• 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 the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

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

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 36.1%

  • No

    Votes: 19 52.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 4 11.1%
  • Total voters
    36
apdst said:
No, but soldiers would be true to their oath if they refused to execute an operation that violated the people's constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

and who in the hell makes that determination? Each individual soldier? Welcome to anarchy.
 
Wiggen said:
and who in the hell makes that determination? Each individual soldier? Welcome to anarchy.
Click to expand...

Soldiers have the right to decide what is a lawful order and what isn't. Welcome to the real world.
 
JJB3333 said:
maybe that is the main problem with the military today. The people and the govt don't respect the sacrifice those men and women make when they go over there. Sure many do it because they need work or need money, but in the long run the reason doesn't matter. They live 24/7 for years protecting us against any who would do us harm. And not just us either. There is a reason other then international military dominance that we sent them to the places we are protecting. Now granted lot of those reasons are political but many people need that protection. How long would japan or the Philippines last with china claiming the whole darn ocean if we just pulled out. Or how long would Israel last if we cut our treaty's with them.
The point is that those men and women are an important part of the world now and we often treat them like crap. For getting shot at for us we pay them minimum wage. hell we called the Vietnam vets baby killers, because the govt said move and they had to move.
Click to expand...

The Libbos believed the lies about our troops. That's why they called them baby-killers.

That's why when a Libbo posts historical information--short of water being wet and the sky is blue--you better check it, because there's a damn good chance the left out some very important parts.
 
Sure they do. That's why we have court martials.

A good solution to this would be to put every order up to a vote, right? And only obey those that get a majority of yes votes! :lamo

That way when you right wingers get an order from a superior, and you don't like the President of the United States, you could just disobey it! Its a great strategy - one that I'd encourage all right wing loons to follow.
 
apdst said:
The Libbos believed the lies about our troops. That's why they called them baby-killers.

That's why when a Libbo posts historical information--short of water being wet and the sky is blue--you better check it, because there's a damn good chance the left out some very important parts.
Click to expand...

What would you recommend doing with all the 'Libbos' currently in the military? If you could only get rid of them, you could execute a right wing coup without any problems at all. Talk about Heaven on Earth for you guys!
 
Wiggen said:
Sure they do. That's why we have court martials.

A good solution to this would be to put every order up to a vote, right? And only obey those that get a majority of yes votes! :lamo

That way when you right wingers get an order from a superior, and you don't like the President of the United States, you could just disobey it! Its a great strategy - one that I'd encourage all right wing loons to follow.
Click to expand...

So, you're totally clueless as to how things work in the service? Thanks for being honest.
 
Wiggen said:
What would you recommend doing with all the 'Libbos' currently in the military? If you could only get rid of them, you could execute a right wing coup without any problems at all. Talk about Heaven on Earth for you guys!
Click to expand...

There aren't but a handful of Libbos in the service.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
What I don't get about this post is, again (and seemingly forever on this board) is the ostensible religiosity involved: soldiers are just mindless automatons who would do horrific things if not for the Constitution to guide them? I don't get why some people confuse the Constitution with some holy book. Seriously, just replace the Constitution with the Bible in your post and the tenor remains basically the same.

Good things can come from ideas and concepts outside of the Constitution. And just because something is in the Constitution doesn't mean it's good. Stop worshiping this thing, it's getting kinda weird.
Click to expand...

Whether you like it or not, the Constitution is the highest law of the land in this nation.

Every public servant takes an oath to uphold the Constitution, and to defend it against all enemies, foreign or domestic. Every public servant agrees to this as a fundamental condition of taking that job.

Any public servant who, in the course of his office, has any willful part in violating the Constitution; who has any part in carrying otu any policy, or in enacting, upholding or enforcing any law that is unconstitutional, is not doing the job that he agreed to perform, and is guilty, at the very least, of malfeasance.

Inasmuch as there may be anything in the Constitution that is deemed to be undesirable, or anything that is not in the Constitution that is deemed to be necessary for inclusion therein, the Constitution established and defines a process by which it may be amended in order to make such changes. This is the only legitimate path to the pursuit of any policy that is not consistent with the Constitution as it stands.

It is never OK for any public servant to violate the Constitution just because he disagrees with it, nor because he is too lazy, ignorant, or cowardly to defy an unconstitutional order. If he thinks that the Constitution is wrong on any point, then let him attempt to pursue the legitimate Amendment process to correct it.
 
OscarB63 said:
the military is obligated to overthrow the govt if the govt is violating the constitution or if the govt is making its own personal interpretation of the constitution.
Click to expand...

