Your statements regarding resigning rather than countermanding an illegal order reminds me of those who say “I don’t believe in abortion because it’s murder, but I don’t believe I should impose my will on anyone else”. You would not carry out the illegal order, but you would abet it by standing idly by, after you resign.
Illogical.
As I have repeatedly said - and let me stress this once again - this situation arises ONLY when illegal orders are given.
I’m sorry you and I disagree so strongly that you feel compelled to be insulting and demeaning. Feel free to continue, although I will likely not respond hereafter. It is obvious we cannot have a discussion without your oozing arrogance and condescension, so I’ll not waste my time.
Illogical? If I felt strongly enough to disobey an order from those above me in the chain of command, I would have to either resign or suffer the consequences. My resignation would be made publicly just like Richardson did. Remember that this is a subjective judgment on my part. Others in the chain of command may not agree with me. And there is also the distinct possibility that by not carrying out the order could have damaging consequences to the unit or the nation.
“I don’t believe in abortion because it’s murder, but I don’t believe I should impose my will on anyone else”.
The operative phrase here is "impose my will." Words have meanings. Abortion is legal in this country. How do I deal with the current situation? I can either work through the legislative system to try to change the laws or I can use vigilante justice by blowing up abortion clinics and carrying out some "citizen justice" by "eliminating" the doctors [read murderers] who perform these abortions. After all, by just standing by and allowing these murders to take place, you are abetting the abortionists and could be considered an accomplice. Personally, I prefer the former option to the latter. We are still a nation of laws.
As I have repeatedly said - and let me stress this once again - this situation arises ONLY when illegal orders are given.
No, you used immoral as one of the criteria as well. And who determines what is legal and illegal?
I’m sorry you and I disagree so strongly that you feel compelled to be insulting and demeaning. Feel free to continue, although I will likely not respond hereafter. It is obvious we cannot have a discussion without your oozing arrogance and condescension, so I’ll not waste my time.
You initiated the ad hominem attacks. I have no problem having the last word. You are defending the indefensible.