CNN: Dramatic increase in Army desertions

Originally posted by TheEXone
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

This is the oath, notice its not about defending the territory or interests of the U.S government, its first and foremost about defending the constitution of the United States. A foreign army attacking the country and threatening its people is in violation of the constitution by denying the rights of the citizenry.

I noticed that you only commented on the first portion of this statement. Any reason why you didn't comment on this part?

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Originally posted by BlueTriangle
I noticed that you only commented on the first portion of this statement. Any reason why you didn't comment on this part?

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

That's a good question. I've go another one BT. If you were in the services and the President ordered you to kill your own kid, would you?

Originally posted by BlueTriangle
...and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

According to the UCMJ only legal orders are required to be obeyed. Iraq war is an illegal occupation.

The war was illegal under international law. The occupation remains illegal under international law. The point is:

“ Article 2(3) and 2(4) of the United Nations Charter read:

“ (3) All member states shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.”

“ (4) All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

Sounds simple, reasonable and clear enough. Let me add that there are two and only two exceptions to the Charter’s Article 2(4) prohibition against the use of unilateralist force

“ … if an armed attack occurs…” (or is imminent) as contemplated by Article 51 of the UN Charter is one. Authorisation by the Security Council is the other.”

( Quote: “Learn the Law” pp. 154-155 – published Trafford 2003 – ISBN 141200775-5)

World leaders ought consistently to be asked – where is your lawful authority for your current course of action?

Source

[edit on 18/4/2007 by ANOK]

Originally posted by BlueTriangle

I noticed that you only commented on the first portion of this statement. Any reason why you didn't comment on this part?

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Well I did, my argument is that the war can be seen to be illegal by constitutional standards and so the orders of the president are unlawful and need not be obeyed. Even the president is not above this requirement, if he were he would be a dictator.

You can argue with me however about whether the war is legal or not, there are points against my case such as the precedents of the last 50 years of "police actions". However I would argue that those wars too where Illegal under the constitution which specifically gives congress the power to declare war barring of course and imminent attack on the country or its people.

The president can order the military to respond to an imminent threat, unfortunately no war to my knowledge except maybe Granada could be argued as representing an imminent threat to the U.S. We have for the vast majority gone to war of our own choosing for so called "national interests".