrity beyond reproach, and fulfilling his oath that he swore on the steps of the Capitol building.

What people in uniform see is now is reflective of the example put before them. When elected officials continually lie, cheat, embezzle, squander, swindle, and display massive amounts of incompetence without a hint of remorse or acceptance of responsibility it resonates throughout the population (both uniformed and civilian) and that same attitude begins to propagate causing a shift in morals among the culture.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 12:30 PM

2015-05-10T12:30:43-04:00

I think it depends on if the SM is just respectfully stating their opinion. Disagreeing with his policies or character can be just someones opinion. If we cant be truthful and honest about things then what's the point. Cursing and being down right unprofessional is another story. Im sure there are a lot of people on here that have to restrain themselves. I can't say that I am a huge fan of our president but, I do respect his position and keep my comments to myself.

Response by 1SG Cameron M. Wesson made May 10 at 2015 7:15 PM

2015-05-10T19:15:55-04:00

CW5 Roy Rucker Sr. I agree it is disrespectful... Though I stop at the added ultimate.

I would submit that what it truly is, is simply unprofessional conduct. I don't talk about my boss, my bosses boss, on and on....What bothers me a great deal is that many of those same people talk badly about many people and it is said underhandedly almost in the third party. I elect simply not to play the game.

On a humorous note... I pulled up a COL short when I elected not to respond or laugh to the comment he made concerning the administration... He noticed this and asked did you vote for the current administration. My reply shocked the table, "that's not anyone's business at this table and has nothing to do with the task at hand... ask me a question that does... also... It's not professional." It became quiet and then started again. After the meeting the COL asked me to stay behind... I did... and when everyone left... he apologized... I guess he expected something because I asked if that was it... he said yes... I stood up and walked out... If he had really meant it he would have done it in the meeting.... My opinion

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 7:23 PM

2015-05-10T19:23:40-04:00

To this I would ask under what Article, and would then ask how things would look if we went about charging everyone who spoke ill of their COC. I'm not sure if you are just advocating specifically for the CIC and are therefore tired of SM exhibiting their disdain for the man but I would love to meet the RP member who has never spoken negatively about someone in their command. You should be more specific about what your version of disrespect is. I have spoken openly about my opposition to the POTUS specifically when he has done things that are both immoral and illegal, and have done the same when it came to a local Commander who had conducted himself immorally and illegally. We are obligated to follow lawful orders and exhibit both loyalty and professionalism, but true faith and allegiance isn't blind, and I never swore blind allegiance to anything. Maybe the Constitution.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 9:56 PM

2015-05-10T21:56:06-04:00

NO! I am 99% sure that you wouldn't have given that courtesy to President Bush. Sounds like a G thing,

Response by SFC Mcglen Odom made May 10 at 2015 9:57 PM

2015-05-10T21:57:13-04:00

Yes

Response by SFC Mcglen Odom made May 10 at 2015 10:05 PM

2015-05-10T22:05:11-04:00

Conduct unbecoming of an Officer, NCO, and or soldier. When you're on active duty. The commander-in-chief is still part of the chain of command command

Response by CPT Jack Durish made May 10 at 2015 10:39 PM

2015-05-10T22:39:05-04:00

This subject touches upon the reason that I would not serve under this Commander-in-Chief (even if the Army were willing to waive my 72 years of age).

Good order and discipline requires that all service members render proper respect to all commanders, especially the Commander-in-Chief regardless of anyone's opinions about the person occupying that office. If you can't abide by those terms, don't serve.

That being said, no one is required to obey an unlawful order. Indeed, every service member is bound to refuse such an order. Has it happened yet? I don't know about the military but the Department of Homeland Security has obeyed unlawful orders in granting work permits under the President's executive order granting amnesty to illegal aliens despite the fact that there is a valid injunction issued by a federal judge precluding this. Now this is a perfect example of an unlawful order from the President and an example of why I wouldn't serve this one.

Response by SGT John Wesley made May 10 at 2015 10:51 PM

2015-05-10T22:51:58-04:00

Once you raise your right hand and take the oath, your ability to voice your opinion about your Commander in Chief is severely limited, and rightly so.

So yes, disciplinary action against any member of the uniformed services that openly disrespect the CiC in public/Social Media is absolutely a must.

Once you get your discharge, speak away!

Response by SSG Trevor S. made May 11 at 2015 12:38 AM

2015-05-11T00:38:41-04:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJxmpTMGhU0

I Am Sick And Tired - Hillary Clinton

In 2003, Hillary Clinton screeched "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not pat...

Response by CH (CPT) Heather Davis made May 11 at 2015 1:00 AM

2015-05-11T01:00:54-04:00

Chief:

Absolutely I believe their is ART 88 “Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, ad-verse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Response by SGT Justin Lamb made May 11 at 2015 2:01 AM

2015-05-11T02:01:29-04:00

Sir,

I believe if you can get UCMJ for tellin an NCO/Officer to piss off then it is standard data to get slammed for bad mouthing the commander in chief. Why should it matter if the man is in the room or not? It's simple like showing up to formation on time.. You don't want to get smoked be there 15 minutes prior.. Well, if you don't want UCMJ keep your comments to yourself or run for president lol

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2015 6:51 AM

2015-05-11T06:51:30-04:00

Most definitely!! We forget you lose the right to criticize POTUS when swear to the oath to protect this country and take all orders from your commander-in-chief

Response by SrA Edward Vong made May 11 at 2015 10:44 AM

2015-05-11T10:44:18-04:00

Article 88 for officers, and I believe enlisted members can get an Article 134.

Response by TSgt Kevin Buccola made May 11 at 2015 11:54 AM

2015-05-11T11:54:21-04:00

Even though I am not a fan of the current administration my personal feelings remain just that. If you publically disrespect POTUS while in uniform or on duty then yes you should be brought up on disciplinary actions. He is the CIC – if you disrespect your CO you are brought up on disciplinary actions.
You might not agree on everything but you still must respect the office.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2015 11:27 PM

2015-05-11T23:27:24-04:00

Define disrespect. If I question things like his politics or whether he adheres to the Constitution in making his decisions, that is not disrespectful, but is normal political discussion. However, if I call him names or attack him personally, then yes, that is a UCMJ offense.

Response by CPL Eric Allen made May 12 at 2015 1:11 AM

2015-05-12T01:11:13-04:00

No? should the person be allowed to have an opinion. or just be a robot

Response by SSG James Courtney made May 12 at 2015 10:54 AM

2015-05-12T10:54:49-04:00

NO, Part of the oath, and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me.

There is a difference between obeying orders, and talking about an elected official where the soldiers vote still counts. Long as its out of uniform and demonstrated in civilian attire or off duty which is allowed.

We are still soldiers, but ultimately still Americans preserving our way of life!

Response by SSG James Courtney made May 12 at 2015 11:38 AM

2015-05-12T11:38:15-04:00

This boils down to AR 670-1, out of uniform you can do any of these things.

Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian
employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except
as authorized by the first O–5 in the chain of command.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army, as determined by the commander.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 2:47 PM

2015-05-12T14:47:14-04:00

Because UCMJ punishment is, for the most part, at the discretion of unit Commanders (Company and Battalion), it would be extremely difficult to establish a blanket policy in regards to this. The same offense committed in different units could be handled with different amounts of punishment. That said...

I do my best to always support the office of the President of the United States. I may not always agree with the individuals policies, or his vision for the country, but he is THE Head of State. The office of the President is more important than any one man (or woman, for that matter). Just as the Constitution of the United States is the most important document in our nation, the position of The President of the United States is the most important office in our nation. It does not matter who is holding the office, if I have the opportunity to meet and shake hands with the President, I absolutely will, and do so with hat in hand.

I don't think anyone should be silenced in their dissent or support of political policies. It is one of the reasons this country was founded. Likewise, the system of electing our president should be supported. If you don't like the Electoral College, elect representatives in Congress and the Senate who want to change it. Until then, the person elected to be the President is the person chosen by our system. You don't have to agree with the man or woman, or agree with their policies, but you should respect the elected position.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made May 12 at 2015 3:03 PM

2015-05-12T15:03:11-04:00

So if I am pissed off because we don't get a pay raise again and when talking to my co-workers in the berthing or crew lounge and I say that "President Doe sucks because he doesn't care about the military" I should be prosecuted for disrespect under the UCMJ?
Are we going to turn into a Communist state where everyone is listening for anything out of line to report each other?
I do think its is very immature and borders on disrespect though when you post something on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc., and that post is in itself disrespectful then yes it should have some action taken because as we all know nothing is private on the internet these days.
None of us are perfect and sometimes we do fly off the handle when irritated / frustrated but if were are going to be worried that every single thing we say could be interpreted as disrespect and possible punishment under the UCMJ its going to take its toll on the service members.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 3:49 PM

2015-05-12T15:49:47-04:00

Yes. Believe me, I know it can be difficult to hold our tongues, but I managed it for years under a President I didn't agree with. The hate spewing forth is absurd, irresponsible, and a violation of the UCMJ for any active service members.

Response by CPT Carl Kisely made May 12 at 2015 4:06 PM

2015-05-12T16:06:46-04:00

UCMJ is pretty clear on this matter, and I wholeheartedly support it. Private conversations are fine, but always remember who is listening. Facebook is not the place to disrespect POTUS.

Response by PO1 Timothy Tapio made May 12 at 2015 4:26 PM

2015-05-12T16:26:52-04:00

One has to show respect...that being said, I don't think I could handle being active duty under this commander in chief. He shows absolutely no respect for the military. Respect goes both ways.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 4:28 PM

2015-05-12T16:28:39-04:00

Active SM: Absolutely, yes. It's not exactly black-and-white in Article 134, but you know if anyone knows it was you, and they don't like it or happen to agree with you, you're screwed.

National Guard/Reserve: IMO, only if they are identifiable as service-members when their comments are made. But you know you're not allowed to according to the laws you agreed to abide by when you joined.

Retirees: Pretty sure some provisions within UCMJ sstill apply. Be careful.

Veterans: Try and stop me.

Response by PO3 Michael Synan made May 12 at 2015 4:50 PM

2015-05-12T16:50:57-04:00

Yes! ....who and under what authority can charge "Our" CnC , for if Unalienable Rights is a concept to Man should he not have the Right regardless of contract!....

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 5:23 PM

2015-05-12T17:23:39-04:00

I say yes but this is a two way street. I think a lot of officers forget that they are men just like that PVT they're telling to do stuff so at a certain point I think both MEN should not only have respect for the RANK but the MAN. Some men get in the army JUST to make rank to boss people around and that's how we end you with BAD LEADERSHIP AND SOLDIERS

Response by MAJ Susan Grimm made May 12 at 2015 7:20 PM

2015-05-12T19:20:13-04:00

My 'knee-jerk' reaction is yes.
Trying to make that work logistically would, I believe, be impossible.
When I was in Iraq and Iraqi officials would ask me (via interpreter) "Do the American people 'like' President Bush?", I always answered that he was the Commander in Chief of the Military, and the leader of our Nation; and that in America we express any displeasure with any official at the ballot box. The usual response was, "I see". Never in a Military capacity, nor in public would I ever voice anything other than respect for that great office, regardless of the "Name on the Door".

Response by PO1 Rick Serviss made May 12 at 2015 7:29 PM

2015-05-12T19:29:45-04:00

I don't agree 100% It depends on what you consider disrespect. The Commander-in-Chief is a politician and they were put in office by you and I. If they suck FIRE THEM. I don't think any military member should take to the airwaves to talk about what is wrong but I do think military has a right as any other citizen in America to voice their opinion without fear of being punished.

Response by SGT Kevin Gardner made May 12 at 2015 7:48 PM

2015-05-12T19:48:29-04:00

The problem, how do you know it is disrespect? If we go by the way disrespectful behavior is considered by senior personnel, "anything I deem as disrespect, is"

Blantent disrespect is easy, but because someone may complain about one thing or another as all members of every branch do one cannot charge someone on the basis of disrespect. given how vastly polarizing politics are we would have 90% of our armed forces brought up on charges.

Case in point, I have always had a problem with George Bushes so called Patriot act, I felt then as I do know that it set an unprecedented challenge against the people's constitunal rights and expanded the power of the federal Government. even being in uniform I could still discuss this issue however I was bound by the UCMJ to not act politically through protests and so fourth. Would that have by your definition been considered disrespectful?

