This is the one issue that I’ve had a real difficult time getting a handle on. Yes, the military can jack their hand up and take an oath. A real important oath.
But during my 20 years in uniform, I received ZERO training on the practical application of that oath. That includes formal Professional Military Education and non-formal. No discussions, no case studies: nothing.
I seriously doubt there will be an extreme example on the horizon, but if history is any example, the erosion of freedom happens gradually until it reaches a point of unreversable momentum.
From a practical standpoint (we can talk about problems until we are blue in the face), but how do conservatives push the issue so that it does get into service academies, up to and including the non-commissioned officers? Name the PACs and other orgs that have skin in the game.
If the JAGs are doing their job, there is instruction at every level of PME (now DE, developmental education) about the Law of Armed Conflict, which specifically includes the circumstances under which an order is considered unlawful and must be disobeyed. We don’t just parrot what the mucky-mucks want us to teach, we use the UCMJ, the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention as our guide. There’s a reason JAGs are officially authorized to have “non-conversations” with each other - to discuss the legal ramifications of any particular action, whether of a JAG or of a commander, and to seek and give advice on how to handle a commander who states that he intends to give an unlawful order or pursue an unlawful course of action.
Colonel, USAFR
Anyone who believes that many, if not most, careerists wouldn't quickly subordinate any doubt they had about the constitutionality of an order to take an action that would violate a citizen's rights is mistaken.
That being said, there is discussion taking place about the subject. Young officers with families to feed, house payments and car payments, etc, will probably initially do what they are told to do. But, at some point in time, someone will question an illegal order or find themselves enforcing an order against their own interests -or that of their family. Then, with luck, men and women will begin to resist. They will pretend to follow their orders, but will sabotage the effort to some degree.
That there will be casualties, I have no doubt. Ultimately, it will come down to a critical few exhibiting the kind of leadership that will impell those with conscience and those who are content to go along with the crowd, to side with the people.
Back in the 1970's when the Ayatollah's revolution was going on in Iran, I recall seeing the Shah's soldiers break and begin firing on their fellow soldiers who were, in turn, firing on the crowds of anti government demonstrators. I expect that if (when) it comes down to shooting, the same will happen here.