Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.

[washamericom]

Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”

The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.

“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.

Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”

Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values​

The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.

“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”

The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.

Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.

“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”

These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”

More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.

This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.

Funny, but there's a gag-order on the active-duty guys. They aren't allowed to publicly voice their opinions about the Taliban In Chief.
What I get from them is they'd be happy to follow President Trumps' orders, but a bit reluctant to obey the Vagina.

I am sure the senior commanders who are actually concerned about issuing illegal orders are relieved that Trump is going to lose. They might be concerned about Hillary for different reasons but not about ordering a war crime.

Thank you. It's refreshing to hear from a sane poster. I was just listening to a doctor on Lawrence O'Donnell talking about how Trump and about 30% of Americans like to bully and demonize people. So true.

i'm pretty sure the military wouldn't take orders from lawrence odonnell

 

[washamericom]

Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.

You DO realize that F-16's would be useless for close in air support required over there, right? They aren't equipped with weapons that can be fired within 100 ft of friendly troops.

Shoot.................Not even an A-10 would have been able to do the job due to the proximity of the combatants to the friendlies.

The only thing that would have worked would have been a rescue mission with helos and a rescue team. Only trouble is, we didn't have any assets that would have been able to get there in time.

Watch the movie 13 Hours sometime.

Spectre is pretty cool. AC-130 with 105 howitzers, 40mm cannons, mini-guns a blazing.
Spent all night listening to that barking above me a couple of times. I hear B52s are more impressive. That's what ended Desert Storm practically without a shot being fired.

I was responding to the poster that said when Benghazi happened, if Trump had been in office, he would have scrambled F-16's to rescue the ambassador.

Only trouble is, there are no weapons that the F-16 can carry that can be fired within 100 yards of a friendly. And, MAYBE a Spooky (AC-130) could have done something to help out, but question is, how many of them were within range that could have arrived on scene to help out before the ambassador was killed?

And exactly what do you think that a B52 could have done to help out the situation in Benghazi, and again...........how many were within range that could have shown up in time to help?

a pair f16 over head screams help is on the way. which in this case of course it never was, or never was going to be.
it's hillary's 3 am phonecall.

 

[Esmeralda]

Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”

The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.

“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.

Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”

Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values​

The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.

“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”

The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.

Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.

“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”

These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”

More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.

This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.

We might end up with a military coup.

 

[Esmeralda]

I just glanced through your first opening post . Its too long and the thing that i saw that made me stop reading is your reference to 'international law' . Feck 'international law' as the USA is a SOVEREIGN Nation and lets hope that the Trump return to the principles of American Sovereignty and everything that the words American Sovereignty means Lakhota .

Couldn't agree more!

You have such an apt screen name.

 

[Faun]

Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.

There was no way of saving the ambassador.

"Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don’t think there is any issue with respect to that—they couldn’t." - Republican, Trey Gowdy

 

[rightwinger]

Top generals have already stated they will not engage in torture or kill the family of terrorists like Trump suggested
I also doubt Trump would ever use nuclear weapons

But as Commander in Chief, Trump has a lot more toys in his toy box

I can see him ordering a political assassination of a foreign leader that insulted him. Kim Jong Un comes to mind. I can see him ordering the Navy to shoot down Russian or Chinese planes that do fly byes. I can see him invading Iran. I can see him disrupting the NATO alliance with his bullying

 

[rightwinger]

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

I'm sure some of the transgender officers Obama promoted are nervous.

------------------------------------ i hope that the TRUMP can purge some , hopefully ALL of the unAmerican diversity that has been inserted into American military and Government ranks .

Our military men and women are not emotionless killbots or worthless cannon fodder. Commanders who treat them that way do not deserve command, this is not just my opinion, it is the very basis of an all volunteer force.

--------------------------------------- and thats one of the reasons why a volunteer military is a poor choice for a USA military Occupied .

Explain? The draft just about tore our nation apart because too many poor people were sent and the rich kids got deferments while wasting their lives and limbs in a stupid war no one really wanted. You want to go back to how it was in light of how badly it flew in the face of this being a free country?

Our military no longer relies on needing a million troops to invade. Our military today uses smaller forces that are more mobile and more lethal. Having a smaller highly trained force is more important than quantity

I doubt if the military would want a draft even if they could have one

 

[Katzndogz]

President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.

 

[rightwinger]

President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.

Why would Trump procure parts for 40 year old airframes?