The day Obama was elected my company found out just before we were to roll out the gate, now I didn't vote for Obama nor wold I have I did not then nor do I now think he can or has been able to do the job he had been elected to. So when everyone else gave a big yay I said boo, now my first sergeant said "we can just leave you out in sector"

I had not been disresctfull to the newly elected president but my first sergeant might have felt I was. I said boo because one I looked at Obama's record as a state representative of Illinois, and two I took into account his expirance as well as people he had associated with.

So do you feel I should have been charged under the UCMJ? If so why? And for which of the two examples I gave, or both.

Response by MSgt Kenneth Robinson made May 12 at 2015 7:51 PM

2015-05-12T19:51:43-04:00

When I was active I never said anything in public about the President. I actually like the 1st Bush and had no ill will toward Bush II. I noticed when President Obama was elected a lot of military people went off on the deep in. For instance, the day after the election, some people had the first family on their computers as screen savers. Other members came around and told them to take the pictures off. I had to intervene and tell them since he is now the President elect, having pictures was allowed. The second thing that amazed me was how many people didn't want their retirement certificate with Obama's name on it. I had never witnessed that in 23 years of serving. BTW, I retired 5 months after he became President. He had not even changed or implemented any policies. I can say that people were vocal about Presidents when I was in but it seemed like they were more frequent when Obama was elected.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made May 12 at 2015 8:17 PM

2015-05-12T20:17:25-04:00

There have been many discussions started over towards disrespect towards the President. I will make it simple: whether what I have to say is positive or negative, I will not talk about the President in uniform around people I do not know or trust. People interpret things different ways. I remember once someone over heard me say the Affordable Care Act is a failure and it is hurting most Americans and I was told I was disrespecting the President because it was his creation. This person was a civilian so I tactfully put them in their place. Talking about the President or government policies at work or in uniform whether positive or negative is not a good idea. People operate and interpret things on different levels of common sense and intelligence. Some people just have blind loyalty.

Response by A1C Justin Bates made May 12 at 2015 9:22 PM

2015-05-12T21:22:09-04:00

I say it really depends on what you mean by "disrespect". I was chewed out once for saying "Thanks Obama" even though I was actually congratulating him (sarcastically on something he and his administration had NOTHING to do with). I think service members should definitely be able to voice their political opinions if they're able to keep themselves under control and while doing everything in their power to make sure that it's "not necessarily the views of the U.S. military". To me, something seems off when people are forced to keep quiet. If I were president, I'd like to know what citizens (especially military, past and present) think of my policies.

But flat out disrespect? Absolutely not. Especially in uniform.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 9:40 PM

2015-05-12T21:40:34-04:00

I agree. The profession of arms is such that disciplined Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines should never publicly criticize the Officers appointed above them. It is unprofessional and tarnishes the service's image. It is prejudicail to the good order and disclipline of units and should be punishable under the UCMJ. Bottom line: If you don't like the CINC and can't keep your professionalism, then get out! Otherwise VOTE!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 10:30 PM

2015-05-12T22:30:51-04:00

I think so. We had a 4 star that was sent to fort living room for it. Why not everyone else?? I bet if they start making examples of people everyone in the military will start butting their tongues and show so damn respect. We all took an oath to support and defend the orders of the president and the officers appointed over us.

Response by LTC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 10:38 PM

2015-05-12T22:38:00-04:00

Disrespect, yes. Disagreement, no. Like anything else, our leaders need to encourage critical thinking and sometimes subordinates need to tell the boss when he or she is wrong. However, use common sense. You do NOT disagree with POTUS in the public media. But professional discussion of what could be done better with regard to National Security matters should be encouraged in the correct forums.

Agree or disagree with the Commander In Chief's policies, bottom line, when POTUS makes a decision, it is our duty to the American people to salute the flag and move out smartly. We took the oath, that's how it goes!

Response by SFC William Farrell made May 12 at 2015 11:21 PM

2015-05-12T23:21:47-04:00

Depends upon which one we are talking about!

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 11:46 PM

2015-05-12T23:46:37-04:00

Your question is not so easy to answer. You need to define "disrespect" because there are some people who say, "If you don't like the president's policies then you are ... (fill in the blank)".

The Oath of Commissioned Officer states that they will,"support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". I think there are a lot of people who equate Constitution with President and that is not the case. The President does NOT equal the Constitution.

The enlisted oath states, "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice".

If whatever, whomever does is against the Constitution or the UCMJ then it isn't considered a disrespect.

I know I'd follow the Constitution because that is the oath I swore to. If someone is disappointed in that then I would definitely be disappointed in them.

Response by SCPO John Croix made May 13 at 2015 12:52 AM

2015-05-13T00:52:59-04:00

What is your definition of disrespect? Calling him names is one thing, but disagreement about his plans and policies is another story. One can be prosecuted, while the second is a mater of what you say, and where you say it.

Response by SPC Larry Boutwell made May 13 at 2015 1:01 AM

2015-05-13T01:01:51-04:00

No......you shouldnt be persecuted for your opinion ....thats sounds like dictatorship to me...js...it would also be a direct violation of the 1st amendment..freedom of speech....

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 1:38 AM

2015-05-13T01:38:14-04:00

Absolutely yes!

Response by SFC Clark Adams made May 13 at 2015 3:58 AM

2015-05-13T03:58:47-04:00

Define disrespect? Every American citizen has the right to speak there mind on issues of a political nature with the well established "Right to redress grievances" to the government. I understand that Commissioned Officers of the Regular Army are constrained by the UCMJ from contemptous words against the POTUS , The Cabinet, Legislative Branch. When the POTUS makes blantant lies and misrepresents facts and his actions, should a servicemember silently accept to this?

Response by CPT Barbara Smith made May 13 at 2015 7:50 AM

2015-05-13T07:50:50-04:00

I respect President Obama's position as leader of the free world and his devotion to his wife and family.

Response by PO1 Matthew Maxon made May 13 at 2015 9:00 AM

2015-05-13T09:00:01-04:00

Yes.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 10:54 AM

2015-05-13T10:54:20-04:00

I believe action should be taken against Soldiers who disrespect the Commander-in-Chief. Now when you say prosecuted I think Courts-Martial and I wouldn’t go that far. We give Article 15’s when people disrespect NCOs and Officers why should the Command-in-Chief be any different? Personally I would counsel the Soldier on what their remarks mean and the potential repercussions of them because a lot of time I don’t think junior Soldiers realize what they are (unless the remarks were extremely disrespectful). Now if it happened again after being counselled and educated I would fully support some fairly severe corrective training or an Article 15.

Response by SSG Genaro Negrete made May 13 at 2015 12:16 PM

2015-05-13T12:16:03-04:00

With social media being what it is today, this issue can very easily put soldiers into a sticky situation. I understand where you're coming from Chief, but the fact remains that human beings will always have opinions about everything.

The line in the sand would have to be the venue for someone venting their personal thoughts about a higher ranking officer. We've all had moments where a particularly lack luster leader has pushed our blood pressure to unhealthy heights. If that person were to go to his or her immediate supervisor to vent, I would say this is acceptable. The venue is private and the goal isn't slander, but an expression of frustration. That supervisor can then offer some sage words of wisdom and the two can move forward to accomplish the mission.

If the chosen venue is on social media, a public interview with the press, or somehow taken as formal record, then there are some issues. When taken in this context, we are ambassadors for the military. When in a public medium, we can't be "off the record". Most of us don't have the training necessary to successfully communicate with media outlets. That is when disparaging remarks about a commanding officer should be met with a swift response.

Look at what happened with General McChrystal. From what I read in that now infamous Rollingstones article, the general was never specifically quoted as being critical of the Obama administration and its policies directly to any reporter. It was mostly his support staff that would let the reporter in on private conversations and attitudes. I wasn't around for any of this, so I take my sources with a grain of salt. General McChrystal was held accountable for the environment cultivated among his staff. General MacArthur was much more forward about his opinion of President Truman's response to Chinese aggression in North Korea and suffered the consequences for his public appearances.

UCMJ should be used to convey the message that these types of public displays do not promote good order and conduct in the unit. This includes Facebook, Twitter, Rally Point, or any other type of social media now used or soon to come. As with any disciplinary issue, if it can be solved with a verbal reprimand or a written counseling statement, all the better. Otherwise, these things will accumulate into a pretty open and closed UCMJ action.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 1:15 PM

2015-05-13T13:15:27-04:00

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but if you voice it publicly, at a venue or on a social media site you're going to get slammed.

Response by SSG Rob Schwandt made May 13 at 2015 2:37 PM

2015-05-13T14:37:29-04:00

I was told long ago by a great Plt Sgt, you can cuss me under your breath so I cannot hear while you keep working

Response by SGT Kim Dixon made May 13 at 2015 2:42 PM

2015-05-13T14:42:59-04:00

Well if they actually had a commander and cheif that upholds the Constitution. I'd say yes. And I know the president is the commander and cheif but there is such a thing as lawful and unlawful orders.

Response by SSgt Everett Jones made May 13 at 2015 2:45 PM

2015-05-13T14:45:35-04:00

Even though the CIC is a civilian, his title says it all, Commander In Chief. He is the top in the chain of command. All the rules that apply to Commissioned officers also apply to him. And, like with any other member of the Armed Forces, you do not have to respect him, but you DO have to respect the office he holds.

Response by GySgt Edward Boeringer made May 13 at 2015 2:47 PM

2015-05-13T14:47:58-04:00

Depends on what kind of disrespect ? We still have the right to free speech and if I said to another service member that Obama is a PoS then no he or she should not be prosecuted. There are all kinds of rules and regs. in place that cover how service members should conduct themselves with regard to political situations so why change something that is already taken care of.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 3:45 PM

2015-05-13T15:45:44-04:00

Funny how we fight and sacrifice so much for the American people but we do not have the same rights. Hmmmm

Response by MSgt Ted Hall made May 13 at 2015 3:53 PM

2015-05-13T15:53:50-04:00

Every hear of the 1st Amendment???

In uniform the UCMJ rules... off duty and unofficially there is no doubt that "Political Speech" is what the 1st Amendment is talking about...

Response by SPC John Lee made May 13 at 2015 3:58 PM

2015-05-13T15:58:20-04:00

I say they, and their leaders should be prosecuted for not placing him under military custody for treason!

Response by SPC Gabe Berdugo made May 13 at 2015 5:31 PM

2015-05-13T17:31:54-04:00

I would agree, yes. Whether you like the president or not, he's still part of your chain of command.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 5:51 PM

2015-05-13T17:51:16-04:00

I say no!! He's more of a figure head not really a commander

Response by SSG Leonard Johnson made May 13 at 2015 6:17 PM

2015-05-13T18:17:46-04:00

I say absolutely not... Normally I would say yes, however, we have some far left wing kooks (not saying the Pres) who have taken over our political system. Its high tide that somebody sticks up against liberals. our senior leadership isn't doing it. So the mission falls on our NCOs and lower enlisted to speak the truth

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 6:20 PM

2015-05-13T18:20:46-04:00

If I was Commander-in-Chief and my troops were upset with me about something, I would want to know. I would want to listen and decide whether their complaints were valid, whether something could be done to resolve them.

Sometimes the work is difficult, the situation bad, and all we can do is cope the best we know how given where we are and what we have to deal with. Sometimes nothing can be done to resolve that except to get through it. And as Commander-in-Chief I would be the first to remind my troops of that, and tell them I pray to God they will still support me, especially in tough times, that care about them and will listen and respond to them.

But to simply tell the troops to silently sacrifice themselves and their families to my causes without voicing their concerns, I feel, would make me a cold-hearted boss who doesn't understand that people's lives aren't things I can take for granted, wheeling them around on chessboards like pawns that have no value.

And if that's whom we have for a president, then we need a new president. Not in 2016. Right Now.

Response by SGT George Smead made May 13 at 2015 7:16 PM

2015-05-13T19:16:40-04:00

He is the Commander in Chief. His position is a position of respect. You may not agree with his politics or policies, but you have sworn obey the orders of the President of the United States. If you raised your right hand and swore to God, then it is your duty to follow his orders. Disrespecting him is disrespecting your commander and that is punishable by the UCMJ. If you don't like that you can become a civilian

Response by SPC Matt Johnson made May 13 at 2015 8:21 PM

2015-05-13T20:21:48-04:00

Yes they should. because UCMJ clearly states that you are not allowed to. And also because they sure as hell did it when Bush Jr. was in office. You may dislike the POTUS but you do not disrespect your chain of command while you are serving active duty. I hated Bush jr but I didn't say anything disrespectful about him while I was serving. If you don't like your Commander-in-chief the ONLY thing are should say when asked how you feel about your commander-in-chief is NOTHING! If you don't like it, then don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Response by SGT Richard H. made May 13 at 2015 8:23 PM

2015-05-13T20:23:25-04:00

As long as you CLEARLY define the line between disagreement and disrespect, yes. While the President IS the commander in Chief, that doesn't mean that you are obliged to lose sight of the fact the he is also a civilian who is obligated by election to act on your behalf. You have more than a right...you have a responsibility to step up if you disagree with his policies every bit as much as you have the same right & responsibility to support those you agree with. Just do it with Military bearing and you can't really go wrong.

