• 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!

Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

  • The President-Civilian Control

    Votes: 23 54.8%

  • The Joint Chiefs-The Military Professionals

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • The President, but the military should decide battlefield tactics.

    Votes: 19 45.2%
  • Total voters
    42
apdst said:
You said that soldiers on the battlefield are obligated to follow the president's order, "no exceptions". Not only is a soldier not obligated to obey an unlawful order, he isn't obligated to obey any order that is contrary to current combat doctrine, or military regulations.

Sorry to break it to you, but a soldier isn't obligated to blindly follow the president to that soldier's death.
Click to expand...

You are flat wrong.
 
apdst said:
I would love for other veterans to respond.
Click to expand...

I have. You continued to press your fallacious point with no proof, but ask us to prove that the constitution really does put the president in charge of the military. Sometimes arguing with a complete idiot is a waste of time, and I think this is one of those times.
 
Redress said:
I have. You continued to press your fallacious point with no proof, but ask us to prove that the constitution really does put the president in charge of the military. Sometimes arguing with a complete idiot is a waste of time, and I think this is one of those times.
Click to expand...

What did you do in the Navy? Yeoman? Pencil pusher? Or, are insults all you really have to offer?
 
apdst said:
What did you do in the Navy? Yeoman? Pencil pusher? Or, are insults all you really have to offer?
Click to expand...

What I did is entirely irrelevant, though your guesses are way off. Your facts also are, as the president is the top of the chain of command, and his lawful orders are in fct orders, and not following them is a violation of the UCMJ.
 
Redress said:
What I did is entirely irrelevant, though your guesses are way off. Your facts also are, as the president is the top of the chain of command, and his lawful orders are in fct orders, and not following them is a violation of the UCMJ.
Click to expand...

It's very relevant. If the president comes in and tells you how to arrange your ink pens and paper clips, it's a far cry from the president telling infantry soldiers what tactics to use in order to defeat an enemy unit, or tell them how he thinks they should react to enemy contact. If he issues orders to combat troops that is contrary to their training, that they know will cost more American lives, then they aren't obligated to follow such orders. Since you're a girl and you never served in a combat unit, obviously, there's no way you can comprehend what I'm telling you.
 
apdst said:
It's very relevant. If the president comes in and tells you how to arrange your ink pens and paper clips, it's a far cry from the president telling infantry soldiers what tactics to use in order to defeat an enemy unit, or tell them how he thinks they should react to enemy contact. If he issues orders to combat troops that is contrary to their training, that they know will cost more American lives, then they aren't obligated to follow such orders.
Click to expand...

Where do you dream up these rules of yours??
You are the only one who doesn't seem to get it.
 
apdst said:
It's very relevant. If the president comes in and tells you how to arrange your ink pens and paper clips, it's a far cry from the president telling infantry soldiers what tactics to use in order to defeat an enemy unit, or tell them how he thinks they should react to enemy contact. If he issues orders to combat troops that is contrary to their training, that they know will cost more American lives, then they aren't obligated to follow such orders. Since you're a girl and you never served in a combat unit, obviously, there's no way you can comprehend what I'm telling you.
Click to expand...

Feel free to show me where these exceptions to the presidents authority are in writing(hint: you cannot do it since they do not exist).
 
Redress said:
Feel free to show me where these exceptions to the presidents authority are in writing(hint: you cannot do it since they do not exist).
Click to expand...

I got a better idea: show me where the president has the authority to violate military doctrine and regulations. I can't wait for your response.

But, at the end of the day, this is all irrelevant, because not even PBO is stupid enough to order around military units at the lower levels.
 
apdst said:
It's very relevant. If the president comes in and tells you how to arrange your ink pens and paper clips, it's a far cry from the president telling infantry soldiers what tactics to use in order to defeat an enemy unit, or tell them how he thinks they should react to enemy contact. If he issues orders to combat troops that is contrary to their training, that they know will cost more American lives, then they aren't obligated to follow such orders. Since you're a girl and you never served in a combat unit, obviously, there's no way you can comprehend what I'm telling you.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about huh??? Look it's simple if I was the President of the United States and I give the Joint Chiefs an order then they must pass it down the chain of command, end of discussion I don't care if it an order telling you how you shall place you ink pen and papper clips on your Military Issued Desk and ****ing order from the President can't be refused unless it goes against a Moral Duty and then be prepare for a very long Trail.

Oh and by the way Redress served in the US Navy onboard CVNs so I suggest you stop all of this silly nonesence with him.
 
apdst said:
I got a better idea: show me where the president has the authority to violate military doctrine and regulations. I can't wait for your response.

But, at the end of the day, this is all irrelevant, because not even PBO is stupid enough to order around military units at the lower levels.
Click to expand...

No problem,

I'll start with the easist one for you to understand,

Article II Section 2 of the US Consitution
 
apdst said:
I got a better idea: show me where the president has the authority to violate military doctrine and regulations. I can't wait for your response.

But, at the end of the day, this is all irrelevant, because not even PBO is stupid enough to order around military units at the lower levels.
Click to expand...

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
Click to expand...

Not seeing those exceptions you mention. Care to point them out?
 
I've been waiting for someone to pick up on it, but I guess ya'll just ain't gonna.

If the president passes down orders to anyone other than his immediate subordinate in the chain of command, he is then in violation of the chain of command. The chain of command works both ways. Hence, it's impossible for the president to give lawful orders directly to field units, because it would be a violation of the chain of command and therefore, would be an unlawful order.

