Posted on May 10, 2015
Do you think military service members should be prosecuted under UCMJ for disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief? I say absolutely, YES!
214K
1.12K
648
95
84
11
Disrespect
Office of the President (POTUS)
UCMJ
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 239
3
3
0
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...
(3)
(0)
SSG Trevor S.
MSG Brad Sand I self debated for about 3 hours if I should put my actual true feelings on this issue up. Then I remembered this little gem, close enough!
(1)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SSG Trevor S. I have the advantage of being retired...so I can be more open with my comments...now that I think about it, even when I was in, I was pretty willing to let the truth fly?
(0)
(0)
SSG Trevor S.
MSG Brad Sand Well since I am retired...
Disagreement does not equal disrespect. So long as a Service Member follows legal orders, they are allowed to disagree with political platforms and positions and state their disagreement with platforms and specific candidates IAW DoDD 1344.10. In fact the constant barrage reminding Service Members not to “disrespect” “express disagreement” ect… may be a punishable offense itself. Consider this; not all service members are set in their political beliefs. If a senior ranking person seizes the opportunity to shut down respectful but disagreeing political conversation by labeling “disagreement” as “disrespect” it can reasonably be construed as using threat of punishment as intimidation. It is my opinion that this is “voter intimidation” and “use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces”.
Chapter 29- Elections and Political Activities.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2011-title18/USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap29-sec594
Sec. 594 - Intimidation of voters
Sec. 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
Disagreement does not equal disrespect. So long as a Service Member follows legal orders, they are allowed to disagree with political platforms and positions and state their disagreement with platforms and specific candidates IAW DoDD 1344.10. In fact the constant barrage reminding Service Members not to “disrespect” “express disagreement” ect… may be a punishable offense itself. Consider this; not all service members are set in their political beliefs. If a senior ranking person seizes the opportunity to shut down respectful but disagreeing political conversation by labeling “disagreement” as “disrespect” it can reasonably be construed as using threat of punishment as intimidation. It is my opinion that this is “voter intimidation” and “use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces”.
Chapter 29- Elections and Political Activities.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2011-title18/USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap29-sec594
Sec. 594 - Intimidation of voters
Sec. 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
(1)
(0)
MSG Nick C.
MSG Brad Sand - She's a serious loony tune. She has classic sociopath behavior, habitually lies, megalomaniac tendencies, self important nut-job who thinks she knows "what's best" for we little people. The facts about her are out there and finally "news" sources (and I say that with extreme doubt of their ability to actually report the non-biased truth about anything) are outing her as such.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
NO! I am 99% sure that you wouldn't have given that courtesy to President Bush. Sounds like a G thing,
(3)
(0)
SPC James Fie
"By SSgt L Ol 16 days ago:
SSgt Justyn Amick SSG David Gentile Every few months we get these random drive-by events where someone (not sure if they are real or something using their account) comes along and starts this crap. Probably trolls from the administration. In either case it is pretty much predictable."
Says the guy who signs in as "SSgt L Ol". Why do I get the feeling he and Gentile are having an all-or-nothing Troll contest?
SSgt Justyn Amick SSG David Gentile Every few months we get these random drive-by events where someone (not sure if they are real or something using their account) comes along and starts this crap. Probably trolls from the administration. In either case it is pretty much predictable."
Says the guy who signs in as "SSgt L Ol". Why do I get the feeling he and Gentile are having an all-or-nothing Troll contest?
(0)
(0)
CPT William Ainley
TSgt (Join to see) - Wow that was quite a testimonial for our El President! You do understand the VA controversy never came up until El President was well into his second term in office? Oh yes, I have a question, "When was the last time you checked into a VA facility for medical attention?" NEWS FLASH! It has not changed all that much! Oh, so you are probably thinking " How does the Captain know of such things?" Answer: "I have, on occasion used VA services for a "Service Connected" injury, and believe me, it isn't anything to write home about!"
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
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.
(3)
(0)
4
3
1
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.
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.
