Posted on Nov 3, 2015
Could you serve under a Commander-in-Chief you don't respect?
12.5K
206
111
14
14
0
COMPLETE INTERVIEW: Bill Maher Interviewes Tulsi Gabbard on Real Time LIVE (10/31/2015)
Bill Maher tonight spoke with Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard about an issue they agree on: the frustrating refusal of President Obama to accept “Isla...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unsdKAvTq9o
Once upon a time we had two political parties that shared common goals though disagreed on the best strategy to achieve them. Regardless of who was elected, we could at least respect them. Sadly, an ideology that appears to some/many/me to be at odds with preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution has emerged and taken root in the established leadership of one of the major American parties. The President appears to be one of its leading proponents and I can honestly say that if I were serving today, I would have resigned my commission rather than serve under him.
As I viewed the video of Bill Maher interviewing Representative Tulsi Gabbard I was relieved to find that the true heart of the Democratic Party may still be beating. I suspect that I would have no difficulty serving under her Administration, or at least respecting her in my current role of a mere citizen. How about you? Does she exemplify the type of Democrat you wished would drive that party today?
I can't help but also observe how screwed up things have become when Bill Maher begins to sound reasonable...
Once upon a time we had two political parties that shared common goals though disagreed on the best strategy to achieve them. Regardless of who was elected, we could at least respect them. Sadly, an ideology that appears to some/many/me to be at odds with preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution has emerged and taken root in the established leadership of one of the major American parties. The President appears to be one of its leading proponents and I can honestly say that if I were serving today, I would have resigned my commission rather than serve under him.
As I viewed the video of Bill Maher interviewing Representative Tulsi Gabbard I was relieved to find that the true heart of the Democratic Party may still be beating. I suspect that I would have no difficulty serving under her Administration, or at least respecting her in my current role of a mere citizen. How about you? Does she exemplify the type of Democrat you wished would drive that party today?
I can't help but also observe how screwed up things have become when Bill Maher begins to sound reasonable...
Posted in these groups: 
Leadership
Leadership
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 49
15
15
0
I served under two (Clinton and Obama) but have gone through a lot of angst in the past 6 years. I served because I still felt it was my duty to the nation and it was something that I fully enjoyed doing. As much as I have hated to see the direction in which the DoD is going, I did my best to make a difference with the people that I served alongside.
(15)
(0)
COL Jon Thompson
PO2 Mark Saffell - This is a tricky situation. What I do not like is when they retire, they write a book about how they disagreed with policy and what it is doing to the military. If they felt that strong, why didn't they say something when they could affect change. I am always reminded of during the Vietnam War, the Army Chief of Staff, Harold J. Johnson, was going over to the White House to resign because of the conduct of the war. He said he had his stars in his hand. At the last minute, he had a change of heart. Who knows how his resignation may have affected the prosecution of the war.
(1)
(0)
MSgt Marvin Kinderknecht
That is what we took the oath for. I commend you for your service and doing the "right" thing. No matter what the circumstances, I always respected the uniform or the office even if I hated their guts.
(1)
(0)
CDR Brian Rinaldi
COL Thomson, I agree with you completely. I felt the same way and will never be sorry that I served my country.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
I wish I could share this discussion with the world at large. I wish that everyone could see as I do the dedication and devotion of those who serve. Although it appears that most who have responded to my original question as well as those who have responded to their comments, have reservations, maybe even doubts, but are honor-bound to fulfill their oaths to the best of their ability. Would that politicians honored their oaths as well...
(0)
(0)
14
14
0
I do not care who is president. I enlisted and swore to do my job to the best of my abilities, and to defend this country. Respecting or even liking who's in office is no concern of mine. Same goes for congress. Liking anyone is nowhere to be found in my enlistment oath.
(14)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" - Naw Bruh...just another Soldier amongst his peers who are also great people in their own right.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Daniel Attilio
Same here, my concern were the Marines to my left and right, the Marines I lead and the Marines I followed.
