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
85
85
0
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?
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?
(85)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
Because they are good soldiers, et al, that's why. You can surmise all you want. I detest this man because he is a fraud. He's never been president. Valerie Jarrett, Georges Soros, and Bill Ayers have been pulling this jerk's strings since he was in college.
(1)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
SGT Dan Gray Er stellt eine allgemeine Frage, da keine Namen erwähnt werden. Ich vermute, die meisten Menschen würden jedoch wahrscheinlich in sie einlesen, die in den letzten Jahren das Büro in den letzten Jahren geführt haben. Denken Sie daran, diese Frage wurde vor sieben Jahren veröffentlicht.
He is asking a general question, since no names are being mentioned. I suspect, however, most people would likely read into it obvious persons who have held the office in the past several years. Remember, this question was posted seven years ago.
He is asking a general question, since no names are being mentioned. I suspect, however, most people would likely read into it obvious persons who have held the office in the past several years. Remember, this question was posted seven years ago.
(0)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
SSG (Join to see) ... Overall, yes, I 'spose you're right. But I can think of two people who are BEGGING to be categorically criticized and verbally crucified for their unadulterated (fill in the blank)!!!
(0)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
SGT Dan Gray ... Those to whom I am referring have successfully fucked an entire nation because of, by, and with their irrefutable ignorance.
(0)
(0)
73
73
0
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.
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.
(73)
(0)
PO1 Javid Benson
Yep I agree if u work for the government u can't say crap about your boss cause he pays your check
(0)
(0)
MSgt John McGowan
LT COL. It's hard to show proper respect when the public knows just how corrupt our leaders are. They show the public a false respect and lie between their teeth assuring us how much they care about our well being. All the while killing 300,000 babies a year. Planned Parenthood is the largest birth control unit anywhere. Corruption is so bad that it isn't even hidden now. I think they call it open season
(0)
(0)
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
MSgt John McGowan - ......
Damned It Sarge. ... You Had Me, Right Up UNTIL You Said:
"All the while killing 300,000 babies a year."...
"MURDERING"? How's That ?
What A F-King Pathetic Way To State That.... Why Not Just Say:
"Tossing Gas On 'the babies' And Hold A BBQ"?
Makes The Sound Of A Damned Trump Supporter.
Forgot The Word "HATE"?
That One's Always A Beauty!
Damned It Sarge. ... You Had Me, Right Up UNTIL You Said:
"All the while killing 300,000 babies a year."...
"MURDERING"? How's That ?
What A F-King Pathetic Way To State That.... Why Not Just Say:
"Tossing Gas On 'the babies' And Hold A BBQ"?
Makes The Sound Of A Damned Trump Supporter.
Forgot The Word "HATE"?
That One's Always A Beauty!
(0)
(0)
37
37
0
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
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
(37)
(0)
(3)
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
Absolutely, hell-to-the-yah. Keep your personal opinions to yourself and do your job. Part of that job is respect to the President and those appointed above...
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Very interesting story, thank you, 1SG. Wesson. Forces me to take a second inventory of my own behavior. Being a law abiding gun owner and proud NRA Life member I'm sure if people who know me guessed how I voted and how I feel they would most likely be correct. I need to police myself a little better in the future. Everyday we have the opportunity to learn something new. I learned something new today. Thanks again.
(3)
(0)
37
36
1
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.
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.
(37)
(1)
SCPO Lee Pradia
LTC Micheal Ballow, how could you vote a comment down and hide or not justify it, just wondering?
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
LTC Bink Romanick - Didn't you learn about assumptions while serving? Sadly, yours smell just as bad as mine. I too served under a Republican and a Democrat as President and that was not even a whisper of a consideration to me. To be honest, I don't consider any member of the GOP or DNC establishment to be true to their party. Obama is no more a Democrat than George W. was a Republican. Dinos and Rinos all.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
CW4 Richard A. Dropik - I don't mind the vote down, not at all. However, I am totally confused by your comment. Who is a traitor? What makes "he" a traitor? Who is "he" that your are glad he is no longer a "Military Soldier" and why? What other kind of "Soldier" is there?
(0)
(0)
30
30
0
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!
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!
(30)
(0)
SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S.
wellll ... he was a Arty ROTC jump school drop out REMF that thought post-vietnam airborne combat medics working the graveyard shift should get up at 05:00 to do PT .. but I don't want to talk about it ...
(6)
(0)
21
20
1
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.
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.
(21)
(1)
SFC Tyrone Almendarez
I don't know what military branch for what country you took the oath of enlistment but in the United States of America, this is what Service members swore to uphold. I'm assuming you had your fingers crossed right? Ugh
(1)
(0)
SPC Nathan Acreman
I am sworn to obey the orders of the president, it does not say agree with nor does it say I can not openly disagree with just not while in uniform. You can repost the same oath over and over again it doesn't make you right in interpreting it.
(0)
(0)
18
18
0
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.
You might not agree on everything but you still must respect the office.
(18)
(0)
SSG Daniel Deiler
Apparently RP won't let me post a link to the article. What the heck? Thanks for the censorship RP admins. Good work there.
(1)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
SSG Daniel Deiler - As I understand it he only taught the 4th amendment, saying he was a Constitutional Professor is a real reach.
(1)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
I would respect the one filling the office of POTUS if he respected voters enough to tell the truth, come clean about his past, and present VALID credentials before assuming office.