(4)
(1)
SGT Anthony Bussing
when did we ever have a CiC in the past fifty years who upheld their oath? not a one...Ike was probably the very last one who did...he was a soldiers soldier...he was an ok president...but I think he was a much better general then president...but people expect too much from our presidents...the vast majority of them have either never served or served in low ranks...Ike was the highest ranking former officer we had since the post civil war days...presidents who"served" during world war II by making movies and never leaving the states dont really count, in my book, as having "served" nor national guard officers who "served" by going AWOL from their units to work on political campaigns never "served" either...even Carter was an Annapolis grad....and look how his presidency worked out...
(3)
(1)
SGT Anthony Bussing
jesus...first I had ssg ol following me around and down voting....then ballinger...then the grouchy old petty officer...now this dude @SFC Paul P....get over it, dude.....your down votes means jack shit to me....stop stalking me
(0)
(1)
(0)
(0)
CPT William Ainley
Back in the day when I was a young Sergeant, we subscribed to "Lead, Follow, or Get The Hell Out of The Way!" This CIC is incapable of all three!
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
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.
(3)
(0)
SSgt Matthew Johnson
"As a member of the Armed Services, I believe you are obligated to sacrifice certain things" <--agree
(2)
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
During the work day when Reagan was our president, he fought tooth and nail with his political counterparts in congress. However, I remember seeing many , many times he and Tip O'Neal cutting up in the oval office at the end of the day like two good Irishmen sharing a whiskey and a few jelly beans.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
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.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Our oath is also to the U.S. Constitution a unlawful order to circumvent the constitution is not lawful
(0)
(0)
SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury
That's why we have service secretaries and SECDEF as well as the checks and balances of our three branches of government. Don't forget the Joint Chiefs of Staff
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I totally agree. I have seen over the span of 20 years what POTUS people choose to respect
(0)
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
I can certainly see that point of view, and I do believe that respect should be afforded to ALL our superiors, regardless of rank, and consequences for those that do not. However, it is not only taught and recommended, it is expected of all military personnel to defy and refuse to follow ANY illegal order. Although one has to be damn sure what they are doing and be able to back it up. This action should still be done with grace and respect.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
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.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
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.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
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.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
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!"
(2)
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
SGM, sorry, but no. he may be the president, but he is completely deficient of honor. That being said, your point was not lost on me. Traditionally, I agree.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
I understand your position. We don't have many politicians these days that can claim honor as well as some of our current military leaders, but unless what they do is immoral, illegal, or unlawful, we all took some type of oath to follow their orders and respect their position. Another point that I think we fall short on is that if we as Service Members don't respect our own leaders, Specifically POTUS, how do we expect other countries to respect him? When other countries lose respect for POTUS and the position he holds, guys like you and I end up going out fighting for respect. Just a view. Not the 100% right view. Just a point of view.
(0)
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
I think you have understood my post as I intended, and thank you for commenting. Unfortunately, some of those items you listed have come to fruition. That's just it, he has broken laws and been immoral. When Mr. Obama first took office he went around apologizing for things our country had done before he took office. What the hell was that? What point did it serve? None. Other countries have lost respect for him!! And us as a nation. What he did was completely disgraceful, embarrassing and uncalled for. He has left our military out to dry many, many times. He tightened the rules of engagement so strict that it put our troops in much more danger. He refused to support our troops and got them and an ambassador killed. He used the I.R.S. to politically bully those that would dare have a different view point than his. He very openly showed not only no respect for our military, but actual disrespect for our military. For a while there it seemed as though he was publically daring Congress to impeach him. There is not one humble bone in his body. He is by far the most arrogant egotistical president in the history of presidents. I just don't understand him. It is almost like he hates this country. I don't care about his religion, his skin color, I could care less about extravagant vacations his family has taken, the fact that the flag was taken off Air Force One and painted over with his campaign symbol, yadda, yadda , yadda.I could go on for days. What I do care about is watching him tear apart this country for no freakin' reason. Blatantly defying Congress and waving his hand over an issue to change existing laws. He simply does not have the power to do these things. He has trampled all over our constitution. But I digress, it is OUR fault. We let him get away with it once and he has run rough shot over it ever since. I love this country deeply and would not think twice to again put myself in peril to protect her and our way of life and he could care less. I am at a complete loss as to what his goals actually are. There simply is no honor in him.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google