 

[Katzndogz]

Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”

The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.

“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.

Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”

Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values​

The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.

“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”

The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.

Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.

“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”

These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”

More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.

This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.

We might end up with a military coup.

A distinct possibility with a Hillary presidency and George Soros wants the military to assassinate Americans.

 

[Katzndogz]

President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.

Why would Trump procure parts for 40 year old airframes?

The democrat answer is to ground the air force.

 

[rightwinger]

President Trump would not require the military to scavenge parts for their equipment.

Why would Trump procure parts for 40 year old airframes?

The democrat answer is to ground the air force.

Our air force is the most powerful in the world under the Dems

 

[healthmyths]

All I do is research for you dummies!!!

According to a new poll conducted by the Military Times,
only 15 percent of active-duty service members approve of President Obama’s performance as commander-in-chief.
Obama’s approval rating crashes among troops, rises with public


Now for you dummies... Troops prefer Trump!!!

military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton | MilitaryTimes
In a new survey of American military personnel, Donald Trump emerged as active-duty service members' preference to become the next U.S. president, topping Hillary Clinton by more than a 2-to-1 margin. However, in the latest Military Times election survey, more than one in five troops said they’d rather not vote in November if they have to choose between just those two candidates.

But given only those choices, 21 percent of the service members surveyed said they would abstain from voting.More than 54 percent of the 951 troops Military Times surveyed said they would vote for Trump, the presumed Republican presidential nominee, over Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. Only about 25 percent said they would vote for Clinton in that matchup.

 

[rightwinger]

All I do is research for you dummies!!!

According to a new poll conducted by the Military Times,
only 15 percent of active-duty service members approve of President Obama’s performance as commander-in-chief.
Obama’s approval rating crashes among troops, rises with public


Now for you dummies... Troops prefer Trump!!!

military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton | MilitaryTimes
In a new survey of American military personnel, Donald Trump emerged as active-duty service members' preference to become the next U.S. president, topping Hillary Clinton by more than a 2-to-1 margin. However, in the latest Military Times election survey, more than one in five troops said they’d rather not vote in November if they have to choose between just those two candidates.

But given only those choices, 21 percent of the service members surveyed said they would abstain from voting.More than 54 percent of the 951 troops Military Times surveyed said they would vote for Trump, the presumed Republican presidential nominee, over Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. Only about 25 percent said they would vote for Clinton in that matchup.
View attachment 87568

Military has always been Conservative

What is your point?

 

[Esmeralda]

Even if some officers thought his orders were illegal or unethical.

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

He has suggested carpet-bombing Syrian cities, assassinating the families of Islamic State fighters and torturing detainees, all illegal under international or U.S. law. He has proposed withdrawing troops from South Korea (a similar troop withdrawal helped ignite the 1950 Korean War), advocated disengaging from NATO, and declared that Japan would be “better off” with its own nuclear weapons. And he has famously bragged, “I know more about ISIS than the generals!”

The U.S. military prides itself on scrupulous adherence to strict moral and ethical values. While some in the ranks may be passionate Trump supporters, for others, the idea of actually carrying out his more bizarre ideas is unthinkable.

“I cannot imagine active-duty troops doing what Trump is stating,” said Paul Eaton, an Army two-star general who resigned in 2006 in protest against Bush administration military policies. “I believe we would have outright defiance,” Eaton told The Huffington Post. Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four-star general and former director of the National Security Agency, is even more blunt. Given an order to kill families of suspected terrorists, “the American armed forces would refuse to act,” he said.

Trump has fired back. “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he boasted at a March 3 GOP presidential debate. “Believe me ― If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”

Trump may be right. Despite its occasional disagreements with presidents and civilian officials, the military doesn’t have an especially proud record of refusing orders. Military officers swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to the commander in chief. Nevertheless, the top brass, despite deep misgivings about the conduct of the wars in Vietnam and Iraq, quietly went along with what the White House wanted. In 11 years of war in Vietnam, 58,220 Americans were killed; 4,520 Americans have died in the still-raging Iraq War so far.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers.
--U.S. Army Doctrine, Army Values​

The record suggests that the United States military, which takes pride in its strong professional ethics, nevertheless is no bulwark against military fiascos.

“It’s hard for military officers to disobey orders,” said Peter Mansoor, a historian and retired Army colonel who was the top aide to Gen. David Petraeus during the Iraq War troop surge in 2007-2008. “It’s a career-ending move that likely will get you court-martialed. One has to be willing to put one’s future on the line.”

