Replies

Wonder Warthog: "No, because your bait and switch of topics won't fly.
But keep on dancin', you do it so well."

But there's no "bait & switch" because I already told you your fantasy cannot happen, period, and cited the enlistment oath to the constitution.
I then offered up an alternate scenario which might happen.

Wonder Warthog: "My question is 'what do the JAGS tell the troops about this specific situation.' "

The simple answer, which should be obvious to you, is: they don't need to tell the troops anything, if they do their jobs and advise commanders against issuing unconstitutional orders.
Only extreme corruption up & down the chain of command would ever put individual troops in the position of trying to decide if a certain order is, or is not, constitutional.

Wonder Warthog: "Completely different situation.
"IF" the progressive forces succeed in amending the Constitution according to the prodedures laid out in the Constitution itself, then guns are gone."

So have we now established that there are no circumstances under which ordinary military troops should ever be put in the position of trying to decide if certain orders are, or are not, constitutional?

Wonder Warthog: "FWIW, I am researching the subject myself, and your position ain't lookin' so good.
But it will take a few days to dig through all the information I am finding..."

So now, having long & loudly complained that I keep "tap dancing" around an answer (i.e., your posts #226 & 232), you finally claim to know my "position" and you assure me now it "ain't lookin' so good"??

So tell us all, sir, what "position" is that, and why is it not "lookin' so good"?

"The simple answer, which should be obvious to you, is: they don't need to tell the troops anything, if they do their jobs and advise commanders against issuing unconstitutional orders."

So, what are JAGS's trained to answer when commanding officers are ordered by an elected President and Congress to "go get civilian guns"??

"Only extreme corruption up & down the chain of command would ever put individual troops in the position of trying to decide if a certain order is, or is not, constitutional.

Given Obama's obvious success at infesting the command structure with leftists, such corruption certainly appears possible.

"So have we now established that there are no circumstances under which ordinary military troops should ever be put in the position of trying to decide if certain orders are, or are not, constitutional?"

Uh, no. The two situations are completely different. One is a violation and usurpation of the Constitution. The other is the legal fulfillment of the Constitution according to its own internal requirements.

"So tell us all, sir, what "position" is that, and why is it not "lookin' so good"?"

Yeah, it boils down to "what, me worry" (Alfred E. Neuman). Or to use your own thought "I don't wanna think about it", with codicil "and I don't want anyone else to either".