View Poll Results: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    17 37.78%
  • No

    21 46.67%
  • Other

    7 15.56%
Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 140

Thread: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

  1. #51
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,423

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by SBu View Post
    I think the real answer to your theoretical questions is 'it depends on who would come out on top.' History is kind to victors.

    In reality, to justify overthrowing a government would require not just a violation of the constitution or even repeated violations, it would require that the constitution itself...our form of government was under attack and at risk of destruction from 'enemies foreign and domestic.'

    The crazies on the right like to hype up constitutional violations, real or perceived, as some kind of equivalent attack. It is far from it and something that we've never seen, or have any reason to believe is on the horizon near or far.

    Also, some on here have indicated that not following unlawful orders is the same as protecting the constitution. It is not. Similarly, following lawful orders is not part of supporting and defending the constitution. One could, for example, be given a lawful order that violates the constitution or vice versa. In this case, the constitution would be the supreme authority. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines aren't expected or empowered to interpret the constitution, that is why their oath includes following the orders of the POTUS and officers appointed over them. It provides some cover to enlisted should they follow orders from the POTUS and/or officers that violates the constitution, whereas officers and the POTUS have no such cover. Lawful orders are simply orders that are in compliance with law.
    Good post!

    I might only quibble with the idea that the Constitution isn't under attack. I don't think it's a coordinated effort by any means, but I do think that all the relatively small-ish violations, when added up, give a disturbing result.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  2. #52
    Professor
    SBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    01-18-16 @ 03:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,523

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Good post!

    I might only quibble with the idea that the Constitution isn't under attack. I don't think it's a coordinated effort by any means, but I do think that all the relatively small-ish violations, when added up, give a disturbing result.
    Parts of the so called Patriot Act and follow on legislation and executive liberties are a bit disturbing, but (and it's a big one) are not attacks on the constitution directly either in intent or consequence. The people who drafted and enacted these things were elected, and the people who can limit or sack them can be elected. When it comes to the cumulative effect, I think 12.5 years of tiny violations, many of which have been challenged etc., is certainly not enough time to conclude that the constitution itself is under attack directly or consequentially. IMO.

    The only thing that I care about these days is our financial situation, honestly.

  3. #53
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,587

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    You seem to only be able to recall part of the oath we swore.... "and I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Officers appointed over me...."

    The part about lawful orders is covered in the last part.... "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice..."

    The devil in this is defining 'truly fighting to preserve the Constitution...'

    While our Government has supported many coups overseas I see them as bad form in CONUS.

    I'd say the Military needs to sit out any political struggle. This can be what-if'd to death but we are no where near any serious need for tanks to roll in our streets...
    You really think I can't recall that was in the oath? Let me get this straight: You think that soldiers who have sworn to both uphold the constitution and obey the orders of those appointed above them, should always choose orders over the constitution if those two come in conflict? Really? To you soldiers are just mindless automotons who should follow every order no matter how horrific, and should never question the constitutionality of their actions?

    Are you one of those people with no beliefs or back-bone? Or do you just expect all of our soldiers to be?
    Last edited by RabidAlpaca; 12-17-13 at 01:51 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  4. #54
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,714

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Yes...IF the government were no longer an elected body and did not follow the constitution. But we are nowhere near there. And if it WERE to come to that point, the military would have plenty of support in the state militias and the private citizenry.

    I wonder how many that would say no are Snowden fans.

  5. #55
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Of course. If we descended into some sort of despotism I don't think people would be saying "Hurr durr, orders first!". This is all context dependent. If I agree with the purpose and goals of this hypothetical coup then I'd think it was justified, same as all of you, if not then not.

  6. #56
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,626

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    You really think I can't recall that was in the oath? Let me get this straight: You think that soldiers who have sworn to both uphold the constitution and obey the orders of those appointed above them, should always choose orders over the constitution if those two come in conflict? Really? To you soldiers are just mindless automotons who should follow every order no matter how horrific, and should never question the constitutionality of their actions? Are you one of those people with no beliefs or back-bone? Or do you just expect all of our soldiers to be?
    What I REALLY think is you need to take a chill pill Bill!

    YOU are making this an all or nothing thing between the Constitution or the LAWFULLY elected POTUS, LAWFULLY appointed Officers in command. Your rhetoric is not helpful... no one says MINDLESS anything, just MINDFUL of the conditions under which WE WHO HAVE TAKEN THE OATH are to operate.

    I am not impressed by those who make all or nothing conditions. Not over impressed by those who think the refinement of our society somehow is an attack on the Constitution. This is a CIVILIAN controlled Republic not a Militarily managed one. The series of events that would have to happen for the military to intervene is way beyond anything we have seen and would mean the republic is no more and a tyrant- a REAL tyrant not a Faux Noise tyrant- has seized power. Frankly crap like the so-called Patriot Act, 2nd A, Immigration and whatever else the ranters can point to as an attack on the Constitution MUST be handled by the civilians or there is no one for the Military to 'save' the Constitution for!

    What I am is one of those who took the oath and now have scars to prove both my beliefs and backbone.

    My BELIEF is those NOT in the Military must show some BACKBONE if they think the Constitution is under attack. The Military is to protect the nation from violence, not resolve political issues.

