Problem: Our Military has already been following illegal orders

[ThoughtCriminal]

Where is the push-back from the military on the boat bombings?

Everybody in the chain of command should have said "Hell no, sir!"

[Irish_Dem]

1. Trump directly threatened generals with loss of rank, pension, job if they speak out or refuse orders.

And now threatening court martial.

[snot]

2. A downside of an all-volunteer military --

weeds out the critical thinkers.

And/or we really need to do a better job of teaching the Contitution in our schools.

[Kaleva]

4. It was mostly draftees who fought in Vietnam

[Kaleva]

3. What authority has determined them to be illegal?

[WarGamer]

5. interwebz people

[dpibel]

8. Do you disagree with the characterization?

If not, why not?

[Brenda]

16. Top military lawyer raised legal concerns about boat strikes

WASHINGTON — The senior military lawyer for the combatant command overseeing lethal strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats near Venezuela disagreed with the Trump administration’s position that the operations are lawful — and his views were sidelined, according to six sources with knowledge of the legal advice.

The lawyer, who serves as the senior judge advocate general, or JAG in military parlance, at U.S. Southern Command in Miami, raised his legal concerns in August before the strikes began in September, according to two senior U.S. officials, two senior congressional aides and two former senior U.S. officials.

The JAG at Southern Command specifically expressed concern that strikes against people on boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean, whom administration officials call “narco-terrorists,” could amount to extrajudicial killings, the six sources said, and therefore legally expose service members involved in the operations.

Is that senior JAG just an "interwebz people?"

Why try so hard to defend Chump's illegal actions?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/top-military-lawyer-raised-legal-concerns-boat-strikes-rcna243694

[dpibel]

22. It's a puzzler, innit?

[Brenda]

23. Not really.

[ThoughtCriminal]

6. Trrump purged the JAGs

Pretty obvious why.

[twodogsbarking]

9. And ethics.

[Brenda]

12. Congressman Jason Crow, for one.

https://crow.house.gov/media/press-releases/crow-leads-resolution-to-block-illegal-us-military-strikes

Congressman Jason Crow (D-CO-06), a former Army Ranger who serves on the House Armed Services Committee and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, introduced a War Powers Continuing Resolution to block the Trump Administration from conducting unauthorized & illegal military strikes.

Congressman Crow was joined by House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY-05), House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-WA-09), Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Member Jim Himes (D-CT-04), House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie Thompson (D-MS-02), and Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN-05).

“We need to stop the flow of illegal drugs into our communities, but President Trump does not have the legal authority to launch military strikes in the Western Hemisphere,” said Congressman Crow. “In the briefings I’ve had on these strikes, I have yet to see a coherent strategy from this administration on their illegal actions. After decades of overseas wars, trillions of dollars spent, and thousands of lives lost, the American people deserve a public debate and vote on military actions and putting our servicemembers in harm's way.”

[moniss]

13. If you have plain language in treaties and precedent you

don't need a years long investigation and high tribunals to determine if an act has violated those treaties and precedents. That sort of "proof must come from on high" determination is part of our problem in the world today. You can have somebody on video committing an act of violence on someone and our society at large is now wanting to say "Well we don't know for sure what was really happening and that person might have a reason why they beat that man and crippled him."

Crooks like Crumb The 1st and other shady people in business and government use that aspect of our current society in order to always deny, obfuscate and delay any accountability for themselves.

[Munu]

7. The idea that there will ever be massive disobedience to illegal orders is a pipe dream.

Do most soldiers even know what is or is not an illegal order?

OK, high ranking officers might know.
But any few who disobey will be court martialed, and they know it.
End of career even with acquittal.

Even massive killing of Americans on American soil can happen if the Commander-in-Chief passes it down the chain of command. Possibly he would get a bit of argument from his chiefs of staff, but if he insists they will comply. An unusually decent one might resign, but that's it.

Sorry to be so pessimistic, but that's how I see it.

[FakeNoose]

10. It makes me very sad to say it, but you're probably right

The days of fragging the green, incompetent "Second Louie's" are long over with.

[MuirHero]

15. They would be prosecuted for war crimes...

If Trump orders the military to fire on American citizens who are peacefully protesting and the military chain of command carries out what would obviously be an illegal order, they would all be prosecuted for war crimes when the Democrats take back control of the government. Full stop, end of discussion. The public would absolutely demand accountability.

[maxsolomon]

18. You have a lot of faith in the American public.

I hope your assessment is correct.

[Brenda]

19. Strawmen

None of the Democrats in the video were talking about "massive disobedience."

All high ranking officers know what illegal orders are and as far as "career ending" well, that's kinda the point.

The message was appealing to their loyalty to the Constitution and the American people, not their fucking careers.

[RoeVWade]

11. There are problems with both following and not following orders which is why you need competent leaders.

A low-level soldier gets an order to blow up a bridge where he can clearly see there are American POWs in tow with a bunch of enemy soldiers he may have to decide right then and there if he is going to get court martialed for what he does or doesn't do. Even worse if they're from his own outfit.

His level of training is likely to leave him confused.in many situations where immediate action may be necessary.

But as far as what the Dem Reps said, ABSOLUTELY, nothing wrong with that.

[flashman13]

14. Do we know who is carrying out the boat strikes? Is it regular military? Could it be CIA?

Not that it is any less illegal if it is the CIA using drones. I personally would feel more comfortable to know it was the CIA and not the Navy.

[RoeVWade]

17. And you know why Trump was upset about that ad is because it implies he's a dumbass and barbarian. WHICH HE IS!

Dangerous and incompetent.

[3catwoman3]

21. Yes, he is. The truth hurts...

...as the old saying goes.

Some infinitesimal part of him knows that he is a massive fraud, which is why he is so thin-skinned. If he were really "all that," he'd just ignore or laugh off criticism.

[Martin68]

20. Correction: "Elements of our military have already..." The entire military is not implicated.

[Ping Tung]

24. Major General Smedley Butler: War is a racket.