The people we elected, who SHOULD have never allowed him on the ballot for not meeting the Constitutional qualifications of office, are equally corrupt and have been bought and paid for, or were blackmailed into submission. In any event the approval rate of Congress is around 11%! So we can safely assume that the public doesn't think those in Congress are representing and doing what they were elected to do. We elected Congress and they allowed a usurper to become Cmdr-in-Chief!
Can a fraud give a lawful order? Should a fraud be allowed to commit treason with impunity? Most regrettably that is what we have going on now. I simply wish people weren't so stupid as to follow leaders who don't even rate the office they squat in. Damn, I am GLAD I don't have to worry about following his unlawful orders.
This coming General Election we get to replace the resident squatter in the White House and Liberals don't have a choice of who to vote for. You know things are bad when the (p)Resident's party can't run their VP. All they can muster for Obama's replacement is a another pathological lying incompetent who failed as Sec of State, and a Socialist who wants to take away some rights and give away our national sovereignty to others... And like every Socialist he promises to raise everyone's taxes.
Conservatives have a choice of Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and Carson. Donald Trump is the GOP front runner because the GOP is as corrupt and stupid as the Democrats... Only two of the top four are eligible to be POTUS. It doesn't take a genius with a Harvard Law Degree to figure out who isn't eligible. So why are Cruz and Rubio running? Nothing justifies it. Both are U.S. citizens, but neither meet Vattel's definition of Natural Born, which is clearly what our Founding Fathers referenced and understood. What part of "born in the country to parents who are citizens" requires a genius to interpret? The 14th Amendment did not change the qualifications for POTUS.
So we have a choice between two outsiders and one has a lot more people endorsing him and the backbone to take on the media and the sell outs in his own party. The other would make a fine Surgeon General.
What is the military going to do if Hillary gets installed by election fraud and Congress swears her in? Remember your oath to support and defend our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and don't follow orders to fire on U.S. citizens -- like the FBI did in Oregon... Civil Disobedience is not a Capital Offense. It's our responsibility as citizens when our Gov't no longer represents the interests of the people that elected it.
The people we elected, who SHOULD have never allowed him on the ballot for not meeting the Constitutional qualifications of office, are equally corrupt and have been bought and paid for, or were blackmailed into submission. In any event the approval rate of Congress is around 11%! So we can safely assume that the public doesn't think those in Congress are representing and doing what they were elected to do. We elected Congress and they allowed a usurper to become Cmdr-in-Chief!
Can a fraud give a lawful order? Should a fraud be allowed to commit treason with impunity? Most regrettably that is what we have going on now. I simply wish people weren't so stupid as to follow leaders who don't even rate the office they squat in. Damn, I am GLAD I don't have to worry about following his unlawful orders.
This coming General Election we get to replace the resident squatter in the White House and Liberals don't have a choice of who to vote for. You know things are bad when the (p)Resident's party can't run their VP. All they can muster for Obama's replacement is a another pathological lying incompetent who failed as Sec of State, and a Socialist who wants to take away some rights and give away our national sovereignty to others... And like every Socialist he promises to raise everyone's taxes.
Conservatives have a choice of Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and Carson. Donald Trump is the GOP front runner because the GOP is as corrupt and stupid as the Democrats... Only two of the top four are eligible to be POTUS. It doesn't take a genius with a Harvard Law Degree to figure out who isn't eligible. So why are Cruz and Rubio running? Nothing justifies it. Both are U.S. citizens, but neither meet Vattel's definition of Natural Born, which is clearly what our Founding Fathers referenced and understood. What part of "born in the country to parents who are citizens" requires a genius to interpret? The 14th Amendment did not change the qualifications for POTUS.
So we have a choice between two outsiders and one has a lot more people endorsing him and the backbone to take on the media and the sell outs in his own party. The other would make a fine Surgeon General.
What is the military going to do if Hillary gets installed by election fraud and Congress swears her in? Remember your oath to support and defend our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and don't follow orders to fire on U.S. citizens -- like the FBI did in Oregon... Civil Disobedience is not a Capital Offense. It's our responsibility as citizens when our Gov't no longer represents the interests of the people that elected it.
(1)
(0)
15
15
0
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.
(15)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sadly, too many people completely miss your exact point. Unfortunately, too many people worship Obama, let alone any other public official, to the point they are totally unable to see the mistakes made. I have issues/concerns with every single President in our history, as well as every single person in public office. ALL of them without exception. Objectivity is the key instead of the subjective emotionality.
(2)
(0)
15
15
0
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!
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!
(15)
(0)
SGT Timothy Rocheleau
This is as inaccurate as anything I've ever read. You don't lose your rights simply by swearing an oath!
(0)
(0)
SGT Mitch McKinley
And then you have to ask, what exactly are considered contemptuous (the feeling that a person or a thing is beneath consideration, worthless, or deserving scorn) words? I can express my dislike for someone and still not disrespect them.
It's called tact.
It's called tact.
(2)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
SGT Timothy Rocheleau - You do in fact give up certain rights and freedoms when you swear an oath to fight for your country. You will always have the right to question orders you believe to be unlawful, and you can choose to not obey them, but you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences. You may be right, and you may be wrong. You have to follow the dictates of your conscience.
(0)
(0)
14
14
0
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.
(14)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google