What? No its not. The SCOTUS, part of the government, interprets the Constitution you know.
 
radcen said:
If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

...does that mean they would be legitimately justified in staging a coup and overthrowing the government?
Click to expand...

Any soldier who would even consider doing such a thing deserves to be immediately court-marshaled and dishonorably discharged.
 
Phys251 said:
Any soldier who would even consider doing such a thing deserves to be immediately court-marshaled and dishonorably discharged.
Click to expand...

So you can't see a scenario where that would be necessary?

If, for instance, a president decides to stay in power after his term and use the military against the populace to protect him, you think all of the soldiers should just kill their own citizens and follow orders? This scenario has happened in a countless number of countries. For some reason you think soldiers should be mindless automotons who obey orders over the constitution.
 
radcen said:
If the military swears an oath to uphold the Constitution...

...does that mean they would be legitimately justified in staging a coup and overthrowing the government?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




There's no if to it, when you join the U. S. military you take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the USA..

There isn't going to be a coup and the U.S. government is not going to be overthrown.

Wait and see.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
 
apdst said:
Only the Supreme Court can decide to abolish a law for it's unconstitutionality.
Click to expand...

I didn't say abolish I said don't enforce. Apple orange.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Absolutely. Willfully and maliciously so
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...




You are entitled to think whatever you want to think but Obama will be in the White House until another Democrat takes his place in 2017.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.

Wait and see.
 
The final arbitrator of what is constitutional is the Supreme Court. Ultimately though we have elected leaders, and the Supreme Court can either uphold or strike down the laws they make. As long as we have elected leaders it is the military's responsibility to follow them, because our Constitution guarantees elected government. You might not like the results of the election but in the end as long as the system is in place the military has no right to engage in a coup of any kind.

Let's just say that in the future a president named President Bubba Goofus is elected. Let us say that Bubba Goofus is an outspoken fascist who favors putting laws in place that violate the Constitution and he manages to pass a few through Congress, for instance he outlaws free speech. Does the military have the right to stage a coup? No they do not, instead the Supreme Court has the responsibility to strike down such a law. Even if Bubba Goofus is reelected, all the unconstitutional laws he passes must be struck down and the military has no right to engage in any coup activity to defend the Constitution as long as the basic authority of the Supreme Court is upheld, no matter how much people dislike Bubba Goofus.

But let us say that Bubba Goofus comes to power and then dissolves congress, imprisons the Supreme Court, and declares himself president for life. He begins passing laws violating the Bill of Rights by edict. In that case the military, as upholders of the constitution have a legal obligation based on their oath to stop Bubba Goofus. However even then they do not have the right to overthrow him, only to strip him of his powers. Technically if they set up another president in his place they would be violating their oath. The legal process they would have to go through would be to reinstate the supreme court which would immediately strike down all laws passed by Bubba Goofus edict, and then reinstate the congress which would impeach Bubba Goofus and later try him for his crimes. But until that point he would remain legally in office, even if all his power was taken away.

The only situation where it would be legal based on their oath to remove one leader from office and put another in, is if Bubba Goofus was never elected, but instead deposed the elected leader, Joe Blow, by force. In that case they would have a duty to overthrow Bubba Goofus and reinstate Joe Blow as the leader. If Joe Blow or any others died in the original coup, it would be whoever was next in line for the presidency legally before Bubba Goofus broke the law.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So you can't see a scenario where that would be necessary?

If, for instance, a president decides to stay in power after his term and use the military against the populace to protect him, you think all of the soldiers should just kill their own citizens and follow orders? This scenario has happened in a countless number of countries. For some reason you think soldiers should be mindless automotons who obey orders over the constitution.
Click to expand...

You just condoned treason. The Constitution is very clear as to what may legally happen to treasonists.
 
Phys251 said:
You just condoned treason. The Constitution is very clear as to what may legally happen to treasonists.
Click to expand...
LOL. Those who fight traitors are traitors. What a cute little logical loop you made there. Upholding the constitution can not be treason.

So in your world the government should have no limits and no opposition, no matter what it does?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
LOL. Those who fight traitors are traitors. What a cute little logical loop you made there. Upholding the constitution can not be treason.

So in your world the government should have no limits and no opposition, no matter what it does?
Click to expand...

Bob Blaylock said:
So you want a soldier to be prosecuted for his thoughts, even in the absence of speech or actions?
Click to expand...

Bob Blaylock said:
The Constitution also contains a very clear description of what constitutes treason. The word does not mean what you think it means.
Click to expand...

I will not entertain these lies. Anyone who attempts to overthrow our government by force in the name of freedom has become the very thing he swore against, and deserves to be hanged.

If you don't like what America is becoming, you are free to leave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom