I disagree with the U.S. Military............?

Question

People keep saying "They are just following there orders"


I think All Military/Army People in the U.S. Should question every order they are given and refuse to obey if they disagree.

What do you think?

Answer 1

Ever been n the military? I think not! My Dad served 25 years and my brother is fighting in Iraq as we speak. He has a very important position over there. If he were to stand down can u say dead, murdered, killed, set up, screwed...........

I kind of find it insulting myself.

If we questioned every order given to us and refused the ones we did not agree with - we would all be out of JOBS!!!

Then we might as well put down our weapons, release Sadam and make him OUR President.

Answer 2

Would you trust someone to watch your back in a warzone, if you knew they had their own agenda? Would you trust someone operating with their own agenda, to carry guns and operate multi-million dollar equipment?

Chances are, no.

The military tries to weed out the people who cannot take or follow orders. Granted, it is an imperfect system, but they do pretty well for the most part.

If you directly refuse to follow orders (orders must be approved all the way up the chain) then there are some serious consequences. You might go to prison, lose rank or pay, and perform many more duties that are worse than what you were doing before.

Militarty law is a little less forgiving and flexible as civillian law. Once you make a committment to the military, it is a legal contract governed my military law. You can't just quit, or you'll pay a high price. A dishonorab;e discharge is virtually a death sentance as far as future employment goes, and there is usually prison time to add to that.

If you have put in 20+ years, you may have earned some credibility to question orders, but most often it backfires and you are forced out of your job, sometimes losing benefits.

Remember General Shinseki? He got off easy. They just forced him into retirement. It could have been worse, and it would have had he not earned the credibility he had, plus the experience he gained, and he was correct in his contentions, and it was widely publicized in the media. All they could do to him was force him into retirement.

Too many soapboxes and personal agendas conflicting would make our military highly ineffective. That's the bottom line.

What would it be like if our government did just that (well, they sort of are and getting away with it at present). What if the police only did what they thought was right, regardless of laws or operating standards?

I understand where you are coming from, but you have to understand the value in the effectiveness of a unified force. I have read some of the responses posted so far. Your opinion has stepped on a few toes. You have also received some valuable insight. I hope that this answers your "question" (I am doing the best I can).

Answer 3

Totally disagree.
It doesn't make any sense for everyone in a military unit to have a different idea of what should or would be done. Everyone must be in tune with each other and have the same objective.
Following orders and doing what your told and trained to do is what accomplishes missions !
Those missions and objectives are decided on my our leadership and their missions are supported by men and woman who believe in defending this country by any and all means, including their own sacrifice.
Second guessing orders and commands in the heat of a conflict will get more people killed than anything else.

Answer 4

All US military personnel have the right and responsibility to disregard illegal or self destructive order. WE are not robots and the" we were only following orders" excuse died at Nuremberg in the war crimes trials. The catch is knowing what orders are bad and which aren't,This varies with the comfort level of each soldier as they don't go over this very well in training.

Answer 5

You give up that right when you join the military. When you are sworn in, you swear to "uphold and defend the constitution, from all enemies.............., and to follow all lawful orders from those officers and civilians appointed over me." Now there are exceptions to that rule. If you are ordered to do something that is against your conscience (i.e.-execute someone, blow up a church or hospital) then you cannot be punished for disobeying that order. Now, if war is against your conscience, then you shouldn't have joined the military in the first place.

In response to pandor the cat, you are absolutely right. When you have put in 20 years (Master/First Sergeant, Senior Chief Petty officer, Lt. Colonel, Commander), then you do get to question orders. But you also know how far you can go with questioning them.

Answer 6

I think before you denigrate our armed forces, you should spend a few years enlistment in some back-water third world country and see how their armies perform. We have the best trained, best equipped army on earth, and they don't let stupid people enlist. Military law defines what lawful orders are, you don't have to follow an unlawful order. Your superior officer can not tell you to "go over there and beat that guy up", but he can give the order to attack, if HIS superior officer has authorized it. It's called the Chain of Command, and all Military are subject to it. You should get a copy of Armed Forces Military Regulations and see for yourself just what is and isn't allowed.

Answer 7

Actually you have obligation to refuse an unlawful order. But question every order? That is hardly practical. A soldier cannot disobey an order just because they "disagree", it has to be perceived as an unlawful one.

Answer 8

just to be a nitpicker. there is no such factor as universal conflict. conflict by making use of it quite is totally nature is unconventional. each conflict is replaced by making use of the final. in fact battles are even replaced by making use of ones that come later. history is written by making use of the winners. Now assuming which you in basic terms meant without using nuclear hands. properly if the middle east, to illustrate, wanted to break us. they might in basic terms take the oil fields, keep promoting to different worldwide places, swap from the U.S. invoice to the Euro or different such remote places money, effectively undermining the fee of our greenback, destroying our financial device. Then they does no longer even could deliver lots militia might over right here. in basic terms threaten us in our time of weak spot. You all have this dire and blatant vulnerability as because of the the federal reserve financial employer. in basic terms great. in terms of pre nuclear war, no nukes and no homestead earnings. i think of American squaddies in basic terms actual adventure could be china or Russia as suggested. of direction, war isn't any longer fought with weapons and bombs. it quite is particularly fought with economics and documents. That constructive says some thing approximately us being in the middle east proper now...yet be certain, without it the fee of our greenback and the international banks might of all taken a hefty blow. combat the federal reserve, get that appealed.

Answer 9

Gee, yeah, THAT would be called a MOB not an ARMY. Thats just what every country should have. Man, I wish people would stop asking these silly questions.

Answer 10

The military men and women must follow orders. That's the rules.