By Andrew R. Milburn
Lieutenant Colonel Andrew R. Milburn, USMC, is assigned to Special Operations Command, Europe, Future Operations (J3).
There are circumstances under which a military officer is not only justified but also obligated to disobey a legal order. In supporting this assertion, I discuss where the tipping point lies between the military officer’s customary obligation to obey and his moral obligation to dissent. This topic defies black-and-white specificity but is nevertheless fundamental to an understanding of the military professional’s role in the execution of policy. It involves complex issues—among them, the question of balance between strategy and policy, and between military leaders and their civilian masters.
Any member of the military has a commonly understood obligation to disobey an illegal order; such cases are not controversial and therefore do not fall within the purview of this article. Instead, the focus is on orders that present military professionals with moral dilemmas, decisions wherein the needs of the institution appear to weigh on both sides of the equation. Whether the issuer of the order is a superior officer or a civilian leader, the same principles apply. However, because issues at the strategic level of decisionmaking have greater consequences and raise wider issues, I focus on dissent at this level.
In the face of such a dilemma, the military professional must make a decision, which cannot simply owe its justification to the principle of obedience, and must take responsibility for that decision. But when and on what grounds should the officer dissent? And how should he do so? I offer three propositions:
continue reading here...
http://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/2013/07/06/breaking-ranks-dissent-and-the-military-professional/
Comments
Bring them on I have bullets for them too. Wake up America they are here now and in control look at the turn coat RINO's and you can see that you have no choice in what they want and do. The Right is Left and the Left is in control. The OBAMA Muslim Brotherhood Socialist Dem. Party is in control.
The courts have all but removed from their consideration any standard of morality as it should apply to any case for the sake of true justice. And though the morality of the framers is surely evident in the very words used to pen the Constitution, modern interpretations of the law by this government disallow any influence of morality. Therefore, the Lt. Col.'s premise of a "moral obligation to dissent", though I agree, assumes the government acknowledges such a moral obligation, which it does not and will not.
MY DREAMS,BECOME A DUNGHILL!!!!!
.......MY DREAMS,BECOME A DUNGHILL...!!!!!!!..
I don't think the American People are going to take it kindly if "El Presidente" Obama brings Russian special forces troops (or United Nations troops) on to American soil to defend the Washington, D.C. area from the American People themselves. Things could turn nasty quickly!
When I was sworn into the US Air Force back in 1948, I swore to uphold and protect the constitution of the United States of America, there was nothing in that oath about accepting servitude to any political person or political party and I would interpret that as taking whatever action necessary against all who would attempt to void the constitution or any part of our declaration of independence I admit that I do not know what the current oath of defending our country contains or how any of our military personal interpret or perceive that oath
Speak LOUDLY, you DO have a voice!
Can you say FAST and FURIOUS???
Can you say BENGHAZI???
Can you say IRS???
Can you say AP???
Can you say NSA???
Hello Congress, where is the RULE of LAW? When DO you propose to HONOR the OATH you took upon election? You DID take an OATH, right? Listen to us NOW, or find a job later!
As a veteran, I recall, taking an 'oathe' on24 jun '59 that I swore to uphold the constitutions of the U.S. and to fight against all enemies domestic and foreign. in '68 & '70 I fought against
"communisim" in 'nam.
now, we the people" must step forward to protect our constitution.
as a veteran, I so shall. LOCK&LOAD
OLD SARGE,'NAM VET,'68,'70
LRRP/ABN
Simple said a veteran should know the constitution and keep his oath.
RSS
did you see he is replacing all veteran hi ranking Generals with his own picks for nothing that is agains the Constitution that is Treason right there !! When are we going to wake up, maybe Hoder was right we are a nation of cowards no one has the guts to do the right to the Constitution and go after this deviate in WH and his goons we must march we must demand him to be removed !!!
The trend of the article is quite clearly correct. Military officers take an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies. They do not, as was the case with the duty of the German military to Hitler, take a a personal loyalty oath to the Leader that transcends all other obligations. Commanding officers have been placed under arrest before; they will be in the future. In his relationship to the military the President is essentially no more than a commanding officer. Naturally, there is and ought to be a lot of leeway afforded a commanding officer , especially when it comes down to whether his actions, particularly in the case of the President, are on the borderline or clearly outside the Constitution. Inferior officers, if anything, should err on the side of restraint. Yet there comes a point when unconstitutional conduct becomes as plain as the nose on one's face. We may be very close to that in the U.S. today. If that day ever comes, the President will have in his corner the thugs and hacks he has installed to the Homeland Security Gestapo. The American people will have the U.S. Military. The day may be coming when a high-ranking U.S. military officer says the following: "Mr. President, I have the unhappy duty of placing you under arrest for treason. You will have the right to.......... (etc.)" An order to kill an American citizen is , in the proper circumstances, an act which places the President outside the Constitution and would justify his arrest, in my judgment at least.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next