Response by PO2 Jerry Gallagher made May 13 at 2015 9:32 PM

2015-05-13T21:32:21-04:00

You may not respect the man, but you need to respect the office and title. That being said, we all gave up some rights when we raised our hand and took the oath. There is a time and a place to speak your mind, but being disrespectful in public is not acceptable.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 9:58 PM

2015-05-13T21:58:10-04:00

After reading some of the responses I see that a lot of service members are letting emotions get the best of them. No matter what your views are of the POTUS or anyone else in the COC we should refrain from speaking negative towards them publicly. For one why would anyone want to be a part of something that you yourself speak so ugly about. Secondly you are who you are in and out of uniform. And always remember that you do retain your right to have freedom of speech. However always remember to end your distasteful remarks with "these are my views and opinions and are not in-line with the policies of any of the U.S. Armed services or the DOD civilians".

How would anyone feel if their own soldiers were talking bad about you to others. I know you and I would go to full lengths of counseling said soldier for disrespecting a NCO/O or WO or unbecoming of a service member so think about that for a minute.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 10:37 PM

2015-05-13T22:37:43-04:00

The better question is why aren't they charged with Art 88 Contempt towards officials? Doesn't matter how you feel about the person who holds the office, you should keep your opinions between yourself and the voting booth.

Response by COL Charles Williams made May 14 at 2015 12:47 AM

2015-05-14T00:47:12-04:00

This has come up before CW5 Roy Rucker Sr.. As I am sure you know Officers can be specifically charged and prosecuted under the Art 88 of the UCMJ, but enlisted Soldiers are not bound by that Article. You could make an argument elsewhere like conduct unbecoming etc.

The really gray area, especially within RP, is what are the rules once you ETS, retire etc. I still feel bond by the UCMJ...

http://nlgmltf.org/leaflets/GI_Rights_free_speech.html

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 1:59 AM

2015-05-14T01:59:41-04:00

Sure! Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Then again, it could be worse. You could just be executed by anti-air fire.

Response by SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA made May 14 at 2015 4:04 AM

2015-05-14T04:04:14-04:00

Then let us take another perspective. As a member of the Armed Forces, do you believe each service members' rights under the United States Constitution is suspended?

Also, if you refer to your Oath of Service, it says you will defend the United States and its Constitution from enemies, foreign and domestic. It does not say to defend the president, nor anyone else, because politicians come and they go.

For any true disrespect to the POTUS, one must plege allegiance to him and him alone.

Getting back to the suspension of Servicemembers' rights, this means they cannot vote. Did you vote? If you are married, did you ask the POTUS for permission to have a wife? Appearantly, you think any right you may have must be given to you by the POTUS and do not forget, if you have children, did you ask for permission to have them. As we all know, he is pro-abortion.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 8:20 AM

2015-05-14T08:20:24-04:00

Lol, is this really a discussion topic?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 9:13 AM

2015-05-14T09:13:03-04:00

No, if that were the case we would have a lot of E-1's in todays Military. Remember, you don't have to like the person but you better respect the rank. I respect the Office of The President of the United States but I don't respect the person holding it.

Response by Sgt Vance Bonds made May 14 at 2015 10:44 AM

2015-05-14T10:44:36-04:00

Seems to me there are Regs that cover this. If we follow and enforce the Regs properly and fairly there is no issue.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 11:03 AM

2015-05-14T11:03:51-04:00

As for doing my job as a Service member....... I will protect him with my life. That doesn't mean I have to agree with him or his actions.

I didn't agree with some of the officers that I served with either. But I respected the rank and drove on. As well as put my life on the line for them in combat.

If you are given a direct order and you disobey it, that is cause for UCMJ. Disrespect of an officer or senior enlisted..... that can also be cause for UCMJ. But, having your own opinion about an issue or person..... that you keep to yourself should not be grounds for UCMJ.

Response by SPC David S. made May 14 at 2015 11:23 AM

2015-05-14T11:23:48-04:00

As long as you are wearing the uniform or on duty, yes. Off duty and not in Uniform, I won't stop you. Should you foot in the first place, no. He's the CiC, he's your boss as a service member. Does not matter if you're active, reserve, guard or what. If you are a service member, don't disrespect the CiC, end of story.

Response by Sgt David Hutchinson made May 14 at 2015 11:33 AM

2015-05-14T11:33:16-04:00

Yes, we gave up that right when we joined the military, if you want to have an opinion wait til you get out.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 11:38 AM

2015-05-14T11:38:53-04:00

Yes, they should be. While opinions are a constitutional right, the military governs them slightly different for its personnel, and for good reason. We voluntarily signed up knowing full well that the commander-in-chief is a temporary position and destined to have differing ways of doing things. We accepted that when we signed on the dotted line. We can have our views of the President, but under our own time and out of uniform. How great of a military would we look if we disrespect the top of the chain?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 12:10 PM

2015-05-14T12:10:08-04:00

Depends. This is an incredibly ambiguous question. If you're at home in civilians talking to family, you should be able to express whatever opinion you want. If you're communicating in a civilian forum as a civilian (like commenting on a political news blog), then first amendment applies. If you're at work around other troops, that's obviously a no-go. If you're posting from a civilian account to a military forum, I'd say that's a no-no as well since your military affiliation is obvious. If you're posting on a civilian forum as a civilian, but your profile shows you in uniform, again, no go.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made May 14 at 2015 12:25 PM

2015-05-14T12:25:08-04:00

The office of the Presidency should be respected, not only by the Military, but by the office holder as well.

Response by 1SG Chuck Davis made May 14 at 2015 1:19 PM

2015-05-14T13:19:18-04:00

Should this even be a question? Bad mouthing your Chain of Command publicly should always carry the consequence of UCMJ action.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 1:37 PM

2015-05-14T13:37:12-04:00

Yes. If the Service Member is in uniform, on or off duty, I think the service member should be punished, regardless of who the President is and what Party he or she belongs to. It really ticks me off when Service members call the President by his last name only, especially when our Chain of Command boards (for units that have them) usually proceed the person's name with "Honorable!"

Response by PO1 Thomas Herms made May 14 at 2015 1:52 PM

2015-05-14T13:52:49-04:00

Disrespect to POTUS is a complex issue. Military members in uniform and representing the Armed Forces, should never disrespect anyone in the chain of command, but as a citizen out of uniform and clearly not identifying themselves as a spokesman for any unit of the Armed Forces, they should have the same freedom of speech as any other citizen. This right is very important to be a well informed citizen when they enter the voting booth. Military members are in a unique environment that has their main circle of friends being other military members, and if they cannot openly discuss the reelection of our representatives, even POTUS, their ability to make the best decision possible using an extensive and diverse set of facts and opinions is severely inhibited.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made May 14 at 2015 3:00 PM

2015-05-14T15:00:15-04:00

Chief, I think it is already punishable under UCMJ for "contemptuous words" against a superior or higher ranking individual. I forget the exact words.

Article 88

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made May 14 at 2015 3:34 PM

2015-05-14T15:34:03-04:00

Military Members are corrected by their superiors for disrespect towards our Commander in Chief, the issue of prosecution is at the Commander discretion meaning their command chain to include the Commander In Chief. Most disrespect comes from biases, misguided beliefs or ideas, prejudices and from accepting the ideas from individuals that are all smoke but no fire. So nothing is gained from using UCMJ, when corrective matters of education are more appropriate.

Response by SFC Douglas Duckett made May 14 at 2015 3:49 PM

2015-05-14T15:49:20-04:00

Thank God I am retired, I can say what I want now about POTUS, that is until they threaten my disability pay for voicing my thoughts.

Where is my foil hat?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 5:32 PM

2015-05-14T17:32:02-04:00

Like any higher command figure, you have to be respectful. I use the mother and father model. You don't disrespect your parents? Well, the same goes for anyone else. Be decent to the lower grades or higher grades. But, if you want to express your opinion, DO IT IN A RESPECTFUL WAY, rather you like the person or not, agree to disagree.

Response by SGT Rick Ash made May 14 at 2015 5:33 PM

2015-05-14T17:33:05-04:00

I look back on my military days as the most exciting time of my life. And then, I always was respectful of our CiC. With the current one though, I have no respect at all for him.

Response by SGT Frank Leonardo made May 14 at 2015 7:48 PM

2015-05-14T19:48:46-04:00

No matter how bad the commander and chief you need to,keep your lips sealed while serving

Response by SPC John Decker made May 14 at 2015 9:03 PM

2015-05-14T21:03:33-04:00

Under which section of the UCMJ might they be prosecuted for violating?

Response by MSgt David Hillman made May 14 at 2015 10:04 PM

2015-05-14T22:04:03-04:00

Yes, he's a worthless sack of skin who could care less about the military. Wake up and quit drinking the Kool-Aid.

Response by SPC William Hinesley made May 14 at 2015 11:58 PM

2015-05-14T23:58:55-04:00

You may not like or respect the person in the office but you still must respect the office it self.He may not deserve our respect but the position and rank certainly do. As much as I may not like it he is still the Commander and Chief

Response by SGT Jim Russell made May 15 at 2015 12:05 AM

2015-05-15T00:05:20-04:00

Part of the job. We kept our opinions of W. to ourselves, even when he decided a "troop surge" was needed and our OIF tour went from 12 months to 15. Service members playing politicos has never gone well, even for generals like McChrystal and MacArthur.

Response by SPC Candace Leach made May 15 at 2015 10:23 AM

2015-05-15T10:23:32-04:00

No one in uniform should not disrespect POTUS, chain of command, officers, SNCO's and NCO's period. There is no room for disrespect and misconduct and sometimes we disagree with some policies or rules but we still follow orders. We are taught to be respectful and professional at all times both on and off duty and if you can't do that, you shouldn't even be in the military.

Response by SGT James P. Davidson, MSM made May 15 at 2015 11:15 AM

2015-05-15T11:15:28-04:00

I believe respect is earned. I believe the position of CiC should be respected. I believe the Office of POTUS should be respected. I do not believe, however, that the individual sitting in those seats has earned respect. I believe military members should not be prosecuted for having an opinion, nor stating/expressing it (outside of threats and the like). No one should be forced into 'respecting' someone under threat of prosecution. Defend 1A much?

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 12:19 PM

2015-05-15T12:19:21-04:00

In some fashion, yes. There must be a professional level of discipline and decorum where petty personal contempt is banished so that leaders can be impartial. Of course, American citizens must also be able to express opinions and disagree without disrespect (especially here in RP!). However, military people are twice the citizen: we have a higher duty to respect the office of Commander-in-Chief and live up to the oath we swore upon enlistment, reenlistment, commissioning. If not, we are merely mumbling words without honor. It's not easy to respect the position, not necessarily the politics or the person, but we must rise above ourselves to do so in such a way that is professional, not personal. And that same level of professional respect should be given to any other person, especially in the military. It's not easy being Green!

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 12:43 PM

2015-05-15T12:43:22-04:00

As long as it is disrespect and not just disagreement with the POTUS' policies, politics, affiliations, etc. We should never stifle discourse and debate, it is part of what separates us from the majority of this world we live on.

I do believe though that Article 88 only applies to commissioned officers for the express purpose of allowing the enlisted to say their piece without reprisal. It is the officer's responsibility to keep his troops in line by displaying a professional attitude that supports the command. If we prosecuted the enlisted ranks for every rant, rave, grumble or complaint, we wouldn't have anyone left to drive on with the mission.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 12:52 PM

2015-05-15T12:52:12-04:00

CW5 Roy Rucker Sr., I see the words "Ultimate Disrespect" under the photo you posted. Am I missing something? Is someone in the crowd disrespecting the POTUS, or are you suggesting he is doing something in the photo to disrespect the service?

I'm just curious, as I see no correlation between the photo and the words.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made May 15 at 2015 2:19 PM

2015-05-15T14:19:05-04:00

I think you need to define a lot of things in your question. What are you defining as 'disrespect'. You make the statement 'Ultimate Disrespect', how so? Maybe I am missing something?