Goddamn, I can't believe I had to actually explain to ya'll.

Now, ya'll are more than welcome to show me the law, or regulation that allows the president to circumvent the chain of command.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
I've been waiting for someone to pick up on it, but I guess ya'll just ain't gonna.

If the president passes down orders to anyone other than his immediate subordinate in the chain of command, he is then in violation of the chain of command. The chain of command works both ways. Hence, it's impossible for the president to give lawful orders directly to field units, because it would be a violation of the chain of command and therefore, would be an unlawful order.

Goddamn, I can't believe I had to actually explain to ya'll.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't there is no Chain of Command if the President give an US Military Personal a direct order then that person has to carry it out.

Question are you this dense or you just being stupid???
 
apdst said:
I've been waiting for someone to pick up on it, but I guess ya'll just ain't gonna.

If the president passes down orders to anyone other than his immediate subordinate in the chain of command, he is then in violation of the chain of command. The chain of command works both ways. Hence, it's impossible for the president to give lawful orders directly to field units, because it would be a violation of the chain of command and therefore, would be an unlawful order.

Goddamn, I can't believe I had to actually explain to ya'll.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious, and reveals a deep seated ignorance of the military, and of course you cannot prove any of it, since it is all wrong.

Hint: when I was in the navy, if the skipper was near me and wanted me to do something, he did not have to track down my DivO to pass on the order to my Division chief who then did not have to pass it on to my branch supervisor...
 
Redress said:
This is hilarious, and reveals a deep seated ignorance of the military, and of course you cannot prove any of it, since it is all wrong.

Hint: when I was in the navy, if the skipper was near me and wanted me to do something, he did not have to track down my DivO to pass on the order to my Division chief who then did not have to pass it on to my branch supervisor...
Click to expand...

We're not talking about your boat captain. We're talking about the president. You do understand the chain of command, yes?
 
apdst said:
We're not talking about your boat captain. We're talking about the president. You do understand the chain of command, yes?
Click to expand...

Apparently much better than you. Still waiting for you to offer any shred of proof that what you are claiming is accurate(and admitting that using this line against you is so much fun)>
 
apdst said:
We're not talking about your boat captain. We're talking about the president. You do understand the chain of command, yes?
Click to expand...

Oh he understand the chain of command it's you who seems to have a major problem with it. What part of this can't you understand. The President of the United States has the final say in any order's given it doesn't matter if it's Four Star General or some Buck Private if the President give either of them a direct order they must follow it or face a Court Marshal.
 
Scorpion89 said:
Oh he understand the chain of command it's you who seems to have a major problem with it. What part of this can't you understand. The President of the United States has the final say in any order's given it doesn't matter if it's Four Star General or some Buck Private if the President give either of them a direct order they must follow it or face a Court Marshal.
Click to expand...

The president cannot circumvent the chain of command. Hate to break it to you, but it just can't happen.

I busted off in a brigadier general's ass one time for countermanding my orders, without properly utilizing the chain of command. Why was I in the right? Because he violated the chain of command. If he didn't like what my company was doing, he was supposed to go to my battalion commander, then my battalion commander would go to my company commander and then my company commander would inform me that my orders to the company needed to change. In which case, I would have modified my orders to the company in accoradance the the brigade commander's intent.

That's just how the system works. Sorry.
 
apdst said:
The president cannot circumvent the chain of command. Hate to break it to you, but it just can't happen.

I busted off in a brigadier general's ass one time for countermanding my orders, without properly utilizing the chain of command. Why was I in the right? Because he violated the chain of command. If he didn't like what my company was doing, he was supposed to go to my battalion commander, then my battalion commander would go to my company commander and then my company commander would inform me that my orders to the company needed to change. In which case, I would have modified my orders to the company in accoradance the the brigade commander's intent.

That's just how the system works. Sorry.
Click to expand...

No it does not, and you have patently refused to show any evidence that it does. If some one over you countermands one of your orders without going through you, it is poor leadership, but perfectly legal. Your theory is in fact stupid, since it means superior officers have to find the next lowest in command whenever they want to issue no matter how trivial an order.
 
apdst said:
The president cannot circumvent the chain of command. Hate to break it to you, but it just can't happen.

I busted off in a brigadier general's ass one time for countermanding my orders, without properly utilizing the chain of command. Why was I in the right? Because he violated the chain of command. If he didn't like what my company was doing, he was supposed to go to my battalion commander, then my battalion commander would go to my company commander and then my company commander would inform me that my orders to the company needed to change. In which case, I would have modified my orders to the company in accoradance the the brigade commander's intent.

That's just how the system works. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I call BS on you there is no way on hell that you busted off on a 2 Star with out yourself getting taken infront of a Captian Mast. Who the hell do you think your dealing with here huh, you might be able to BS some folks about the Military but I along with quite a few other see thru your BS.

Chain of Command is simple what every the President ask you do end of discussion.
 
Redress said:
No it does not, and you have patently refused to show any evidence that it does. If some one over you countermands one of your orders without going through you, it is poor leadership, but perfectly legal. Your theory is in fact stupid, since it means superior officers have to find the next lowest in command whenever they want to issue no matter how trivial an order.
Click to expand...

I can't prove a negative. It's up to you, since you insist that it's so, to show where it's OK for anyone to break the chain of command. We await with baited breath.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom