The swore an OATH to defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States. When Bush does his signing statements, or when they got rid of Habeaus Corpus (You no longer have the right to a trial in America, or hear the evidence against you) THE MILITARY OF THIS COUNTRY DID NOTHING. In fact they ACTUALLY SALUTE the people who are destroying the very Constitution they SWORE AND OATH to defend. Pretty sad. Meanwhile we have less rights and these boneheads are going around saying they are protecting our freedoms? I feel sorry for any of them who haven't figured out they are just oil puppets and meat for the grinder.
2007-06-04 09:35:33 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
"I, _____ having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of lientenant, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."
2007-06-04 09:40:05 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only if we ever got to that situation would we get an answer, and lets all Pray (if you pray) that we never have to come to that... Yes we are pretty messed up right now... But be that as it may, The US constitution is still the single greatest Document of Law ever written... and beyond it's freedoms... It has a system of checks and balances that would to almost any extreme. prevent the situation you describe from happening....unless we reach a point where one political party would control better than 90 percent of congress along with the White House, We would probably never have such a situation... because long before a president could invoke such things... he would have articles of impeachment brought against him... and While under charges or "High Crimes" and Misdemeanors", the president would be censured (Powers limited) until such proceedings could be concluded... and we would hope to think that if such a thing like that were imposed by a president, he would be removed from office long before the military could get involved...Your question though is a good one. and it scares me as much as Could we win a nuclear war? the Following is the oath of US Military and it does include "Obeying the President"...The Oath of Enlistment (for enlisted): "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." However, the use of the US Military against United States Citizens on domestic soil is Prohibited in the Constitution without severe due process... so if the President ordered it, He would be removed or censured almost immediately.. Probably unanimously too.
2016-05-21 03:51:22 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would you have prefered a military coup?
Were you against Clinton when he did signing statement (they have been around a while)?
And Habeaus Corpus? So Abraham Lincoln should have been overthrown too? FDR? Woodrow Wilson? Bush followed, what is actually very important in a legalistic society like ours, precedent. I do not agree with all Bush has done but if you look at history, Lincoln had over 10,000 people locked up in a similar fasion. How many Japanese were forced to relocated to camps without a conviction or trial? Bush just followed the historical examples or our great Presidents.
2007-06-04 09:43:47 · answer #3 · answered by Tom Sh*t 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Maybe because the military believes in what Bush is doing. Kind of arrogant of you to just assume that the military did nothing. You make it sound like they are thoughtless puppets, when in fact they are fighting FOR the rights given to us under the constitution. Furtermore, your knowledge of the constitution is lacking. The constitution clearly states that the Commander and Chief can send the military to protect the nations interests. Our legislative branch approved it to boot. Further complying with the constitution.
2007-06-04 09:41:02 · answer #4 · answered by tobcol 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The question is - Should non-citizens (enemy combatants) be protected by the U.S. constitution? Many people seem to think not.
But to be clear, the President did NOT get rid of Habeas Corpus - Onlly suspended it in terms of alien detainees.
2007-06-04 09:43:03 · answer #5 · answered by Athena 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
This only applies to non-citizens who are accused of terrorist acts against the US. Why are you so outraged by this? We're at war with people who want to kill us because we're free from their intolerance, and you want to jump up and down at the treatment of these potential killers while I continue to hope my son can walk without an armed guard back and forth to school each day. Get your frickin' priorities straight!!
2007-06-04 09:46:09 · answer #6 · answered by colorado_df 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
enemy combatants are not granted rights under our Constitution...nor have your rights been shredded...now back to \school and get an education on the Law then you may realize these things instead of talking without facts
2007-06-04 10:03:54 · answer #7 · answered by consrgreat 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow, what's amazing is these Repub trolls still think they have all their rights. NO YOU DON'T. IF THE GOVMINT SAYS YOU ARE AN 'EVIL DOER' THEY CAN LOCK YOU UP AND YOU DON'T GET A TRIAL. Maybe you should FIND OUT what Bush and Co. are doing, because guess what, what happens when Hillary or Obama might win in 08'? Maybe they won't like you militia types, or Fundie Christians, or whoever, maybe you'll be deemed an 'enemy combatant' and disappear.
2007-06-04 09:42:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
You are obviously not a constitutional scholar! I, on the other hand did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
2007-06-04 09:41:34 · answer #9 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Even worse was the corporate media's reaction to Bush's blunder. 1 giant yawn. Only Keith Olbermann spoke out about these atrocities.
2007-06-04 09:37:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