So you are in favor of going back and prosecuting those military member making comments about President George W. Bush's mental abilities or just the President that you are currently endorsing or supporting?

Last, even as soldiers, we are citizens and this is a Republic, and while we should not be disrespectful of those WE have elect to REPRESENT us, they still are supposed to be REPRESENTING us.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 2:49 PM

2015-05-15T14:49:24-04:00

This is a pretty tricky question as you have 1st Amendment rights. BUT you must also respect your superiors regardless of gender/ religion/ creed as they are elected by the country/ voters. I say while in uniform they cannot get into political debates, thats why the UCMJ states you cannot wear your uniform to political rallies. While off uniform and not representing the country, they are well within their rights and shouldnt be an issue.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made May 15 at 2015 4:06 PM

2015-05-15T16:06:20-04:00

Would you feel the same if a white supremacist managed to get elected?

Response by SSG John Erny made May 15 at 2015 5:47 PM

2015-05-15T17:47:21-04:00

1. I have said it here many times that talking about the POTUS is a very bad Idea for service members. Those of us who are Veterans or Retired should not lead those who still serve in a discussion that could cost some one their career.

2. We do not want the DOD to take notice of this great place we call rally point in a negative light. Off limits mean any thing?

Response by SFC Robert Wheeler made May 15 at 2015 6:05 PM

2015-05-15T18:05:21-04:00

I don't see it as an option. The minute you disrespect to anyone, it should have consequences. I could not stand George HW Bush but as long as I was in uniform, I respected him. I also did not tolerate and disrespect from my soldiers for the CINC.

Response by SFC Aaron Lutz made May 15 at 2015 7:12 PM

2015-05-15T19:12:08-04:00

This is why I'm so glad I'm retired now. At least I did not have to have him as my "Commander in Chump" when I was in the box. I feel sorry for those who must do their job while this guy is boss.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made May 15 at 2015 7:42 PM

2015-05-15T19:42:30-04:00

If the young trooper can't respect the boss, that's a "leadership challenge" --as we would say. And to the point of respecting the Office of the President: I'd say there is a segment of leadership, traversing ALL ranks, that have their own challenges here.

Prosecute those who show disrespect to the C-in-C? I'm sure our S-1's, Commanders, JAG Corps have bigger fish to fry.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 9:38 PM

2015-05-15T21:38:35-04:00

Chief Rucker,

I have downgraded this for the reason I completely disagree. (This is already policy).
We already know that is taboo and highly frowned upon to disrespect the Commander in Chief. However, I am going to ask a poignant question, and feel free to answer it honestly: did you like or not like President Bush? Or what about previous Presidents? Did you have something to say about it? ( I only threw President Bush up here as he was the last one in office before President Obama).

Like it or not, Soldiers have an ability to think and utilize decision making skills to form an opinion. The ability to voice it and make it heard are a complete set of complex issues altogether. I think there needs to be a fine line. I dislike the President because of xyz, and here are the facts and a supporting argument in a logical, respectful, tactful manner, is far better than I hate the President because potato.

Last but not least-perception is reality. When servicemembers are having a hard time with confidence in the leadership as is (just look at all the scandals, problems, and other issues that have arised, along with the ever shrinking budget problems, drawdowns, and mandatory training that comes with it *do more with less* mentality), yes I think that there are problems with morale as is. Whether it truly is President Obama's fault (or insert any President in here, I am just placing the name as that is our Current Commander in Chief), or not, if the troops perceive there is a problem then as he is the end all be all for American servicemembers, then its the President's fault.

Punishing them for becoming adaptive, thinking, and forming an opinion is a detriment to their ability to become a leader. I am not saying let them run amuck and create anarchy and war within the ranks. But I also don't think we should punish a soldiers career via UCMJ simply because they don't like the President. I am not one for politics-its above my pay grade, I dislike them in general, it causes stress and strain on any relationship, and its far too complex for me to really get a good grasp to form an opinion. So I stay out of it: however, I do like to have a stance and firm finger on the pulse of the current political issues. We exercise the right to vote and free speech (within reason).

Please also understand that if I am going to go out of my way to write my dissertation and form an opinion, I have done so with the utmost respect and tact that I can muster, simply because it is a hot button topic within the ranks. If more people would argue like this rather than simply throw an insult out, it cannot be considered disrespect but more so a legitimate gripe.

However, outright slurs and disrespect of that nature, yes, just like any NCO, Officer, commisioned or otherwise, should be treated the same. Troop comes up in front of a formation and calls the President a bunch of slurs, slay em. But this is already policy. AR600-2, UCMJ, and any other punitive or administrative means to throw them under the bus.

Response by CPL Jay Freeman made May 16 at 2015 1:57 AM

2015-05-16T01:57:37-04:00

Bad leader ship leads to...... if you can finish this then you know what I mean sometimes poking at. The comander and chef is fun and games like bush and stategery that was funny the shoe flying and so on but our leaders should stand up for the people who fallow them we have very few liberties when we swear in the few we have we should keep and then after we get out the promise was made to help us out not cut the befits we earn to give the money to people here illegally. Make them serve a mandatory 4 years minamum to become a citizen and earn there privlages. Rant over

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made May 16 at 2015 5:19 AM

2015-05-16T05:19:17-04:00

I am glad that I am retired because I despise this person. I have absolutely NO RESPECT for im as an individual.....

He NEVER wore a uniform and has never put himself in Harms Way for his country, thus he has never earned my respect. I respect those that have earned the respect and no one else.

LET ME BE CLEAR...I despise him because he does not have the intestinal fortitude to defend this Country in a uniform and not from Air Force One, and also because I consider him to be a Marxist.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 6:52 AM

2015-05-16T06:52:56-04:00

Service Members have to understand that while serving any disrespect to any official is punishable.

Response by SGT Joe Sabedra made May 16 at 2015 8:40 AM

2015-05-16T08:40:50-04:00

When it comes to command in public whether it be an officer, NCO or even the CIC disrespect can not be tolerated.

Now face to face there is a lot that can be said that really gets the point across if done so in a reapectful manner.

(Sir when I leave this mans Army I will always remember you for the person that you are and never miss you. )

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 10:32 AM

2015-05-16T10:32:37-04:00

People take the actions of the president so personally.
I don't understand why it is so difficult to respect the rank. Most people wouldn't come on this site and bad mouth their commander by name, let alone do it to their face. Why is it the line gets blurred in SM's mind for POTUS? I don't really understand. I did not like Bush Jr. I thought he was lacking in common sense & intelligence, I can't say I'm the biggest fan of the current Commander in Chief, but regardless of my personal feelings, badmouthing him is a freedom I gave up when I swore my oath.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 10:45 AM

2015-05-16T10:45:25-04:00

If done under the auspices of the uniform, absolutely. Out of uniform, when conducting yourself as a civilian, to include social media, then you have the right to voice or write any opinion you wish. However, as soon as you are back in that uniform or say something like "as a soldier who has served etc etc etc..." you relinquish your right to vocalize/publish your opinion and must conduct yourself with the professionalism and honor befit your service. Fail to do that and absolutely you should be subject to the UCMJ as was intended.

Response by MSgt Manuel Diaz made May 16 at 2015 7:21 PM

2015-05-16T19:21:21-04:00

As with any superior, always respect the rank, especially in public; however in private one should be able to share respectful honest opinion without fear of prosecution in or out of uniform. We are not communist north Korea; however anyone could accuse you of an out of context remark and we should still have some constitutional rights with out prosecution by political correctness police... somewhat like Muslim religious police.

Response by LTC Scott O'Neil made May 16 at 2015 7:34 PM

2015-05-16T19:34:19-04:00

Remember respect is a two way street. You have to respect the position and for what it stands for. As for the man, my parents told me if you do not have anything nice to say about someone don't say anything at all. As a retired service member and an American, I would only say in public what I would tell him to his face.

I have served 26 years in the United States Army, serving this country, its people and its elected leadership. Having said that. As a service member in uniform you are forbidden (Under UCMJ) to speak out against the POTUS, member of Congress or any of the leadership of this country. As a retiree, My freedom of speech is restored. I stand forth and assert my first amendment right to tell this government and it's leadership what I think, and if asked to say it to their faces, I welcome the chance to express distain, objections and any other negative feeling I would want to express. "With all due Respect" of course.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 8:39 PM

2015-05-16T20:39:59-04:00

His policies are bullshit 98% of them.

Response by 1SG David Niles made May 16 at 2015 8:51 PM

2015-05-16T20:51:25-04:00

Yes, I bit my tongue during the Clinton years so he'll yes, close the trap and drive on!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 8:56 PM

2015-05-16T20:56:16-04:00

I agree with this. Everyone has different views and is entitled to his/her opinion.

However when it comes to POTUS, basically "your boss" you should have upmost respect for them and put your views and opinions to the side.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made May 16 at 2015 11:25 PM

2015-05-16T23:25:08-04:00

Depends on what you may mean by disrespect. We all have opinions on political policies and have a right to them. Those policies can be discussed, but in a respectful manner. Just because you disagree, that does not equate to disrespect. It seems that is where people want to go to when an expression of disagreement is made. We can write to our congressmen and senators as citizens and should be encouraged to do so. Having the freedom to elect our officials is a privilege that we have. Although we may disagree with policy that is forced on the military, does not give us the right to disobey. We have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Along with that oath is to obey the orders of the President and the Officers appointed over us. But those orders must be lawful orders. If those orders are not lawful, we are required by the UCMJ to not obey them. That too must be done with respect.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 17 at 2015 12:04 AM

2015-05-17T00:04:59-04:00

Absolutely. Anyone in uniform should learn the chain of command. If they are unwilling to give due respect to anyone in that chain of command, they voluntarily submit themselves to prosecution under UCMJ. In this all-volunteer force, nobody put a gun to anyone's head and told them to raise their right hand and swear the oath.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made May 17 at 2015 1:07 AM

2015-05-17T01:07:07-04:00

For me, before I retired, I respected the office, even if I didn't respect the person. We must have the personal discipline to do what's right, and I know we all know the regs or if we don't better get to know them. I am in agreement with other on the site, if you can't say it to their face, then don't say it at all. And like my Dad told me, "If you have nothing good to say, keep your mouth shut!"

Response by 1SG Todd Sullivan made May 17 at 2015 3:19 AM

2015-05-17T03:19:06-04:00

Um No! Respect is earned. Where was this discussion when the Bush fellas were in office, or Reagan, even wild bill Clinton. I spoke my mind about the commander in chief when I felt like it, it is and was my right. As it is every red blooded American service member or not.... Now I would say that it is business that should be kept behind closed doors. When are all the 40lb brains going to realize that we still cannot take every single right of a person just because they join the service. Like I used to tell my Soldiers it's big boy rules.. Live by them get treated like a big boy, dick it up and you get punished like a big boy. But seriously, where is this even coming from?

Response by SN Greg Wright made May 17 at 2015 9:23 AM

2015-05-17T09:23:10-04:00

I thought this was already the case?

Response by SGT Scott Page made May 17 at 2015 10:25 AM

2015-05-17T10:25:12-04:00

Why is this even a question? Article 88.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 17 at 2015 10:38 AM

2015-05-17T10:38:48-04:00

This is a fairly loaded exclamatory statement. I see a picture of the President and a statement about "ultimate disrespect" and nothing more. Am I missing something or is there more I don't see?
I ask this... What is disrespect to the President? Are their certain words I can't say or opinions I can't have? You can dislike someone, their leadership, policies, actions, etc. and make comments about how you feel while being respectful. I just worry that someone's personal feelings are being offended here and that's the real case.
Why does the President warrant some elevated level of respect and not just leaders in general?
Like I said, this statement seems a little loaded or musing something...

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 17 at 2015 10:42 AM

2015-05-17T10:42:30-04:00

I respect the position as Commander in Chief, but in no way can you punish me for what I think of him as President of our country. I will follow his orders, but if I disagree with something that he has done or laws he has passed, I will voice my concern freely. Just because we enlisted does not mean we waive our 1st Amendment rights. I still vote and pay taxes. If you think that you should be punished for speech, then there's something wrong with you. Now, if it goes beyond just your opinion into say a planning stage or something, then yes, by all means punish.