The legal lines are clear. Waterboarding, used on detainees during the Bush administration as an “enhanced interrogation technique,” or torture, is illegal under international and now U.S. law. The deliberate targeting of war-zone civilians, whether or not they are related to ISIS fighters or other terrorists, is a war crime under international law.

Nevertheless, Trump has asserted that both are necessary and, if he’s president, would be part of his war on ISIS.

“You have to take out their families,” Trump said three times during a phone interviewwith Fox News last December, brushing aside the issue of civilian casualties as “political correctness.”

These and other Trump pronouncements may be impulsive bluster, but they clash hard against the military’s values of personal courage, honor, integrity and loyalty, among others. At its core, the military’s value system is its commitment to use lethal violence only when legally and morally justified.

“Do what’s right, legally and morally,” the Army instructs its soldiers. “Facing moral fear or adversity may be a long, slow process of continuing forward on the right path, especially if taking those actions is not popular with others.”

More: Would The Military Obey Commander In Chief Trump? Probably.

This is yet another reason why I find the thought of a President Trump very dangerous and repugnant - because I agree with the OP that most soldiers would likely obey illegal, immoral and/or unethical orders from the president.

We might end up with a military coup.

A distinct possibility with a Hillary presidency and George Soros wants the military to assassinate Americans.

 

[pismoe]

Trump would have scrambled F16's to benghazi. they would have gone.
as America, we would at least have tried. there would be no cover up in the aftermath.

There was no way of saving the ambassador.

"Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don’t think there is any issue with respect to that—they couldn’t." - Republican, Trey Gowdy

------------------------------------- trey gowdy , mr. hot air is fulla sh1t Faun .

 

[pismoe]

Top generals have already stated they will not engage in torture or kill the family of terrorists like Trump suggested
I also doubt Trump would ever use nuclear weapons

But as Commander in Chief, Trump has a lot more toys in his toy box

I can see him ordering a political assassination of a foreign leader that insulted him. Kim Jong Un comes to mind. I can see him ordering the Navy to shoot down Russian or Chinese planes that do fly byes. I can see him invading Iran. I can see him disrupting the NATO alliance with his bullying

-------------------------------------- getting nervous ehh , wife just told me as she was passing by combing her hair that the Trump is moving on up in the polling RWinger .

 

[pismoe]

Donald J. Trump is causing some high anxiety inside the military.

I'm sure some of the transgender officers Obama promoted are nervous.

------------------------------------ i hope that the TRUMP can purge some , hopefully ALL of the unAmerican diversity that has been inserted into American military and Government ranks .

Our military men and women are not emotionless killbots or worthless cannon fodder. Commanders who treat them that way do not deserve command, this is not just my opinion, it is the very basis of an all volunteer force.

--------------------------------------- and thats one of the reasons why a volunteer military is a poor choice for a USA military Occupied .

Explain? The draft just about tore our nation apart because too many poor people were sent and the rich kids got deferments while wasting their lives and limbs in a stupid war no one really wanted. You want to go back to how it was in light of how badly it flew in the face of this being a free country?

Our military no longer relies on needing a million troops to invade. Our military today uses smaller forces that are more mobile and more lethal. Having a smaller highly trained force is more important than quantity

I doubt if the military would want a draft even if they could have one

------------------------------------------- i don't care what the military WANTS outside of when the American public and the American military both agree . Military doesn't make the rules RWinger .

 

[Maryland Patriot]

If they followed a Kenyan goat herder Im pretty sure they will follow a Patriotic American

 

[rightwinger]

Top generals have already stated they will not engage in torture or kill the family of terrorists like Trump suggested
I also doubt Trump would ever use nuclear weapons

But as Commander in Chief, Trump has a lot more toys in his toy box

I can see him ordering a political assassination of a foreign leader that insulted him. Kim Jong Un comes to mind. I can see him ordering the Navy to shoot down Russian or Chinese planes that do fly byes. I can see him invading Iran. I can see him disrupting the NATO alliance with his bullying

-------------------------------------- getting nervous ehh , wife just told me as she was passing by combing her hair that the Trump is moving on up in the polling RWinger .

Don't see much movement...do you?

RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Video and Polls

Hasn't changed significantly in the last two weeks. Let me know when Trump takes back some of the states currently in Hillary's column