Talaraine@fedia.io 16 hours ago
While I know you are all good intelligent people who source your info before posting, I JUST had this argument with some people and figured I'd copy paste the literal facts for your easy consumption. Shout it far and wide, everyone.
I'm gonna edit this to include the oath, and then include the segment of the Code of Military Justice.
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.
10 U.S.C. § 892 (Article 92 – Failure to obey order or regulation)
“Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
Now two points. 1) Which comes first in the oath, the Constitution or the President? 2) Point ONE in the Uniform code says and I repeat 'violates or fails to obey any LAWFUL general order.
BrikoX@lemmy.zip 15 hours ago
Per the same Uniform Code of Military Justice all orders lawful until military court deams them unlawful.
Only military court can determine the order to be illegal and until that determination is made months later the military can apply all the sactions against you (no pay, solitary confinment, loss of rank, etc.). Following orders even illegal ones is also an affimative defense for any crimes. It’s all by design as US learned from Nuremberg trials.
Asafum@feddit.nl 14 hours ago
Cool cool cool cool.
“Ok troops, we’re taking this list of registered Democrats and killing them all.”
Military court:
“Are you insane? Of course that’s no-…”
(Judge removed)
“New judge, can you take Trump’s dick out of your mouth so you can rule on this?”
“Yep. All good here. That was a lawful order, hope you carried it out completely.”
ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 14 hours ago
That’s Against the Rules thought continuing to rack up Ls against Who’s Gonna Stop Me doctrine
Solano@piefed.social 10 hours ago
As ridiculous as that sounds, yes, this is to be expected. They already weakened the military courts, but I don’t know the extent, just remember there were some articles about it earlier in the year. Also, I don’t know if history has an example of any large groups of military refusing an order, not counting coups.
Talaraine@fedia.io 14 hours ago
I'd like for you to point that part out, as the only other reference is here:
From the commentary/guidance for Article 92:
“An order is presumed lawful. … A general order or regulation is lawful unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders …”
BrikoX@lemmy.zip 13 hours ago
Again, order can be ruled illegal later, but until the military court makes that determination, you will be held in breach of UCMJ for refusing to obey an order.
If you have some time listen to youtu.be/TwPLqGkYnBA where an actual JAG explains it better than I can.
Talaraine@fedia.io 13 hours ago
So the Nuremburg trials still hold fast as an example here. A soldier can make the determination to undergo potential courtmartial, or he can avoid the death squad. I know which one I'd pick. We don't have mindless soldiers in our military.
If an order violates the law, they are wise to disobey, just as I said.