Response by SFC Malvin Espinosa made May 17 at 2015 11:09 AM

2015-05-17T11:09:40-04:00

Your opinions are irrelevant, we in the military are governed by regulations, articles, laws, that provide order, read below some :
UCMJ provision is Article 88, which makes it a crime for an officer to use contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, Congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of a military department, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, or the governor or legislature of any state, territory, commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present
Article 134, known as the catch-all article, makes criminal those acts of speech that are prejudicial to good order and discipline or that could bring discredit upon the Armed Forces.

Response by SPC Frank Roberts made May 17 at 2015 3:29 PM

2015-05-17T15:29:00-04:00

Not when it's a Commander and Chris that has absolutely no respect for them or the Flag they serve under. When that man tries to declare marshal law against civilians are you going to go into your father, mother, brothers, sisters house and take their weapons with deadly force if He orders you to do so? I took the oath to defend my country against all enemies foreign and domestic that includes a President that hates the country he controls.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made May 17 at 2015 7:34 PM

2015-05-17T19:34:17-04:00

quite simply, yes. Glad I am out, I would be up the creek with this administration from top to bottom and back again.

Response by SPC Christian Ziegler made May 17 at 2015 8:30 PM

2015-05-17T20:30:16-04:00

Disrespecting the POTUS is a bad move and should be punished under UCMJ, now that being said the NCO or Officer that forced the troops to go to see the POTUS against there will should also be punished under UCMJ.

Yes a soldier must obey the POTUS just like he must obey any shity leader, but he does not have to like the person and he sure as hell don't have to go see him and hang out with him that goes for any leader. The old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink".

If you look at the picture a few people are smiling many are not. Don't force the troops then there is no cause for UCMJ. Scouts Out

Response by SGT Kevin Brown made May 17 at 2015 9:40 PM

2015-05-17T21:40:53-04:00

I think you need more context in your question Sir. A service member is limited in uniform in regards to politics and obviously disrepecting senior officers (commissioned or non). With that said, we still have the 1st Amendment, and though we cannot openly disrespect the POTUS, the military or its officers while in uniform, private conversation and other forms of expression are not subject under UCMJ just because someone might see it as disrespectful or offensive. For example: I personally cannot stand our current POTUS and I cannot wait until he is out of office (the sooner the better). With that said, I do not publicly rally against him, protest him, nor do I disobey any lawful orders that have been passed down to me through my chain of command, under him. Another example of the use of freedom of expression includes a Marine who was charged under UCMJ after posting a picture on a social network site that he photoshopped of the Preidents face on a Donkey. The court dropped the charges and ruled that his actions fell under the practice of his freedom of expression. Many military personnel hated Bush when he was in office and talked very badly about him, in private and publically. The individual is no more protected then you or I are to the scrutiny of the public (or our peers), even though our rank is and we hold said rank. With all that said, a common value held true across the military is respect and that value, as well as all others, shall be practiced and lived by all service members.

Response by SFC Tyrone Almendarez made May 18 at 2015 1:32 AM

2015-05-18T01:32:41-04:00

I'm biting my lip because I know I will find comments that will go against everything we swore too. I smell the ignorant remarks and the distasteful comments made to our Commander in Chief. The answer is yes. UCMJ action does apply to service members who Disrespect the Commander in Chief. That's why they made you swear when you enlisted or was commissioned. First order of business....raise your right hand....things don't change because you have a different view for our current CIC. I suggest tread lightly active Duty members. For the Veterans who have a different point of view shame on you for promoting dereliction of duty and trying to scramble words around to fit your point of view. Here's a reminder. Raise your right hand and repeat after me..

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 18 at 2015 4:29 AM

2015-05-18T04:29:36-04:00

Maybe this is just me being an MP but...

Prosecuted is a legal word. If you're going to prosecute people and you want me to enforce this rule under UCMJ, I need a definition "Disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief". Is this more, less, or the same as the current definition towards Military Officers already in the UCMJ?

Response by MSG Scott McBride made May 18 at 2015 7:29 AM

2015-05-18T07:29:58-04:00

This administration is the worst of our generation.

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made May 18 at 2015 10:18 AM

2015-05-18T10:18:15-04:00

Absolutely

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made May 18 at 2015 10:26 AM

2015-05-18T10:26:18-04:00

In the army that I came up in and in my dads army before me there was an unwritten rule. No politics in uniform. I'd say that made a lot of sense.

I never knew the politics of one of my best friends until we both were retired and we've since agreed not to discuss politics.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 18 at 2015 12:00 PM

2015-05-18T12:00:20-04:00

I've decided that I'll be the first female president:) gotta retire from the Army Reserve first, so prepare yourselves;) - as for the question, Soldiers shouldn't be disrespectful at all, to anyone- regardless of where they stand in the food chain

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made May 18 at 2015 3:05 PM

2015-05-18T15:05:11-04:00

I can't see the Ultimate Disrespect in the photo. Where is it? Is it the left hand thing? Or is it not a photo caption?

Response by PO3 Jeffrey Levy made May 18 at 2015 4:57 PM

2015-05-18T16:57:50-04:00

If the service members are in uniform and in public I believe they should be present themselves as professionals. However, regarding a personal opinion, speaking poorly about the commander-in-chief, cannot be something someone can be prosecuted about; but should be in the category of closed door conversations, such as Sex, Religion, and Politics. Technically, we are sworn to protect and up hold constitution, and obviously Bill-of-Rights. It may be a stretch to try to punish someone for a comment for an elected official whom, the person has never met, or is not saying to their face or media channel. Do you personally believe that as a CW4 there is no one who has spoken poorly about you while in the presence of others? Additionally, have you never spoken poorly about a superior while not in their presence, regardless of titles....?

Response by PO1 Javid Benson made May 18 at 2015 10:01 PM

2015-05-18T22:01:23-04:00

I say your a complete idiot

Response by CPL Derrick Grady Sr. made May 18 at 2015 11:58 PM

2015-05-18T23:58:15-04:00

Yes they should the President is part of their change of command and to show disrespect for the commander in chief falls under the UMCJ actions.

Response by CW5 Roy Rucker Sr. made May 19 at 2015 1:34 AM

2015-05-19T01:34:23-04:00

I asked this question in reference to the position of Commander in Chief....It doesn't matter who that person the person holding the office is at the time. I have served under a few CINCs since 1989 and have never disrespected either of them or the position.

The RallyPoint Administrators added the photo of the current POTUS to stir up a little controversy or I guess to see what type of responses would be generated about President Obama.

Response by SSG Richard Reilly made May 19 at 2015 9:29 AM

2015-05-19T09:29:57-04:00

What Article?

Response by PFC Chris Hemingway made May 20 at 2015 1:54 AM

2015-05-20T01:54:32-04:00

I've said this once to a lot people I'll say it again if you don't want others insulting the current potus then respect the former ones. Not saying you yourself did chief but usually when people make that comment they have insulted previous potus' years prior.

Response by CPO Jack De Merit made May 22 at 2015 2:43 PM

2015-05-22T14:43:17-04:00

IF the Commander in Chief served in the Military, maybe yes. Our current CIC is a brainless fool with brainless lackeys doing his bidding. He has done more to undermine the Military than any other person since Benedict Arnold.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made May 24 at 2015 9:05 PM

2015-05-24T21:05:55-04:00

Of Course! You Wear the Uniform, You should know the rules.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 25 at 2015 10:55 PM

2015-05-25T22:55:21-04:00

Yes of course. The POTUS is our boss and in any other line of work it's unacceptable to publicly speak badly about the boss. That being said, social media counts as a medium for public display. The men and women who talk smack on the Web will also do it behind your own back. Definitely not the kind of soldier I want to serve with or keep in the ranks.

Response by SGT Anthony Rossi made May 28 at 2015 1:47 AM

2015-05-28T01:47:19-04:00

Respect the Rank. I didn't vote for the President, but he is still my president, and I would still put my life on the line to defend him. Yes, he frustrates me at times but he is still the president of America!

Response by SSG James Arlington made May 28 at 2015 11:38 AM

2015-05-28T11:38:21-04:00

Yes! Doesn't matter who POTUS is. Follow code and be professional.

Response by MSgt Ted C Hall made May 28 at 2015 4:12 PM

2015-05-28T16:12:03-04:00

Here I thought we'd all sworn an oath to uphold The Constitution. Last time I looked political speech was the most protected form. I think you'd have to wear your uniform and make a public speech to violate the UCMJ badly enough for charges to stick.

Response by SFC Malvin Espinosa made May 28 at 2015 4:32 PM

2015-05-28T16:32:08-04:00

Why is this question brought up now, during the presidency of President Obama, never before, never throughout my career have I heard so much disrespect towards our Commander in Chief, prosecute them all under the regulations, I have my opinion about other issues and if I express my opinion freely I will be prosecuted under UCMJ, EO, etc. We have codes of conduct, regulations, rules, and laws to follow, you signed up and took an oath to do so, so do it and shut up about your rights, whats right is right and whats wrong is wrong.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jun 1 at 2015 8:36 AM

2015-06-01T08:36:06-04:00

Yes!

Response by CW4 Larry Curtis made Jun 1 at 2015 4:23 PM

2015-06-01T16:23:38-04:00

Well...it is easy for me at this stage in my life to say "NUTS" to anyone. I am older and far much less tolerant of things with which I disagree. While I was on active duty, I loathed president Carter, in spite of the fact that I had voted for him. I thought he was inept and quite inert as a leader, particularly throughout the Iranian hostage crisis. However, I can remember a time when I was out to dinner with my wife and child in Germany one evening, and a drunken German walked over to my table with a small package of peanuts and smacked them down on my table, and in his broken English saying, "Jimmy Cahta ist goot fahma, but NO deeplomat!" I sat there and smiled up to him politely, and maybe even chucked a little bit just to be civil with the guy...but he would not go away and persisted with the same line over and over, which PISSED ME OFF to no end. Thankfully, just at the precise moment I began applying pressure to my chair to move it to stand and clobber this clown, a group of his friends came along and grabbed him and ushered him away from my table. I DID, however, eat the peanuts he left behind, just to be friendly and all. ;)

I think you really need to put this into a context we can work with here. I have the feeling that with this current administration, merely politely disagreeing with our president could be construed as a blatant act of disrespect and land you in serious trouble. Are we talking about voicing our opinion of the man among your closest friends and associates, or walking up to him and flipping the finger in his face? As professional soldiers I would like to think that NONE of us would do anything to be so blatantly disrespectful to the president as that...we certainly wouldn't do anything like that to our commanders on up. If the shoe fits, you have to wear it, and everyone needs to understand that. Just like respect, disrespect is a two-way street, and most people, with a very few exceptions, won't do or say anything disrespectful toward anyone without having been provoked in some way or another.

Seeing as how members of today's military are the ones who are voluntarily signing-up to serve our country and put our very lives on the line for the idea of maintaining our republic and the freedoms we enjoy, which have been handed down to us through generations of others who have made the ultimate sacrifice in order to give it to us, I don't think ANYONE should have to place their gonads in a vault regarding some things while they are expected to have buckets-full of them otherwise. You can still be critical of someone and serve under them and do your best for them. I think this relates to Intestinal Fortitude. When you start wielding UCMJ around in order to control people's attitudes and viewpoints, you've just fallen off of the ladder of respect for most people...we all know and understand that. There is a thing called TACT and INSPIRATION which is tempered with professionalism and Military Bearing which many people tend to forget about on a regular basis. If you wouldn't do or say something toward, about, or to your commanding General, it should also apply to your Commander-in-Chief...simply put. But UCMJ for anything short of directly insulting or disrespecting anyone to their face, or actually committing a blatant criminal act, is utterly gutless and has no gonads. We do NOT serve under a Lord and Master, we serve under a President. And when you think about it, if it wasn't for the outspoken insubordination of a small group of discontented settlers against the Crown, the USA would probably be flying the Union Jack instead of the Stars and Stripes.

My 2 cents. ;)

Response by SPC William Weedman made Jun 4 at 2015 5:23 AM

2015-06-04T05:23:03-04:00

When I entered basic training I was sent my absentee ballot. My Drill Sgt asked me who I voted for (George H W Bush CiC 41) so every one who agreed with me did push-ups for our candidate. Then he asked who would vote for Michael Dukakis; and they all got to do push-ups as well. The one guy who informed our Drill Sgt. he would not vote got to do a double set of push-ups for not voting. That said, the majority of my career, I did not vote for the POTUS I obeyed the orders of; I also did not vote for any of the Governors I obeyed the orders of as a National Guardsman. Just because I did not vote for them did not mean I did not gave them the respect due the title Commander in Chief. If it is barracks chatter "President Lincoln is nuts if he thinks I'm fighting the Confederates." that is one thing, but if that guy starts walking around town in uniform with a sign saying the same thing it's very different. I disagree with other people regularly, but there is no need to disrespect them. I do not like my current representative to Congress currently at least on a political level, but when he has attended social functions I have attended and he's trying to win votes, I'll smile and shake his hand and say "Hello" it's polite and he's seems like a nice guy.

