A question about duty...

[Anonymous]

Well, I tried to post this before, but I don't see it on the index, so I'm trying again. I have been wondering about this for sometime...it is an interesting theoretical question that I'd like to get opinions on from military /not-yet military members.

You take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. What would happen if someone should be elected to the presidency who does not seem to want to defend or uphold the Constitution (maybe not openly showing this, but implicitly through his/her actions)? He (or possibly she) is your Commander-in-Chief. Can you obey orders from this person when you swore to defend the Constitution from such a person? If you were in the military and this should happen, what would you do? If you were considering joining, would this alter your decision? Thanks...

Jeri

[Anonymous]

A prime example of this can be found with Lt. Col Oliver North and Iran-Contra in the 80's. Col. North was given a mission that was considered to be illegal at the time. However he was smart enough to keep enough information to show that he was following the orders issued to him by his superiors. In short Col. North was released and the President (Reagan at the Time) and other cabinent members CIA director were held accountable for the mission.



ronald45@kornet.nm.kr

[Anonymous]

I've thought about this question myself. The President is the Commander in Chief, but he is also advised by generals. If given an order, I would have to comply and trust that they have all of the facts that I don't. Yes, that would weigh on my concience, but the consequences for disobeying the President's orders are severe. If it's an issue that someone really feels strongly about, and they're prepared to go down hard for it, then that is their choice. Having never been faced with that situation, I can't give an example but I hope you understand what I'm saying. A career would most likely be over as a consequence to such an action, but in certain circumstances, someone might feel that it's worth that risk.


: Well, I tried to post this before, but I don't see it on the index, so I'm
: trying again. I have been wondering about this for sometime...it is an
: interesting theoretical question that I'd like to get opinions on from
: military /not-yet military members.
:
: You take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States
: from all enemies, foreign and domestic. What would happen if someone
: should be elected to the presidency who does not seem to want to defend or
: uphold the Constitution (maybe not openly showing this, but implicitly
: through his/her actions)? He (or possibly she) is your Commander-in-Chief.
: Can you obey orders from this person when you swore to defend the
: Constitution from such a person? If you were in the military and this
: should happen, what would you do? If you were considering joining, would
: this alter your decision? Thanks...
:
: Jeri


michelle45304@hotmail.com

[Anonymous]

A few more comments on the issue of following unlawful orders...

This issue was pretty definitively clarified by the Nuremburg Trials. "I was just following orders" is NOT an excuse for any or all behavior. If you obey an unlawful order YOU can indeed be held accountable while the officer issuing the order is held responsible (the Army does consider those to be two different concepts).

This can be a "rock and a hard place" situation. You can be court-martialed for obeying the unlawful order and you can be court-martialed for not obeying the order: the court will then have to determine if the order was unlawful. HOWEVER, keep in mind that IF the order was, in fact, unlawful, the defendant will not be convicted. I know that I would much rather be courtmartialed and acquitted for disobeying an unlawful order than be courtmartialed and convicted for obeying an unlawful order.

Regarding Oliver North: Ronald Pritchett makes it sound as if North wasn't punished for Iran-Contra. Some of us think he wasn't punished enough, but that's not the point. Although it may be hard to remember, he was cashiered from the Marines.

The nature of punishment for obeying an unlawful order depends a great deal on circumstances. Are you on the losing side, for example? Was the nature of the offense? How political and how widely known is the offense? None of that should matter but it does.

The Army (the other services, too, probably, but I don't know)actually has a procedure for dealing with unlawful orders ( at least it did back in the early seventies). Obeying unlawful orders is against regulations just as is issuing the unlawful order.

Fortunately, this shouldn't often be a problem. With luck, you won't ever be given an unlawful order. Also fortunately, knowing an order is unlawful is fairly easy, too. You know: you can't be ordered to slaughter innocent civilians, torture prisoners, rape and pillage, etc. You know these things are wrong. You know you can't be lawfully ordered to do these things. You know you should be held accountable if you do do these things regardless of who has told you to do them.



greatoz@aol.com