No need for a conspiracy theory here. Look at it from the perspective of a commander in a combat theater. Distractions from the mission can have life-and-death implications.
The Army almost certainly figured that a guy who would play politics with his deployment orders wasn't the kind of guy who should be commanding soldiers in Afghanistan.
Well, that certainly covers the Army. On that strictly operational level, you, and the Army are absolutely correct. Which still begs the larger question, "What about the constitutional validity of the order?"
THis has got to be handled, or the command structure is weakened.
Then what would normally happen is the officer or enlisted service member would face the consquences of the UCMJ, perhaps a court martial for failure to obey a lawful order or deriliction of duty. The military never responds to a refusal to deploy by rescinding the orders, then saying "carry on."
Ever been in the military? The rescinding of Maj. Cook's orders is highly unusual. In fact, I'd venture to guess that it's unprecedented - which tells that something else has to be going on.
Also, those who rescinded the order in a case like this, - involving the CoC (sic) himself - didn't simply act on their own accord without being pushed or at least having the most careful consultation at the very highest level. Army brass exists in perpetual CYA mode, so rescinding the orders in a case like this either came from the very top or at least had the appropriate "blessings."
OBAMA is the cause of these distractions.
OBAMA is distracting the military. He could resolve this **immediately** by asking his secretary to make a 1 minute phone call.
Distraction? Put the blame where it belongs! ON OBAMA!
They could have given this field grade officer a direct order to deploy, and had he disobeyed what would have been a lawful order on its face, he should have been subjected to court-martial. The Army would have been entirely within its rights to discipline and make an example of this officer, should others have the same idea.
I believe to a moral certainty that improper command influence was exerted from the very top of the chain of command to protect this lying crypto Marxist usurper bastard of a counterfeit POTUS from the exposure of trial discovery.
They could have given this field grade officer a direct order to deploy, and had he disobeyed what would have been a lawful order on its face, he should have been subjected to court-martial. The Army would have been entirely within its rights to discipline and make an example of this officer, should others have the same idea.
I believe to a moral certainty that improper command influence was exerted from the very top of the chain of command to protect this lying crypto Marxist usurper bastard of a counterfeit POTUS from the exposure of trial discovery.
But this action now opens the door for others in the military to file for relief of duty elsewhere, because they tried to keep the Gennie in the bottle, but the Gennie is now out and CANNOT be put back in the bottle!!!
What makes you think they'd send an IMA to command soliders. IMA's are generally "staff" type specialists. Intelligence eofficers for example. They might be briefers, or administrative types. This guy is an IT specialist in his former civilian job, lots of that needs doing in the conflict zone.
I know of one guy, involuntarily recalled after taking early retirement back towards the end of the Clinton adminstration, not to work in his military specialty, which he was by then almost 10 years out of date, in spite of having been an instructor in his last assignment. But rather called up for his civilian expertise, (in IT as it happens), He was given some sort of waiver on the physical standards, sent to Omar the Tent Maker to have a few sets of ACUs made up, and then sent to man a an air conditioned tent in Iraq.