Response by SPC John Lee made Jun 4 at 2015 3:06 PM

2015-06-04T15:06:11-04:00

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 7 at 2015 1:21 PM

2015-06-07T13:21:22-04:00

Okay so where has this lark flown off to. It pretty corroborates my point that this is a lot of hubris. Remember just this week, the President talking about how he is "Terribly Unfairly Criticized". This is where a lot of thise comes from. Fairness? Really? And where the hell are you CW4 Rucker? Oh yeah, it will be someone else pretty soon because we get these driveby innuendos all the time.

Response by SGT Robert Hawks made Jun 7 at 2015 4:02 PM

2015-06-07T16:02:31-04:00

In this question I would have to ask what you would consider disrespect? Is it disrespect to disagree with policy, philosophy or religious beliefs. I thought this was America where you have the freedom to disagree. Now that doesn't mean you can make fun of or make disparaging remarks against the president to your subordinates or peers but you do have the right to disagree.

Response by MAJ Bill Maynard made Jun 10 at 2015 8:26 AM

2015-06-10T08:26:48-04:00

I think they should but it depends on the situation. Any subordinate who is disrespectful to any member of the chain of command is subject to UCMJ. Often times, members of the chain of command are disrespected in private conversations (in person and via technology). The other issue with the CINC is that he is the only elected official in the COC. American citizens have the right to express their opinion regarding elected officials. Service members are citizens. They vote and have a voice. Points of view differ. One service member may not agree with a Presidential policy. Another service member may view that as disrespectful.

Response by CW3 Amel Smith made Jun 11 at 2015 1:30 PM

2015-06-11T13:30:02-04:00

Interesting question, and I wonder if the question is regarding Obama specifically considering you are a black man, or is the question more generalized. What did you think about the Bush's, Regan, Ford or Carter?
I think the answer is clearly defined, while in uniform and on duty soldiers are enjoined to be respectful of all government leadership, whether they agree with them, are of the same or different party affiliations, regardless of race, religion or political affiliation. However out of uniform and on their personal time, soldiers are still american citizens and should be afforded all the freedoms they have fought and died protecting for all american citizens. They have the right to freedom of speech, as long as they do not attempt to associate that speech to their position, rank, uniform, or any military affiliation. They have the right to be racists, anti-gay, anti-abortion, non-racist, pro-gay, pro-abortion, they are not bound to have to like or respect any leader if they chose, all of these are the rights of all of us. Why should it be different for soldiers?
Questions for you Chief:
Would you shoot and kill a protesting American if the president ordered you?
Would you kill a protesting family member if the president ordered you?
Would you kill a white american if the president ordered you?
Would you kill a muslim american if the president ordered you?
Would you kill a black american if the president ordered you?

Response by SGT Frank Leonardo made Jun 11 at 2015 5:53 PM

2015-06-11T17:53:26-04:00

If you are serving yes you should, if your out and done with the service say what you want

Response by CPL Eric Allen made Jun 19 at 2015 2:57 AM

2015-06-19T02:57:14-04:00

Please Define the disrespect you speak OF...... are they saying that he doesn't know how to use his military assets wisely,or that using and abusing them while taking away more and more of their benefits or that he is a piece of sh** if i had more info that might help answer the question a little better........

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 25 at 2015 1:35 PM

2015-06-25T13:35:31-04:00

Yes. He is the POTUS and due the proper respect that position entails.
He is also a subject of this great nation and not above the law and there are mechanisms for disciplining politicians no matter how mighty as Richard Nixon learned. We as service members need to be cautious and judicious in our words, particularly when they are said in public.

Response by SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA made Jul 2 at 2015 6:22 PM

2015-07-02T18:22:33-04:00

To make this question even more feasible, let me put it this way.

Since the millitary takes an Oath to uphold the Constitution, this does not give the military personnel any right to be bound by the Constitution. In other words, When a person enlists, there are no constitutional rights for anyone wearing the uniform of the United States. And, while in the military, they have no right to vote either.

So, if you disrespect the president, you get court-martialed. Disrespect the Congressman, you get court-martialed. Even disrespecting the dog-catcher, you get court-martialed. Disrespecting anyone who has influence over you, you get court-martialed.

Do you see the escalation of stupdity? I think Mr. Rucker is seeing things from ONLY his point-of-view and his eyesight is very dim. What about all of the other presidents that have been talked badly about. If you do not know what I mean, the liberals were in the streets hanging Bush 43 in effigy and calling for his murder. This was center-piece conversation at the time everywhere, to include the military. According to Mr. Ruckers' discussion, Bush 43 could have had lots of military personnel court-martialed and imprisoned for disrepect.

My question to Mr. Rucker is this: What should the President have done during the military race riots of the 1970s? (Or, is Mr. Ruckers' vision still cloudy?) Should that president have everyone rounded up in those riots and imprisoned for actions unbecoming of a soldier. Remember, Viet Nam was still going on then.

For me, I got the hell out of these race riots by reenlisting and going back to Viet Nam. At least there was some sanity and people actually worked together. All I see in this thread, is divisiveness.

Everyone who has any rank on their shoulder, or sleeve, has said derogatory things about politicians and if you say you have not, then you join the cast of other liars.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 12:28 PM

2015-07-16T12:28:16-04:00

Absolutely!!! I feel it should be the same as if the service member disrespected his chain of command.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jul 16 at 2015 4:28 PM

2015-07-16T16:28:18-04:00

All it would take is a change of two or three words of Article 88...

Response by CW4 Richard A. Dropik made Jul 17 at 2015 11:04 AM

2015-07-17T11:04:24-04:00

Absolutely yes. The President is the Commander and Chief. If you don’t or think you can’t, you need to resign immediately.

Response by CW4 Chad Balwanz made Jul 17 at 2015 11:46 AM

2015-07-17T11:46:34-04:00

We would have to define disrespect. Is disagreeing with the policies, such as using the military as a social experiment to pave the way for broader implementation of ideological causes considered disrespect? I think a better question is "Do you feel it appropriate for the Commander-in-Chief to disrespect the military? Was the firing of Gen Stanley A. McChrystal an appropriate act? The General accepted responsibility for everything that happened or failed to happen under his command, he personally did not disparage or insult the Commander-in-Chief, it was members of his staff. The General understood and accepted responsibility, he did not blame anyone else. Perhaps our Commander-in-Chief should take this same approach. Remember respect is a two way street and it is something that is earned not bestowed due to rank or position. Is using the full weight and authority of the federal government to attack political opponents an appropriate use of the government? There are other actions to correct behavior, such as counseling, then company grade article 15 verse going directly to prosecution. Soldiers do not terminate their religious or political beliefs when they put on the uniform and prosecuting them for such would leave us with a military void of diversity. I respectfully disagree with the Chief's statement as written.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2015 1:18 AM

2015-07-20T01:18:34-04:00

No one, and I mean no one, gets anything from me until they earn it. From the moment this sanctimonious jerk came on the world stage, he has been nothing but a pompous, arrogant prick and pathological liar. As a POTUS, he is the consummate fraud. As a human being, he is a waste of oxygen. To your question, not only no, but Hell No. Returning to the matter of your question, any particular reason you feel a need to post this particular question? Any particular president that you had in mind, or are you actually speaking in general terms???

Response by SFC Joseph Weber made Jul 20 at 2015 3:19 AM

2015-07-20T03:19:29-04:00

Yes.

Response by SGT Timothy Rocheleau made Jul 20 at 2015 10:19 AM

2015-07-20T10:19:40-04:00

I feel that this is going a bit overboard. Here's the thing, would you say this for another president? Did you bring up this stance for President Bush? Because in my experience he received a lot worse disrespect than the current one. Nobody can deny that.

From where is your question coming from? Is it because you feel any president shouldn't be disrespected or because you feel that this particular president shouldn't be? Where is your question regarding presidential disrespect for any other president prior to this one? Bad evidenced by your rank you have served under a few presidents.

Even military members should retain the most basic of constitutional rights, that being the right to free speech. They should be allowed to vent and complain about a commander in chief who has shown more respect for criminals than he has our military.

I'm more concerned with your question than I am the "disrespect" for the commander in chief. Simply being the commander in chief or even an E-8 doesn't instantly grant you respect. You still have to earn it. And let's be honest here, every person on planet earth are going to have people who disagree with them and do not respect them. This should be able to be voiced and discussed amongst a group of people.

If a military member were to do an interview for TV or a paper and showed open disrespect sure, they deserve punishment but if they are discussing this and you or someone who hears them finds what they are saying to be "disrespect" is it really disrespect or is it just something you don't agree with and since you happen to like the sitting president find it disrespectful?

Everybody needs to take a damn step back and think about things. This country was in a much better place before the current administration. We were in a better place both in the military and in the civilian world. Our respect as a country has dwindled to the point that foreign countries no longer respect or fear us, and that can be related directly back to who our president is.

Race relations have declined under the sitting administration, this administration, meaning the president has sent representatives of himself or went himself to the funerals of criminals, gone on live TV and spoke of police being racist and such when the police he was referring to simply did their jobs and yes, I am referring tonthebMike Brown incident. He sent reps to the funerals of criminals and sent no one to the funerals of our military brethren killed in action under his command.

He has welcomed the race baiter Al Sharpton to the White House a record number of times. And for what? Has any of his actions increased our standing around the world. For the love of god we are seeing the destruction of all YOUR hard work and sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are active conflicts on every continent and the Societs and Chinese are openly being aggressive and hacking our federal government and under this president he finds it wise to reduce the size of our military to the lowest that it has ever been.

Instead of meeting with the families of slain Americans by illegal aliens here under his amnesty program he meets with a "you tube sensation" who fills her tub with milk and fruit loops then gets in and proceeds to eat the cereal. Does this really say "I am a respectful person"? Does this our troops and the world that this man is deserving of respect?

I leave you with this question and feel it is a viable question.

Would you be asking this question if it were say President Bush? if so link me to that question where you asked this very same thing.

And I'm sure I will get voted down for this next one but it needs to be asked.....

Would you ask this question if he wasn't a "black" President?

Would you ask this question if your political ideology didn't align with his?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2015 6:03 PM

2015-07-20T18:03:25-04:00

I would say that it would depend on the forum in which they spoke. For example, I make it no secret that I have my own personal disagreements with the administration currently in office. When I am off duty and out of uniform, I speak them openly amongst friends. I do not bash POTUS on social media, nor in a setting where I would be overheard by others. But to take away the ability to discuss protestations against anyone would remove our freedom of speech. And if a bunch of retards can walk around burning, stomping on, and wiping their ass with the American Flag for the sake of free speech, then by the gods, I will gladly speak my disputes with the choices of my boss to friends.

Response by CW4 Richard A. Dropik made Jul 23 at 2015 12:46 PM

2015-07-23T12:46:27-04:00

What a sorry and prejdudice person you are. How were you ever allowed to serve in the American Military, Disgusting idiot.

Response by SGT Scott Curtice made Jul 23 at 2015 1:02 PM

2015-07-23T13:02:03-04:00

of course, not for being critical of decisions, but attacking the individual or position, at least to the same standard of your direct command, yes, wish UCMJ covered so called news outlets :)

Response by SGT Mitch McKinley made Jul 23 at 2015 1:33 PM

2015-07-23T13:33:04-04:00

There is a difference between obeying the orders of the President od the United States and respecting the man (or woman) that is sitting in the Oval Office. Keep in mind, that until elected by the PEOPLE, the President was just another citizen of this country. I never understood how a person who wins a nation-wide popularity contest is handed an automatic "I deserve and demand your respect" card. The respect is afforded to the position, the office, the title, not to the individual.

Response by SPC Nathan Acreman made Jul 23 at 2015 1:34 PM

2015-07-23T13:34:04-04:00

First of all I would ask what are we calling disrespect? If by disrespect we are talking about being critical of his policy and decision making, than no. If it bothers people though the soldier should be addressed and told to stop talking politics in shop. If by disrespect you mean insulting the man directly in a way that has no real bearing on his politics, I again think it should be addressed first, then move to some form of UCMJ action.