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
If you can't serve under a CinC that you don't respect, then you don't belong in the Military.
When you get to the policy-making level (which almost no one on RP is), then you go ahead and exercise your ability to influence policy or resign if you irreconcilably disagree with the ends or rationale of an administration's strategy or policy.
At the lower levels we have only a very limited ability to dissent, and can only refuse if the required action or inaction is illegal, immoral, or unsafe.
What does respect for the CinC even count for if the CinC's orders are evaluated individually by each Service member? Who's to say that a leader you respect won't demand that you do something with which you disagree? The point is that Service is supposed to be *apolitical* (that means non-political). Therefore, the question in the original post is irrelevant.
When you get to the policy-making level (which almost no one on RP is), then you go ahead and exercise your ability to influence policy or resign if you irreconcilably disagree with the ends or rationale of an administration's strategy or policy.
At the lower levels we have only a very limited ability to dissent, and can only refuse if the required action or inaction is illegal, immoral, or unsafe.
What does respect for the CinC even count for if the CinC's orders are evaluated individually by each Service member? Who's to say that a leader you respect won't demand that you do something with which you disagree? The point is that Service is supposed to be *apolitical* (that means non-political). Therefore, the question in the original post is irrelevant.
(9)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
COL Jon Thompson, I understand the distinction well, sir. Still, in carrying out one's Oath-bound duty, respect for superiors (individuals or offices) is irrelevant. A respected/respectable leader can issue unlawful orders, and a leader deserving no respect can issue lawful orders. The same applies to safe/unsafe and moral/immoral orders.
My original point was that one should not serve at all if he or she would either fail in executing his or her duties or resign his or her position based on who occupies a superior office. If one's own ability or willingness to lead subordinates in good faith necessarily depends on the occupant of superior offices, then he or she should not serve.
My original point was that one should not serve at all if he or she would either fail in executing his or her duties or resign his or her position based on who occupies a superior office. If one's own ability or willingness to lead subordinates in good faith necessarily depends on the occupant of superior offices, then he or she should not serve.
(1)
(0)
SGT William Howell
LTC (Join to see) There is only one flaw in your theory of if you don't respect the position then resign. Most any of us that have been in for any length of time have served under someone we have not respected. Political swings happen from 4 to 8 years and when they swing it is usually the opposite of the way it was going. Obama being a perfect example. Bush was conservative, Obama uber Liberal. If you can swing from respecting one to the other I don't want you leading anything, anywhere near me because you are a wacko with no moral compass. People just don't give up their beliefs like that.
(0)
(1)
SGT William Howell
LTC (Join to see) Sir, I want to apologize. I use the word "you" all the time in general. It is the hillbilly in me. "You" and "you all" can be both plural and singular in redneck. It was not meant to say that you personally are either unstable or that you do not have a moral compass. It was not meant to be a personal attack on you at all. It was very poorly written on my part.
I will work on picking my words better in the future. I do respect you and your opinions. We may not agree, but it does not mean that what you have to say is any less important or significant that what I have to say. Again, Sorry for coming off like an ass.
I will work on picking my words better in the future. I do respect you and your opinions. We may not agree, but it does not mean that what you have to say is any less important or significant that what I have to say. Again, Sorry for coming off like an ass.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SGT William Howell, the edit function is useful in such situations.
Again, the point is that *respect for the individual occupying the office is irrelevant*. Serving the Nation cannot possibly depend upon one's personal respect for the occupant of any higher office. That is not Service, that is selfish.
The problem is that you see it as "swinging" when in fact Serving under presidents of different political poles is consistent. The consistency lies in the fact that it is *Service to the Nation.*
Again, the point is that *respect for the individual occupying the office is irrelevant*. Serving the Nation cannot possibly depend upon one's personal respect for the occupant of any higher office. That is not Service, that is selfish.
The problem is that you see it as "swinging" when in fact Serving under presidents of different political poles is consistent. The consistency lies in the fact that it is *Service to the Nation.*
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google