It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reserve Corporal Could Face Discipline After Paul Rally, but Candidate's Support Within Military Is

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
You can only wear your UNIFORM when on duty or going to and from your post/base. Any other use of it, is prohibited under the UCMJ.

That means, you can go to the store or any event, unless it is a military function or are ordered to do so.

I see guys that are in the Guard/Reserves out shopping after drill/work that do this, but no one gives the soldier crap for it, because they are soldiers.




posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   
If he broke the rule then I don't see why he shouldn't face some 'consequences' IF they decide to do anything about it. Do I think it makes sense? No. I do think if he is punished it will only help the cause. But hopefully there's not some extreme measure in place for something so petty.

Unfortunately nowadays there's an endless number of laws all of which apply to the average person; and the people that live above the law are the ones who run the show; military industrial complex & all. Ironic but true...



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skewed

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by Skewed
 


Dude, it does not matter WHO you support.
You are NOT allowed to express political views while in UNIFORM.

Take your uniform off, put on civies.....your fine.


I am well aware of that. But the point being, the corporal sent a powerful message to the masses. Was he wrong, absolutely, according to the UCMJ. Morally, he was spot on and even with punishment I would have to say I could possibly do the same thing if I felt it was the right thing to do, so yes, to hell with the consequences, dude.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Skewed because: (no reason given)


As a Cpl, this individual is a Jr NCO......so this is an NCO setting a bad example to his troops. I say lets bust this E-4 back down to E-2, or simply dischage him. (other than honorable)

He has no business leading troops if his POLITICAL views can get in the way of his job to serve and defend.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
If this man should face discipline, then the president needs to stay the hell out of military barracks. We shouldn't have these staged photo OPS with cheering service men and women.
I say, all Ron Paul supporters should buy some fatigues and wear them at the rallies.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by vogon42

Originally posted by Skewed

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by Skewed
 


Dude, it does not matter WHO you support.
You are NOT allowed to express political views while in UNIFORM.

Take your uniform off, put on civies.....your fine.


I am well aware of that. But the point being, the corporal sent a powerful message to the masses. Was he wrong, absolutely, according to the UCMJ. Morally, he was spot on and even with punishment I would have to say I could possibly do the same thing if I felt it was the right thing to do, so yes, to hell with the consequences, dude.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Skewed because: (no reason given)


As a Cpl, this individual is a Jr NCO......so this is an NCO setting a bad example to his troops. I say lets bust this E-4 back down to E-2, or simply dischage him. (other than honorable)

He has no business leading troops if his POLITICAL views can get in the way of his job to serve and defend.


And as I have already noted, he did violate the UCMJ and according the contract he signed he is guilty of breaking the rules. I am sure there will be consequences, what ever that may be. I am not sure what you are trying to point out to me. According to the UCMJ he is wrong and I support there being consequences, but considering the circumstances of the country I fully support every thing he did and said on a moral level. I just think that this was something that needed to be done, regardless.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Skewed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
That's a pretty bad idea. I can of course only speak for my own country, but we don't allow stuff like this, because we do not want to give the impression that the soldier somehow represents our military when he's making his statements. And naturally, when he IS representing the military, he's wearing his uniform. This guy if he's a soldier should've known better, and if he didn't...well, let's just say that in my experience, the military is quite unforgiving when it comes to stupidity.

That said, it's a fair question to take into consideration, whether or not this would've happened had he been speaking pro some other candidate. My gut feeling says no. My rational mind says yes.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by freakjive
 


Yes it would...

Military members are subject to the UCMJ, which places restrictions on certain areas, including political speech and freedom of speech. This is nothing new nor is it a surprise to military members. They are made aware of these restrictions before taking the oath.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
so i was aware of them not supposed to be making political statements but is there any law or provision that would prevent an ACTIVE military member from running for president? example like a general or admiral or hell a really smart Sargent? or would they just have to campaign and what not out of uniform or would them being active in the military make them ineligible some how and make them resign etc?

more directly on topic it does seem like a mistake he made by wearing the uniform but his message still remains the same sucks hes probably gonna get in a bunch of trouble for this but who knows



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by vogon42
As a Cpl, this individual is a Jr NCO......so this is an NCO setting a bad example to his troops. I say lets bust this E-4 back down to E-2, or simply dischage him. (other than honorable)


Fair enough - rules are rules. I understand that he broke the rules. My question and my interest in discussing is if this would have happened had he been supportive of the "establishment candidates"?


He has no business leading troops if his POLITICAL views can get in the way of his job to serve and defend.


I get the point above about leadership and being a good example, but please explain...

How does showing support for a candidate get in his way of serving and defending? I'm failing to see that one.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 


The only mistake, as you point out, is the uniform. Aside from that I think he has some valid points. As far as running for political office so long as it doesnt interfere with the person obligations they made to the military they should be ok - Which is to say they would need to be out of the military before running.

If you are a contract employee, which military is, you agree to certain items / restrictions - The republic above all else.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by freakjive

Fair enough - rules are rules. I understand that he broke the rules. My question and my interest in discussing is if this would have happened had he been supportive of the "establishment candidates"?


