Posted on 07/14/2009 3:29:17 PM PDT by MacSuibhne
At this point, I believe Congress is the only organization with the power and authority to address the issue, and they've already punted.
But what if there is a very legitimate reason? How is that ‘idiocy?’
You're saying that soldiers should refuse to fight the on-going war in Afghanistan (and anywhere else we may need to fight) merely because Obama is giving the orders. That's idiotic, as it equates our "national interest" with Obama's birth status.
I am certainly no fan of Obama, and have no illusions about his inadequacies as president. But he is the president, and our national interests -- including the military postiion in Afghanistan -- are independent of the name and pedigree of the person sitting in the Oval Office.
The good Major is using his military position in an attempt to make a political point. That is a horrendous misdeed, on many levels.
Not if Obama is a fraud, they aren’t.
If your ridiculous posts are any indication, your mental faculties never progressed beyond "little fella" status.
Get off your pro-Obama soapbox, stop making moronic arguments for five minutes and understand that if the CIC is illegitimate, no member of the military has any business implementing his military agenda.
It's that simple. There's no nuance.
Damn, progressives are stupid idiots.
Now that's a sneaky and slimely way of mooting the lawsuit, and avoiding providing a $12.50 document, (It's probably free if the court would order the state of Hawaii's Registrar to provide the document).
If this is confirmed, then one has to suspect the "order" to cancel the orders came from on high, very high, and most likely verbally, with nothing written down. Of course the people who actually issued and then revoked the orders would know who directed that they be revoked.
Who's got the popcorn?
Are you suggesting that the members of the military simply refuse to do anything until this little matter gets cleared up?
“That hasn’t been proven.”
+++++++++++
Isn’t that the whole point of what he’s doing?
That's been reported here as well. They likely read it here.
By the way It’s not like Obama is let them fight in Afghanistan either, Obama has place rules of engagement on all the troops over that that have made them all targets for the taliban, and I’m sure this Major knows the rules of engagement he would have to defend himself under.
Like hell they have. I was going to say they didn't punt, they fumbled. But in reality they didn't even show up on the field.
I don’t consider it a “little matter” as to whether Obama is eligible to be CIC.
What ... expecting soldiers to follow their orders is now "pro-Obama" and "progressive?"
stop making moronic arguments for five minutes and understand that if the CIC is illegitimate, no member of the military has any business implementing his military agenda.
What you are suggesting, sir, is that the military should simply give up and go home, wherever they are, and no matter what they happen to be doing.
It's that simple. There's no nuance.
Yeah. "Simple" as in profoundly retarded.
OK, then let me rephrase.
Are you suggesting that the members of the military simply refuse to do anything until this GREAT BIG MAHONKIN' matter gets cleared up?
OR perhaps are you more rational than that, and realize that the military still has a job to do, regardless of Obama's status? And in that case ... shouldn't Mr. Coates be following his oath and his orders?
“and he has every right to do so, because this sort of thing has never happened before.”
+++++++++++++
Exactly. Step back for a second. What if Obama is Kenyan or Canadian and an avowed or even closet Marxist (all distinct possibilities) - then he’s pulled off the largest fraud in history perhaps...it may take many, many brave, courageous steps to undo that.
Others of us are talking about breaking the law when it comes to not paying taxes. How ‘idiotic’ and ‘crazy’ and ‘insane’ is that? I sure hope we or anyone else breaking laws, orders or historical protocols really understand the consequences.
I guess it depends on what you’re fighting for, huh?
Really? And did we except this reasoning at Nuremburg?
Are you really trying to suggest that ordering a soldier to deploy to Afghanistan with his unit is no different from ordering a soldier to commit a Nazi-style war crime?
Are you suggesting that no orders should be followed, because some Nazis used the "just following orders" defense?
Your argument (such as it is) is silly.
“You’re saying that soldiers should refuse to fight the on-going war in Afghanistan (and anywhere else we may need to fight) merely because Obama is giving the orders.”
+++++++++++++++
I’m saying some soldiers may choose to do this...and some of us may choose to break the law and quit paying taxes also...a chorus of thousands or millions until our institutions (as you say Congress and the SCOTUS absolutely) address this simple, basic, fundamental right to know about our leader’s status.
He can't possibly be subject to any UCMJ action until tomorrow, when he is ordered onto active duty. Only if he then "refused to go" would he have committed an infraction under the UCMJ.
No matter what you might think, reservists are civilians for almost all purposes. They can't resign after receiving activation or movement orders, but are still civilians until the effective date of such orders.
Isn’t that the whole point of what he’s doing?
But does that make his actions above consequences?
Well sure ... but "choosing" doesn't make it right; and this particular example is profoundly bad idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.