In my time in I served under Clinton, Bush and Obama. I will say under the Obama administration was the first time I have seen so many relieved of their commands and soldiers chaptered out of the army, and in some cases for nothing more than openly stating political differences. The rule is clear under the UCMJ, while recognizing that ever soldier has the right to vote and therefore their own right to an opinion, that their opinion needs to be kept seperate from the uniform they wear. Which means your opinion is strictly yours and shouldn't ever be given at an official capacity.

Response by SGT Christopher Churilla made Jul 23 at 2015 1:48 PM

2015-07-23T13:48:38-04:00

Servicemembers can be prosecuted for disrespect to officers and NCOs, why shouldn't POTUS be included in that? Respect is given for the person's rank, not the person himself.

Response by TSgt Tony Helms made Jul 23 at 2015 1:52 PM

2015-07-23T13:52:12-04:00

I say if the Commander and Chief does not follow his oath then the member should be able to voice it because the military oath states support and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies....and our politicians take an oath as well but are not so much as questioned on following theirs. My oath in the military was never about an individual but the basic principal of what our nation stands for. Our military is here to follow lawful orders, not unlawful ones. Any that are anti-Constitution are not lawful orders. Our politicians are selling the American people out. I say if the member is tactful about how it is voiced then it should not be punishable. For some it is hard to watch our own president weaken this great nation. Other prefer to silently be on for the ride blindly following.

Response by CW4 Brendon Despres PMP made Aug 5 at 2015 6:33 AM

2015-08-05T06:33:17-04:00

I would agree with you up to a point, because the Declaration of Independence charges, us as citizens, "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-- No one can be above "We The People."

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Sep 25 at 2015 5:46 PM

2015-09-25T17:46:38-04:00

it depends on the "disrespect"... it it's just voicing an opinion, no. But if its an act of violence yes....

Response by SGT Michael Glenn made Oct 11 at 2015 3:51 PM

2015-10-11T15:51:14-04:00

I believe the best way to go about this whole business is to ask oneself...Self... would you like to be put into the situation of having to go to your hometown and go door to door to the people who respect you and have known you all your life and demand they hand over their guns to you and your unit. Or tell them that some are being removed from the community because your boss feels they are substandard and that they will be replaced by muslim radicals, That all flags are to be removed from open display and no religion other than a muslim based one will be allowed in your town anymore and if the time comes take up arms against your hometown and barricade them either in or out. When we can walk up to a vet and tell them that they no longer mean anything to this country and that their care and thanks for all they have done is no longer. When we can openly admit that we would have no issues doing any of the above then we can say that this CIC deserves respect. Until then, he will get the respect he deserves, NONE!!!

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2015 6:31 PM

2015-10-11T18:31:04-04:00

If I can be reprimanded for disrespecting my squadron commander it makes sense that the same should be done for disrespecting the boss of my bosses!

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Oct 11 at 2015 9:07 PM

2015-10-11T21:07:30-04:00

Yes. But that changes the second they get out!

Response by MAJ Jim Woods made Oct 13 at 2015 11:26 AM

2015-10-13T11:26:58-04:00

So you can't have an opinion? Or just can't express your opinion no matter what the format?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2015 12:57 PM

2015-10-13T12:57:05-04:00

Chief, you're right. And yes they should. As long as it's actual disrespect, and not people taking offense at differing opinions. I'm not sure what the exact rule for enlisted members is, but I know for officers there's actually an article of the UCMJ dedicated to this question, I want to say it's Article 88. This is why I express my political thoughts as generalizations and never as specific criticisms of a person, so that way I can avoid any kind of situation like that.

Response by SPC Luis Mendez made Oct 14 at 2015 12:52 PM

2015-10-14T12:52:21-04:00

At least an Article 15 could be applied. Do they still do those in today AVM?
Yet again IMHO this is another Test/Sample of the lower quality of recruits the AVA gets, and of the incredible extents the Military now is going, to retain the few that join. And BTW, let me assure you it was Worst in the late 70's.

We wouldn't be having this discussion in the Military and others like: women in Combat, homosexuals/transgenders, Bergdahl, Manning et al. etc. if there was a DRAFT. Back in the days ALL of these were inconceivable and absolutely unnecessary. Simply 'cause for every undesirable/unfit, the DRAFT could and DID find/provide ten (10) that were Fit.

Napoleon Bonaparte was Right in every sense when he Created the Modern Draft and said: "Every man is a defender of the Country". The DRAFT is also Scriptural. Some of the accusations that were brought on against the DRAFT were NOT resolved at all by the AVA. Not only that, these undisciplined misfits are being paid 15 times more plus Bonuses. Incredible!

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Oct 14 at 2015 2:18 PM

2015-10-14T14:18:42-04:00

Yes, as provided for under Article 88 of the UCMJ and under those circumstances only.

Response by SSG Todd Halverson made Oct 14 at 2015 3:03 PM

2015-10-14T15:03:14-04:00

Hell yes. They may not like the person, but they still have to respect him as their CIC.

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Oct 18 at 2015 4:22 AM

2015-10-18T04:22:46-04:00

CW5 Roy Rucker Sr., Were you saying the same thing when G.W. was President?

Response by PO3 Brad Phlipot made Dec 5 at 2015 6:16 PM

2015-12-05T18:16:47-05:00

Ummm......It is already LAW in short your not allowed to have an opinion. If they are in civilians clothes in their homes they can express their feelings as they choose. A uniformed person can not show disrespect of any kind to the CIC unless this has changed recently.

Response by CPO Eugene Gillam made Dec 10 at 2015 4:51 PM

2015-12-10T16:51:03-05:00

Hell no...this POS (or is that POTUS) has no respect for the military community and even less respect for the office of CIC. Why should any active duty service member be held to a higher standard than him?

Response by SrA Art Siatkowsky made Dec 17 at 2015 4:24 AM

2015-12-17T04:24:11-05:00

utter nonsense. Obama is a disgrace to the position. He swore and oath to defend the constitution and had his fingers crossed behind his back. I say Obama should be prosecuted for lying under oath.

Response by MSG Barry Kerby made Dec 17 at 2015 1:38 PM

2015-12-17T13:38:56-05:00

In light of the duty to uphold and defend the Constitution, the answer is no, especially as it relates to politicians vs. commanding officers and supervisory NCOs. Who gets to decide what "disrespect" is toward a politician? What if I were from Texas and signed a petition of impeachment of the current sitting President (calling for the removal of your superior officer could definitely be considered "disrespect," or "sedition," or "mutiny.") This gets to the heart of the question: "what is disrespect," and "who should it apply to, both military and elected officials?" If it's a politician does it only apply if I'm in uniform? (What if I call for his resignation or impeachment on FB): Is it disrespect only if my FB page identifies me as being in the military? Or only if my FB picture is of me in uniform with a statement on my page? Just as politics is local, so is leadership. If you are prosecuting someone for disrespect, you've already failed in your fundamental leadership responsibility, and that would apply to the President as well.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Dec 18 at 2015 11:51 AM

2015-12-18T11:51:42-05:00

There are some here on RP who seem to relish in doing exactly that.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 18 at 2015 11:53 AM

2015-12-18T11:53:17-05:00

Of course they should......but expressing one's disagreement with the commander and chief is not the same as being disrespectful.....the trick would be drawing the line between what is free speech and what is disrespectful. Course the simple answer should just be, as in the civilian world, you are always better off not discussing politics or religion in the work place.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Dec 18 at 2015 11:56 AM

2015-12-18T11:56:36-05:00

CW5 Rucker, did you feel the same way when President Bush was in office, or is this because you like Obama?
Prosecuted for what? Having an opinion are you crazy?

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Dec 18 at 2015 12:11 PM

2015-12-18T12:11:15-05:00

888. ARTICLE 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
10. Punitive Articles
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Nothing specific with regard to enlisted, except the good all catch all Article 134 that can get you for a crooked smile.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Dec 18 at 2015 12:50 PM

2015-12-18T12:50:35-05:00

Do you mean like Sadam did when someone criticised him.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Dec 18 at 2015 2:02 PM

2015-12-18T14:02:32-05:00

The oath of enlistment states, "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." By having the obey the orders of the president in there it implies that we will support the office and its direction according to the UCMJ. We don't have the luxury of not following his orders because we don't agree and we certainly don't have the right as long as we are in a uniform to disrespect the CINC.

The officer oath states. "I, _____, having been appointed an officer in the "enter service branch here", as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental 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." Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution give the president the title and authorization of Commander in Chief. So by stating this oath you swore to protect the constitution...all of it...not just what we believe. By disrespecting the president you are undermining the authority of the office and should be held accountable.

Response by SGT Mathew Husen made Dec 22 at 2015 9:13 PM

2015-12-22T21:13:31-05:00

I agree, disrespect of anyone in the chain of command and NCO support channel can affect unit moral. And it is prosecutable under UCMJ.

Response by SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury made Dec 24 at 2015 4:43 PM

2015-12-24T16:43:42-05:00

If someone will be openly disrespectful if their Commander-in-Chief, regardless of their political views, they should be prosecuted under the UCMJ. Our enlistment oath pledges to obey the orders of the POTUS. We willingly forfeit the ability to weigh in on his or her performance. We need to get back that level of respect for our leaders.

Response by SCPO Joshua I made Dec 31 at 2015 10:12 PM

2015-12-31T22:12:14-05:00

Did you believe the same when Bush was president?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2015 11:51 PM

2015-12-31T23:51:52-05:00

Funny you just disappeared
You are a poser.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 2 at 2016 4:34 PM

2016-01-02T16:34:45-05:00

If Hillary gets elected it's going to be damned difficult to not badmouth that lying bitch.

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Jan 3 at 2016 1:29 AM

2016-01-03T01:29:52-05:00

If in uniform, yes. If not in uniform, NO! You do not relinquish your Constitutional rights just because you are in the military. While you are in uniform, you represent the nation and once you take that uniform off at the end of the day, while you may still be in the military, you are free to express your views.

Respect is always given to the Office of the Presidency. Respect for the person in that office must be earned and not just automatically given because of the office held. In my 63 years, I have been alive through twelve Presidents. Out of all twelve I can honestly say I have respect for four...Truman, Ike, Kennedy & Reagan. In my opinion they are the only ones who put their country ahead of themselves. For the record, I am a conservative.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 2:57 AM

2016-01-04T02:57:29-05:00

Let's understand what contemptuous is - "The Benchbook defines it as insulting, rude, disdainful or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness, disreputableness, or worthlessness." The Manual for Courts-Martial asserts that contemptuous language is either so obvious that it amounts to contempt per se or it may be inferred by examining the circumstances surrounding the making of the accused’s statement. That Benchbook by the way is DA PAM 27-9.

Art 88, 92, 93, 133, 134 have been covered, but you can also include Art 117 Provoking Speeches and Gestures. There are two pertinent Department of Defense directives (DODD) that govern political speech in the military. Directive 1325.6 establishes guidelines for dealing with protest and dissident activities, and Directive 1344.10 specifies the types of political activities that may be appropriate for
active-duty service members to engage in. The directives establish principles that are intended to help commanders balance the free speech rights of their troops with their own command obligations. For instance, DODD 1325.6 counsels commanders to preserve the service member’s right of expression to the utmost extent on the one-hand while on the other they are cautioned not to ignore conduct that could destroy the effectiveness of their units. The directives also presuppose that commanders will exercise calm and prudent judgment when trying to properly reconcile these two interests when they clash.

Department of Defense Instruction 1334.01 generally forbids wearing a uniform while participating in any personal, professional, or political activity where an inference of official sponsorship may be drawn. Examples include giving an unofficial public speech or interview and participating in a march, picket, or any other form of public demonstration. A good rule of thumb is that members may never wear a uniform while engaging in any activity that would tend to bring discredit upon the armed forces or create an inference of official endorsement on behalf of the military.

Unlike UCMJ, the directives do not distinguish service members who publicly criticize a President and oppose a war from those who openly support both. The directives were intended to preserve in part the long- standing tradition that the military remain an apolitical body whose duty is to obey the orders of its civilian leaders. Just as soldiers are prohibited from airing their grievances in public, so too should they refrain from delivering speeches, granting interviews, and publishing statements that tend to show partisan support for any cause and political leader.

Here's a bit of trivia, Art 88 of the UCMJ is rooted in the British Articles of War of 1765, much like all the other UCMJ articles. "The British Articles of War forbade any officer or soldier from using traitorous or disrespectful words against the King or members of the royal family. The articles also forbade British troops from behaving with contempt or disrespect toward a general or other commander-in-chief of the British forces and from using words tending to hurt or dishonor them."

