Former CIA Chief Says Military Could Defy Donald Trump's Orders

WSJ ^ | Feb 27, 2016 | Damian Paletta

[TigerLikesRooster]

Former CIA Chief Says Military Could Defy Donald Trump’s Orders

By Damian Paletta

Feb 27, 2016 4:53 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Retired Gen. Michael Hayden, who recently led the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency, said the U.S. military would likely refuse to follow certain orders from Donald Trump if he is elected to the White House in November and follows through on campaign promises.

"I would be incredibly concerned if a President Trump governed in a way that was consistent with the language that Candidate Trump expressed during the campaign," Gen. Hayden said during an interview will Bill Maher on Friday.

Mr. Trump, the frontrunner in the GOP primary, has vowed to use torture techniques against suspected terrorists if he wins the White House, going beyond waterboarding and doing things he described as a "hell of a lot worse."

He has also suggested he would order U.S. forces to kill the family members of terrorists, a charge that some have alleged would be in violation of the Geneva Convention.

[wardaddy]

But!

Hayden I think supports water boarding

[r_barton]

In WWII it was called Total War.

The Nazi’s bombed British cities first, so the British and U.S. Air Forces gave it back to them.

In the present day, the terrorists are killing our families. Paris and San Bernardino are cases in point. Maybe a little carpet bombing of their cities is in order.

[Cobra64]

This piece is a load of BS. Trump never said he believed in torture. He did say water boarding was acceptable. The question as to whether water boarding is torture is up to debate. Does our military “torture” our Navy SEALs?

[TigerLikesRooster]

He is just another desperate Bushbot.

[USCG SimTech]

Mutiny is always an option. So is diving into a volcano.

There is a fine line between an illegal order being refused and an order that SEEMS not quite right.

[ronnie raygun]

Looks like the fairies must go

[Samwell Tarly]

It somewhat reminds one of Air Force Major Harold Hering, who was discharged in 1973 for asking a question about the President's sanity and ordering a nuclear attack.

[drpix]

Hayden's just another Bush lapdog. Like his master, he has been silent while Obama has waged a 7 year war on the US Military and US Constitition - and only now finds his voice when the Bush family GOPe is losing their grip on power.

He is also a very dumb lapdog whose apparent ignorance or disregard of the traditions of the US military is as great as his ignorance or disregard of the US Constitution. The below youtube has him adamantly insisting that the "probable cause" requirement is not in the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution:

LINK

Fourth Amendment:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause....

[flaglady47]

I never liked this guy. I like him even less now. Jerk.

[MayflowerMadam]

The military love Trump. If they were ever going to “defy orders” it would’ve been over the last 7 years. Trump is the only one supporting the military in this campaign. How do people come up with this BS? Desperation is ugly.

[trebb]

They didn’t defy Clinton or Obama - Trump would be a breath of fresh air compared to them....

[Tallguy]

Interesting how the military & Intel types are willing to engage in this kind of open speculation about a hypothetical situation where a Republican candidate or office-holder is concerned. Flip it around — even hint that the military might not follow an Obama order — and the Media has a cow.

[dforest]

Very good point!

[PapaBear3625]

He's actually right, that the military could and should refuse to follow orders which violate the law, if a superior ordered them to specifically murder innocent family members of terrorists, or engage in actual torture.

It's another story, though, if the "rules of engagement" are changed so that the military is free to kill terrorists even if there is a probability of also killing human shields, for example.

[bert]

Damn! isn’t that Jasper in the I give up mode?

[Big Red Badger]

You’re FIRED!!

[wintertime]

The military would not follow a President Trump's orders?

Would these be the same military generals and admirals who know that Obama is using a fake social security number, posted fake birth documents, and never approached congress, the courts, or very publicly resigned their commissions?

Are these the same generals who know there is a usurper in the White House but sent their troops into harms ways under insane rules of engagement?

(Just wondering)

[Big Red Badger]

RapeUgees

[zzwhale]

YEP
ANOTHER NON-COMBATANT, DESK JOCKEY
KNOWS HOW TO FIGHT TERRORISM....
NO PROBLEM VIOLATING RIGHTS IN SECRET AND THEN LYING ABOUT IT....
GIVE HIM ANOTHER MEDAL....
and tally him up as another butt sniffing sack licking light footed non combatant hand wringing sweaty palmed do gooder.....

[CA Conservative]

You're talking about the military/intelligence agencies actively disobeying (presumably legal) orders

No, if you read what he said, we are talking about presumptively ILLEGAL orders - killing civilians and torture. The soldiers would be legally obligated to ignore such orders, and if they followed them, they could not use the defense that they were "just following orders".