|
An officer refusing to obey GWB in 2001 would have been full of crap. So is this one. Perhaps in 2001, but as our good FRiend Non-Sequitur has pointed out, the cases of Army soldiers Michael New and Ehren Watada seem to indicate government is rather WEAK in the end on soldiers who disobey orders. Most FReepers would be STAUNCHLY against seeing an American soldier wearing a United Nations beret, like these Italian soldiers below:
 And yet, that's exactly what home-schooled Army medic Michael New of Conroe, Texas, refused to do in 1995. His case is in legal limbo last I heard. I personally support his action — he enlisted to defend the US, not the UN — and I think the VAST MAJORITY of FReepers would concur with this concept! 
Conversely, 1st Lt Ehren Watada of Honolulu refused to follow Bush's orders in 2006 because he felt the war in Iraq was illegal and that, under the doctrine of command responsibility, would make Watada a “party to war crimes.” I do NOT support his beliefs on this issue. But that does not matter anyway ... as Obama told Eric Holder's Justice Department to ask the 9th Circuit Court to DROP Watada’s case in May 2009.
 Does 1st Lt Watada’s case — and Obama's subsequent dismissal of his case — potentially set precedence that could have bearing on Lt Col Lakin’s case? Yes, I think it may.It seems from the Watada case dismissal that Obama is QUITE OKAY with Army officers who disobey orders to which they have OBJECTIONS, regardless of which President has issued those orders.
 |