Yes, it would have. You are not allowed to make political statements (for or against) while in uniform.
Does not matter if you are talking about a presidential candidate, or a local ordnance about girl scout cookie sales......you can not do that in uniform.


I get the point above about leadership and being a good example, but please explain...

How does showing support for a candidate get in his way of serving and defending? I'm failing to see that one.


Because your commander-in-chief is your commander-in-chief, regardless of who the person actually is. If he gives an order, you follow it. It does not matter if you disagree with him over abortion / imigration / taxes......do your job, and do NOT project a negative attitude to those who you command.
edit on 5-1-2012 by vogon42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by vogon42


Because your commander-in-chief is your commander-in-chief, regardless of who the person actually is. If he gives an order, you follow it. It does not matter if you disagree with him over abortion / imigration / taxes......do your job, and do NOT project a negative attitude to those who you command.
edit on 5-1-2012 by vogon42 because: (no reason given)


Even if the order is unconstitutional?
Like, disarming citizens. There are other examples but I will leave it at that.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by vogon42
Because your commander-in-chief is your commander-in-chief, regardless of who the person actually is. If he gives an order, you follow it. It does not matter if you disagree with him over abortion / imigration / taxes......do your job, and do NOT project a negative attitude to those who you command.
edit on 5-1-2012 by vogon42 because: (no reason given)


He's not failing to serve or to defend. That's the point I was making above. (he broke the rule - we agree there)

However...

The man DID NOT speak out against his Commander-in-Chief, he simply spoke his support of Ron Paul.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Did he break UCMJ? Yes. Does the media want to see him punished? Obviously, they do. Lots of civilians are mad over this for whatever reason.

Will he be punished? I'm betting he won't be. It is not that big of a deal - What if his Commander is a supporter of Ron Paul, and his commander's commander is as well? This matter will be between that soldier and his chain of command. There's nothing the media can do about it, either, other than making a phone call to his unit and cry foul.

If you can't look past his fatigues to the individual wearing them, that's too bad.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skewed

Even if the order is unconstitutional?
Like, disarming citizens. There are other examples but I will leave it at that.



No, unlawful orders are a COMPLETELY different topic.
(although on the same logic.....1) you know not to make political statements in uniform 2) you know not to follow unlawful orders)

Have I refused orders? YES (under certain circumstances)

Feel free to read here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

but I request (not demand)....request you refrain from posting, unless you have military experience.

As far as disarming citizens.....PLEASE read my post here....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I believe you will find our views are a bit more similar.
edit on 5-1-2012 by vogon42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82
Will he be punished? I'm betting he won't be. It is not that big of a deal - What if his Commander is a supporter of Ron Paul, and his commander's commander is as well? This matter will be between that soldier and his chain of command. There's nothing the media can do about it, either, other than making a phone call to his unit and cry foul.

If you can't look past his fatigues to the individual wearing them, that's too bad.


Nice. Thank you for stating that. I'm not a veteran nor active enlisted and I forget at times that this is how it works. (chain of command)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Having read the article and looked at what all is posted the following can be stated:

The rules are there for a reason, and one that is suppose to protect both sides of the issue. In this case Cpl did break the rules, as he is not allowed to speak at any function or demonstration while in uniform. This rule has been there for a long time and he will be punished for his actions, as he should be.

This rule, that has so many up in arms, is there to not only protect the military, but also the general public, and there is good reason, consider this: A Cpl is speaking in front of a crowd, would it matter if it had been say a Sergeant, or say an officer in full dress uniform, while on active duty? Would it not stand to reason that such would thus be representing, all of the military while doing such?

The rules are clear, while in uniform it is against the UCMJ to speak out in public, as the military does not allow for such, unless it is approved by the persons superiors and represents the entire branch of that military. Had the person shown up in their civilian attire, and he still got in trouble, then there would be cause for alarm and with good reason. By speaking in uniform like that it sets a bad example and a dangerous precedent, where those who would claim martial law, would have the grounds and ammunition to back up their claim, and it would stand up to the reason of the common man.
To show up in uniform and speak, is a reminder of days gone by when the military, not the population determined who would rule, and thus should not be allowed or permitted.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by vogon42
 


I was only seeking clarification on your opinion.

Nothing more.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Just a question to all those who think this is OK.

I grew up in a very small town. Now lets say that a friend of mine is running for mayor.
Is it OK if I.

Go to motorpool, and sign out a hummer....
Go to unit armorer and sign out a belt fed weapon.....

then show up on election day in my home town....hop up on stage, with the belt fed weapon, and tell everyone it would be in their best interest to vote for my friend?

Do you see how that could perhaps be a bit over the line?

There are other countries where the military is allowed to express political views......do we really want that environment here in the US?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Every soldier knows that what he did was wrong. It gives the impression that the military as a whole backs Ron Paul. If he wished to speak as a soldier and for himself he could've done so in civilian clothes. He would've been introduced as Cpl. having served 10 years and that would have been sufficient and would not have broken the UCMJ. I am fairly sure he knows what he did was wrong. It may be possible that he received permission from command to show up in uniform. It would be nice if we had that information. I doubt that his punishment will be. Severe. He made lose stripe but I doubt he will lose any pay grade.

Considering he didn't get to say too much than I do not see where he deserves much punishment.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join