    Those who try and make the current push-pull over political issues into some 'attack' are just civilians who are wussing out and want 'someone else' to fix it for them- of course in a way THEY think is best but not over eager to do much to make it so.

    That clear it up for ya????

  7. #57
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,587

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    What I REALLY think is you need to take a chill pill Bill!

    YOU are making this an all or nothing thing between the Constitution or the LAWFULLY elected POTUS, LAWFULLY appointed Officers in command. Your rhetoric is not helpful... no one says MINDLESS anything, just MINDFUL of the conditions under which WE WHO HAVE TAKEN THE OATH are to operate.

    I am not impressed by those who make all or nothing conditions. Not over impressed by those who think the refinement of our society somehow is an attack on the Constitution. This is a CIVILIAN controlled Republic not a Militarily managed one. The series of events that would have to happen for the military to intervene is way beyond anything we have seen and would mean the republic is no more and a tyrant- a REAL tyrant not a Faux Noise tyrant- has seized power. Frankly crap like the so-called Patriot Act, 2nd A, Immigration and whatever else the ranters can point to as an attack on the Constitution MUST be handled by the civilians or there is no one for the Military to 'save' the Constitution for!

    What I am is one of those who took the oath and now have scars to prove both my beliefs and backbone.

    My BELIEF is those NOT in the Military must show some BACKBONE if they think the Constitution is under attack. The Military is to protect the nation from violence, not resolve political issues.

    Those who try and make the current push-pull over political issues into some 'attack' are just civilians who are wussing out and want 'someone else' to fix it for them- of course in a way THEY think is best but not over eager to do much to make it so.

    That clear it up for ya????
    No, it didn't clear anything up, because I already understood what you believed. The question was simple: Is there ever a scenario where the military would be justified in a coup, in order to protect the constitution. Your belief is that no, there isn't, and they should sit idly; mine is that if that scenario were to present itself, yes they would be justified. You claimed that because "obey your leaders" was in the same oath with "protect the constitution", that soldiers must put obedience over the constitution, which is plain false and frankly cowardly.

    You seem to be caught up in thinking that we think this should happen NOW, which is ridiculous. If that "lawfully elected" politician is making large enough attacks on the constitution, he is no longer a lawfully elected politician, plain and simple.

    So to summarize my position:
    - Yes, there could be a scenario where the military would be justified in a coup to protect the constitution.

    I think it's sad and short sighted that you think no such scenario could ever exist.
    Last edited by RabidAlpaca; 12-17-13 at 09:05 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  8. #58
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The president doesn't have the authority to change laws at will, nor the authority to decide which laws will be enforced and which ones won't. That's a violation of the Constitution.
    The president does have discretion in how or if a law will be enforced. The president is under NO obligation to enforce ANY law they believe to be unconstitutional.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  9. #59
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    The president does have discretion in how or if a law will be enforced. The president is under NO obligation to enforce ANY law they believe to be unconstitutional.
    The Constitution doesn't allow the president to change, or refuse to enforce the law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #60
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,626

    Re: If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    No, it didn't clear anything up, because I already understood what you believed. The question was simple: Is there ever a scenario where the military would be justified in a coup, in order to protect the constitution. Your belief is that no, there isn't, and they should sit idly; mine is that if that scenario were to present itself, yes they would be justified. You claimed that because "obey your leaders" was in the same oath with "protect the constitution", that soldiers must put obedience over the constitution, which is plain false and frankly cowardly. You seem to be caught up in thinking that we think this should happen NOW, which is ridiculous. If that "lawfully elected" politician is making large enough attacks on the constitution, he is no longer a lawfully elected politician, plain and simple.

    So to summarize my position:
    - Yes, there could be a scenario where the military would be justified in a coup to protect the constitution. I think it's sad and short sighted that you think no such scenario could ever exist.
    There ya go again, making crap up as my position and using all or nothing as your position...

    My position is the military swears it's oath to not just the Constitution and not just the LAWFULLY elected Commander in Chief. He does to both. In order for your scenario to work a true tyrant will have had to seize power from the civilian population.

    Ummm as far as the Military is concerned until a LAWFULLY elected Commander in Chief is declared unfit or unlawful by the proper use of the Constitution then he is lawful. Until he does something so radical like dissolve the Congress, jail the Supreme Court he is lawful. Otherwise there will be thousands of ranters all declaring this or that act as an attack on the Constitution and demanding the army takes to the streets!

    So just who does the Military restore the Constitution for/to????

    A civilian population that let it slip away? oh PLAHEEEESE! Study history, once the civilians let democracy slip away all the Military can do is be a power broker. It is up to 'we the people' not 'we the generals' to safeguard the Constitution in our political process. I've always seen domestic threats to the Constitution as the civilian law enforcement side of the pact, the military only in times of EXTREME threat. Radical groups engaged in Civil War, a massive uprising demanding a tyrant/religion/race to be supreme are more what I see the military having to act on USofA soil.

    I think it is sad for anyone to think a scenario where the military feels it must stage a coup to 'protect' the Constitution would result in a restoration of democracy.

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •