• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

herenow1

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
928
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

Any soldier who refuses should be prosecuted.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

I would do my duty, obviously.

Anyone who refused such an order should be court martialed.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

20 years active duty and another 26 as a Department of the Army Civilian. I always followed orders. In either capacity I would follow this one if I was still in or working for the army.
 
I would do my duty, obviously.

Anyone who refused such an order should be court martialed.

I agree. Only someone who had little or nothing to do with the military would contemplate on disobeying it. Besides, those that go will be medical personal who are specially qualified along with the equipment to handle the situation.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

"Fight" the virus how, exactly?

Do you mean serving in an affected area, or something more... Shall we say, "direct?"
 
Last edited:
Now a GOP congressman is asking for money from the ACA fund for ebola.

After Boehner's cheap shot at Obama for waiting too long.

Never mind the quarter billion Obama has already spent on ebola.

As FOX plays politics with our troops going to Liberia.

And you wonder why I watch FOX right now with the "Special Report",
and then report their treachory Fair, Balanced and Unafraid .
I agree. Only someone who had little or nothing to do with the military would contemplate on disobeying it. Besides, those that go will be medical personal who are specially qualified along with the equipment to handle the situation.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

No question about it - do my duty.

Anyone that refuses to go should be court martialed.

I've been given some pretty hard orders to follow in my carreer, but never thought twice about following them to the letter.
 
Now a GOP congressman is asking for money from the ACA fund for ebola.

After Boehner's cheap shot at Obama for waiting too long.

Never mind the quarter billion Obama has already spent on ebola.

As FOX plays politics with our troops going to Liberia.

And you wonder why I watch FOX right now with the "Special Report",
and then report their treachory Fair, Balanced and Unafraid .

What in the world does any of that have to do with the thread topic??? Jesus NIMBY...
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

I doubt they are just sending soldiers to stand around with their guns... they are sending soldiers that are trained or prepared for such a crisis.
 
No question about it - do my duty.

Anyone that refuses to go should be court martialed.

I've been given some pretty hard orders to follow in my carreer, but never thought twice about following them to the letter.

While I am sure you were never given illegal orders... surely soldiers think about the morality of orders if they are questionable?
 
They have guns.... they use them.

That's the question. Is she talking about some kind of military "purge" of infected persons like you might see in a Hollywood movie, or simply being deployed to an area where the virus is prevalent?

I'd have some pretty serious misgivings about situation A), but I couldn't imagine any duty minded service member putting up too much of a fuss about B).

Deploying to dangerous areas is simply part of the job.
 
While I am sure you were never given illegal orders... surely soldiers think about the morality of orders if they are questionable?

Morality? In what way? Most actions taken by a member of the military in a combat situation could be defined as immoral by someone.
 
Now a GOP congressman is asking for money from the ACA fund for ebola.

After Boehner's cheap shot at Obama for waiting too long.

Never mind the quarter billion Obama has already spent on ebola.

As FOX plays politics with our troops going to Liberia.

And you wonder why I watch FOX right now with the "Special Report",
and then report their treachory Fair, Balanced and Unafraid .

If the president is sending over the military I assume the funds would come out of DOD. But with the political atmosphere in D.C. at the moment all assumptions are off. I haven't had the TV on all day, been busy with other things so I don't know what FOX or any other station is saying about it. I have no problem with it and if I was still in, I would not hesitate to go or think anything about it.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.
Because troops shouldn't be sent anywhere they face possible death? :roll:

Strangely just "dropping off medication" isn't enough when facing a major pandemic across several very poor countries. Given that many of the military personnel being sent are likely to be medical professionals I doubt they'd have an issue and since the proposal seems to be based around providing training and logistics, I doubt they'd be in places of greatest risk anyway. Regardless, they'll be at much less risk that all of the civilians they'd be seeking to help.

And all of that before you even start thinking about refusing legal orders.
 
I doubt they are just sending soldiers to stand around with their guns... they are sending soldiers that are trained or prepared for such a crisis.

They are sending medical, construction and just a few security personnel.

The mission, from what I've heard, is to build hospitals and clinics, train locals in medical procedures, and of course provide some basic security for our people (not an aggressive force).
 
I don't know why the poll question didn't show, ugh.

It's my understanding that half of the people who get EBola die. People who have used every precaution still ended up getting it. I just don't understand why it's always us that gets involved. Why don't other countries ever offer to help? I just don't have a good feeling about this. Do I feel for these people? Yes I do. Do I feel like we already have our hands in multiple pots? Yes!
 
I don't know why the poll question didn't show, ugh.

It's my understanding that half of the people who get EBola die. People who have used every precaution still ended up getting it. I just don't understand why it's always us that gets involved. Why don't other countries ever offer to help? I just don't have a good feeling about this. Do I feel for these people? Yes I do. Do I feel like we already have our hands in multiple pots? Yes!

To be fair, the survival rate for American victims so far has basically been 100%. The disease can be treated effectively with the right technology.

It also isn't all that easy to catch. It's a blood borne pathogen, meaning that you have to come into contact with either infected bodily fluids, or contaminated food or water, to catch it. Most of our servicemen wouldn't be in contact with either, and those that were would be following much more thorough sanitation procedures than the locals.
 
Morality? In what way? Most actions taken by a member of the military in a combat situation could be defined as immoral by someone.

Crossing the line Nazi (for lack of a better description) kind of stuff. Executing people is probably way over the top but firing into a crowd with women and children or detonating a car with unknown occupants. I don't know the possibility's because I have never been in combat but I am sure there are situations that merit individual soldiers moral input.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

Better fighting ebola in Africa than fighting for who-knows-what in Iraq.
 
To be fair, the survival rate for American victims so far has basically been 100%. The disease can be treated effectively with the right technology.

It also isn't all that easy to catch. It's a blood borne pathogen, meaning that you have to come into contact with either infected bodily fluids, or contaminated food or water, to catch it. Most of our servicemen wouldn't be in contact with either, and those that were would be following much more thorough sanitation procedures than the locals.

Well then, I hope I'm over reacting! ;)
 
Yet you didn't speak to what I said of the politicsw of wanting to use ACA funding, knowing I don't lie .
If the president is sending over the military I assume the funds would come out of DOD. But with the political atmosphere in D.C. at the moment all assumptions are off. I haven't had the TV on all day, been busy with other things so I don't know what FOX or any other station is saying about it. I have no problem with it and if I was still in, I would not hesitate to go or think anything about it.
 
They are sending medical, construction and just a few security personnel.

The mission, from what I've heard, is to build hospitals and clinics, train locals in medical procedures, and of course provide some basic security for our people (not an aggressive force).

Sounds about like what I imagined. If they are sent they should go and not argue about it. A Taliban rifle is no less lethal than Ebola. Not sure why the OP was even raised.
 
I guess dropping off medication is not enough, we now have to send our troops to face possible death.

If you were ordered to go by the president, would you follow orders, or would you say no and face a dishonorable discharge?

I would say something since it's not the job of the U.S. military to play "Peace Corps." Using the military for these humanitarian missions only downgrades the military combat readiness of the U.S. military.

If I were ordered to wear the "blue helmet" I would refuse to wear the blue helmet on the grounds that it is an unlawful order. Court martial me. I seem to remember a soldier or Marine doing the same thing when President Clinton tried to order our soldiers to wear the blue helmet.
 
Back
Top Bottom