In June 1775, the Continental Congress adopted this provision and slightly modified the language to make it applicable to the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War. In 1776, Congress amended the provision to prohibit the use of traitorous or disrespectful words against the United States Congress or any state legislature in which a soldier or officer may be quartered. The provision was modified again in 1806 to preclude the President and Vice President from being treated as objects of disrespect. The provision remained unchanged until Congress incorporated it into Article 88 of the UCMJ in 1950.

Here's something very interesting in reference to Art 88; "The government may not charge expressions of opinion made during the course of a private conversation or adverse criticism of a protected official or legislature if it was not personally contemptuous and was done during the course of a political discussion" So in order to secure an Article 88 conviction, the government must prove that the accused was a commissioned officer; that he or she used certain words against the official or legislature specified in the article; that a third party became aware of these words because of an act attributed to the accused; and that the words were contemptuous in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances in which they were used.

Now those of you who are retired, have you ever heard a retired Soldier say, “They can’t touch me now; I’ve retired.”? Fortunately, for the sake of military justice, this is not true when it comes to retired Soldiers who violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) while they were on active duty or in a retired status.

Under Article 2 of the UCMJ, the Army maintains court-martial jurisdiction over retired personnel. Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justice, states “Retired members of a regular component of the Armed Forces who are entitled to pay are subject to the provisions of the UCMJ and may be tried by court-martial for violations of the UCMJ that occurred while they were on active duty or while in a retired status.” Included within Article 2(4)’s ambit are service members retired for either a permanent or temporary disability. Department of the Army policy, however, does limit these trials to cases where extraordinary circumstances are present. The Army normally declines to prosecute retired Soldiers unless their crimes have clear ties to the military, or are clearly service discrediting. If necessary to facilitate courts-martial action, retired Soldiers may be ordered to active duty. (I am sure this applies to the other service branches with respect to regulations of said branch)

The regulation adds that “Retired Reserve Component Soldiers are subject to recall to active duty for the investigation of UCMJ offenses they are alleged to have committed while in a Title 10 duty status, for trial by court-martial, or for proceedings under UCMJ, Article 15.” Forfeitures imposed under the UCMJ, Article 15 may even be applied against a Soldier’s retired pay. Now if there any savvy lawyers/legal specialists, I do believe there's a two-year statute of limitations for Article 15's and the five year statute of limitations for Court Martial still applies.

First off I apologize for this post being long winded. I suffer from a severe chronic nerve pain that does not allow me to get adequate REM sleep, go out in public for long periods or just enjoy simple mundane things, like taking out the garbage or washing dishes. So I am up at all hours of the day and night riddled with brief respites of 20-30 minute cat naps. CW5 Roy Rucker Sr., I sincerely apologize if I went off topic. I found your post to be intriguing and thought provoking, so much I would do some research and contribute some dialogue without the need to insult anyone's intelligence, unnecessarily use profane language or attack anyone's opinion. In summary, this could be one of those late night ramblings of an ill man having difficulty recalling, but thankful for those RP notifications to remind me and hope I didn't spark another storm.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made Jan 6 at 2016 2:34 AM

2016-01-06T02:34:56-05:00

There is disrespect and there is differing in opinion. The two are not the same. I can disagree with anyone and still be respectful. But when respect is defined as a requiring full agreement and blind acceptance of ideas and policies, that isn't respect. That is coercion.

Response by 1SG Larry Cole, EMBA/MBA/MS made Jan 7 at 2016 3:36 PM

2016-01-07T15:36:43-05:00

Absolutely, Yes. This should also include DA Civilians as well because they are a service member as well supporting the mission of the Department of Defense.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jan 17 at 2016 3:26 PM

2016-01-17T15:26:26-05:00

Obama is a MORON....Prosecute me.

Try and remember the 1st amendment. If you kool aid drinkers can.

Response by SPC James Dollins made Feb 8 at 2016 12:35 PM

2016-02-08T12:35:53-05:00

Yes! If the disrespect is in a public setting, while in uniform, or extreme enough to grab people's attention & they are associating those comments to their service. If that makes sense..

Response by SGT Vince Albert Dickson made Feb 21 at 2016 12:52 AM

2016-02-21T00:52:03-05:00

Absolutely and also Veterans receiving benefits from the VA

Response by SGT Vince Albert Dickson made Feb 21 at 2016 1:37 AM

2016-02-21T01:37:03-05:00

Yes! I also believe Veterans receiving benefits from VA as well should be held accountable

Response by SGT Scott Curtice made Feb 25 at 2016 12:50 PM

2016-02-25T12:50:35-05:00

absolutely

Response by CPT James Burkholder made Mar 3 at 2016 2:23 PM

2016-03-03T14:23:51-05:00

I believe that even members of the active military should have the right to comment on the policies of the civilian administration as it applies to the military or anything else. it's harder for me to separate criticism of policy from criticism of the individual making that policy. That takes a pretty good writer to do so and I think that the member of the military should be given a lot of room. As far as veterans I believe they should say whatever they want whether they get VA benefits or not. Should a person be indentured to the government merely because they receive what the government is obligated to provide them for their service? I think not. Going further, should anyone on Social Security be forbidden to criticize the President? Where would it stop?

Response by 1SG Larry Cole, EMBA/MBA/MS made Mar 10 at 2016 2:12 PM

2016-03-10T14:12:57-05:00

Yes,
When you raised you hand and swear in you have vowed to follow orders. No military service member to include DA Civilians, and CME Support Contractors working in direct support of the government should be allow to disrespect the Commander-in-Chief, no matter how you feel about the job he/she is doing. I have been serving in some form of service for over 32 years and never in public have I ever disrespected the Commander-in-Chief.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 18 at 2016 1:14 AM

2016-03-18T01:14:36-04:00

There is Article 88 in the UCMJ for Officers...Comtempt Towards Elected Officials.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 1:14 PM

2016-03-21T13:14:31-04:00

I think the problem in the Army and the United States today what is disrespectful and what is the truth. If I tell the truth about a leader, any leader, and someone does not agree they may call it disrespectful or unprofessional, or any other myriad of PC phrases today. I will follow the orders of those appointed over me. That is what I swore too almost 20 years ago. But I also swore to UPHOLD AND DEFEND the Constitution of the United States of America. So my freedom of speech stays intact. If I want to believe and state that a policy is immoral, illegal ect it is my right to do so. If you try to take away that right you are violating the oath you took and also create an environment of distrust and lies because a SM will not be able to comment on issues for fear of trumped up retribution. Leaders don't want the truth they want to be told they are doing a good job. They will change good to bad right to wrong just to fit in with the PC community. They want to hear themselves blowing hot Air.
If I say I have probable cause to believe Hilary Clinton violated the laws of the United States While Secretary of State. Is that disrespectful or the truth?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 1:25 PM

2016-03-21T13:25:28-04:00

Only if we make it retroactive and prosecute those who disrespected Bush when he was CIC. If not, you are being a hypocrite.

Response by Annette Hindsley made Mar 21 at 2016 9:22 PM

2016-03-21T21:22:56-04:00

YOU DON'T GIVE RESPECT IT HAS TO BE EARNED AND OBAMA HASN'T EARNED ANY

Response by PO2 Nick Burke made Mar 21 at 2016 9:31 PM

2016-03-21T21:31:34-04:00

Traditionally they have not. How far back should they go? 7 years? 10? 15? Every comment? Who should choose?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 8:34 AM

2016-03-22T08:34:39-04:00

And I say "First Amendment"!

Response by Cpl Rodney Patterson made Mar 23 at 2016 3:29 AM

2016-03-23T03:29:18-04:00

Agree...100%

Response by PO1 Darren Martin made Mar 23 at 2016 12:26 PM

2016-03-23T12:26:58-04:00

During the Bush Presidency did you bad mouth him? Did you bad mouth Clinton?

The president is human and prone to errors. He's just a man and nobody is perfect.

I say politics in the work place are a no no and people get to emotional over it. I say talk about something good like puppies.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2016 4:21 PM

2016-03-23T16:21:09-04:00

Yes!! Regardless of who the Commander in Chief is.

Response by SPC Brandon Hamilton made Mar 29 at 2016 4:56 PM

2016-03-29T16:56:30-04:00

Positive!

Response by CPT James Burkholder made Mar 31 at 2016 12:55 PM

2016-03-31T12:55:39-04:00

Many here have provided thoughtful responses. Mine may not be as good, but I have always felt there is a difference between commissioned/noncommissioned superior officers and those elected civilian officials who we do accept as being in total command of the military strategic goals and policies. I believe that criticism, even disrespectful criticism, of the elected superiors is different than that of superiors in charge of day to day operation. I've heard too many guys talk about how dumb various policies are in the army. Shall we charge all those barracks rantings with violations of the UCMJ? I think not.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2016 7:37 PM

2016-05-07T19:37:23-04:00

In that it is a violation of Article 88, UCMJ, then my answer is yes. My issue is that those who I've met who'd like this Art 88 prosecuted during the current administration seemed pretty vocal and equally disrespectful toward the previous Commander in Chief.

Response by Chris Stevens made Jun 12 at 2016 9:20 PM

2016-06-12T21:20:14-04:00

hell no just because some one is in the military doesn't mean they don't have the same damn right everyone does like freedom of speech people like you is what's wrong with America

Response by CPO Joseph Grant made Jun 13 at 2016 12:48 PM

2016-06-13T12:48:41-04:00

We've all had opinions about the POTUS since the US Military was established. Not all of them are respectful. We follow his orders. Commissioned Officers cannot speak against elected officials but the UCMJ doesn't keep us enlisted scum from having our own opinions.

Response by CPT James Burkholder made Jun 16 at 2016 1:06 PM

2016-06-16T13:06:57-04:00

I don't think the military service member should be prosecuted if they do not identify themselves as active duty personnel by rank. That is signing a post as xxxxx, Sgt, U.S. Army. If the post is made as an individual personally I don't think they should be prosecuted. Members of the US military are still citizens of the United States - - they can vote, have opinions about the direction the country takes and should be able to express them as citizens, not military personnel. Now when you get up into the high military ranks where people know who they are that might be another mattter.

I do agree with Col. Jones that the President is a civilian who directs and orders the actions of the military of the United States. Is he subject to the UCMJ? I don't know, but I doubt it. In some ways his job is different from that of a Commander of a unit.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Jun 23 at 2016 4:55 PM

2016-06-23T16:55:13-04:00

Much of this comes from resentment towards the current POTUS and his being the first black President in this country's history. This question NEVER came up before now and sickens me no end.

Response by SPC Brandon Hamilton made Jun 30 at 2016 6:02 PM

2016-06-30T18:02:46-04:00

That's a "Roger", But before the President leaves the Oval-Office he should Presidential Pardon Former Black Panthers Political Prisoners for whom was wrongly Jailed for their Beliefs and give some of the Homeless a place to call home in the White House so they can help him with his Ideas to end "Homelessness" for good. Finally, I think President Obama's Successor should be a Native-American because this is their land taken from them by Extreme-Measures. I should know I'm half Native-American myself.

Response by A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney made Oct 2 at 2022 12:30 PM

2022-10-02T12:30:34-04:00

I Have Problems With Showing My Respect
For Anyone Whom I Feel Doesn't Deserve My Respect.
Not Just D.J.T., But Anyone; It's Tantamount To Doing Nothing More
Than Out & Out Lying
...My Personal Feeling About D.J.T., Is That I'd Have a Lot Of Difficulty Trying To Show Respect For Him, Or Anyone Else, Whom Lies To Me On Any Manner Of His Numbers & Consistency.
Especially By The 1000.'s, When He Must Know The Lies Will Be Uncovered And Be An Embarrassment To Himself, Our Country, And Those Whom Give Him Their Support..

It's Far Beyond Anything I Could Even Imagine Doing;
Especially As A World Leader, For The Entire World To See....

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2022 12:46 PM

2022-10-03T12:46:19-04:00

Chief, disrespecting ANY commander-in-chief is punishable under UCMJ. The awesome thing about our country is the pendulum swings both ways. Sure you might not agree with everything they stand for but you made an oath to stand by the constitution and its tenets, which includes supporting the President. In 4 years, you'll then likely get someone you align with more, while others less, etc. It's the reason why we succeed for the most part as a democracy. Yeah we aren't perfect, nobody is, but that does not give us the right to slander any President as oath-bound Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors, etc. Don't like fiscal policy? Go vote. Complaining goes nowhere, right? Adjust fire and drive on they say.