I’ve done my homework. I asked everybody on these threads and everybody on Dwight Sullivan’s site regarding what in the MCM would make it unlawful for brigade commanders to deploy combat troops to Iran. Nobody would do a darn thing. The “experts” would not give me the answer that they said was so stinkin’ obvious to everybody. So I researched it on my own.
Article 92, under a) Lawfulness, ii. That’s where it is. The superior commissioned officer must be authorized to give “such an order” - by law, by regulations, or by the custom of the military.
There is no law, regulation, or military custom that allows a brigade commander to decide to invade Iran. That authority belongs to Congress, who alone has the authority to declare war. IF Congress had declared war on Iran, then the military structure under the leadership of the CINC could conduct combat operations there. The Declaration of War and the general orders of the CINC down the chain of command would be the authorization for brigade commanders to deploy troops to Iran.
But Congress has not declared war on Iran. They have, however, delegated to “the President” alone the authority to “use force” in the war on terrorism. If “the President” would authorize the use of force in Iran, brigade commanders would be authorized to give “such orders” deploying combat forces to Iran.
Congress has never declared war on Afghanistan. The same authorization needed for the use of force in Iran is also needed for the use of force in Afghanistan. Both would be fronts in the “war on terrorism”, and combat operations are LEGALLY totally dependent on the decision of “the President”.
If “the President” is truly IRRELEVANT to the combat orders given by brigade commanders, as Lind asserts, then brigade commanders don’t need to follow the stinkin’ law that gives only “the President” authority to “use force”.
If the POTUS is irrelevant to the lawfulness of orders to deploy combat forces to Afghanistan, then the POTUS is also irrlevant to the lawfulness of orders to deploy combat forces to Iran, or anywhere.
Lind’s claim is revolutionary. It takes the rule of law out of the equation and makes every brigade commander an entity unaccountable to either the command structure or to Congress’ own resolutions.
“There is no law, regulation, or military custom that allows a brigade commander to decide to invade Iran.”
__
That’s right. And any brigade commander who initiated orders to invade Iran would be severely punished for it.
Your point?
I’ve done my homework. I asked everybody on these threads and everybody on Dwight Sullivan’s site regarding what in the MCM would make it unlawful for brigade commanders to deploy combat troops to Iran. Nobody would do a darn thing. The “experts” would not give me the answer that they said was so stinkin’ obvious to everybody. So I researched it on my own.
Article 92, under a) Lawfulness, ii. That’s where it is. The superior commissioned officer must be authorized to give “such an order” - by law, by regulations, or by the custom of the military.
There is no law, regulation, or military custom that allows a brigade commander to decide to invade Iran. That authority belongs to Congress, who alone has the authority to declare war. IF Congress had declared war on Iran, then the military structure under the leadership of the CINC could conduct combat operations there. The Declaration of War and the general orders of the CINC down the chain of command would be the authorization for brigade commanders to deploy troops to Iran.
But Congress has not declared war on Iran. They have, however, delegated to “the President” alone the authority to “use force” in the war on terrorism. If “the President” would authorize the use of force in Iran, brigade commanders would be authorized to give “such orders” deploying combat forces to Iran.
Congress has never declared war on Afghanistan. The same authorization needed for the use of force in Iran is also needed for the use of force in Afghanistan. Both would be fronts in the “war on terrorism”, and combat operations are LEGALLY totally dependent on the decision of “the President”.
If “the President” is truly IRRELEVANT to the combat orders given by brigade commanders, as Lind asserts, then brigade commanders don’t need to follow the stinkin’ law that gives only “the President” authority to “use force”.
If the POTUS is irrelevant to the lawfulness of orders to deploy combat forces to Afghanistan, then the POTUS is also irrlevant to the lawfulness of orders to deploy combat forces to Iran, or anywhere.
Lind’s claim is revolutionary. It takes the rule of law out of the equation and makes every brigade commander an entity unaccountable to either the command structure or to Congress’ own resolutions.
Lieutenant Colonel Lakin isn’t charged with violating “combat orders.” He is charged with violating “get on a plane and fly to Charlotte, North Carolina and then fly to Fort Campbell, Kentucky” orders and with “report to your commanding officer” orders.
B.S.
Operation Enduring Freedom is a combat operation authorized by the U.S. Congress and the U.N.
Commissioned officers in the Army have duties and responsibilities under Title 10, Subsections A and B. It’s Title 10 that makes their orders legal.
Were you born stupid or something?
Ever hear of Article 34 the “Catch All” under the UCMJ? This alone basically tells every service man or woman that the military/federal government can do what they want with you.
When you sign up for service to our nation then you are basically government property. You no longer have the same rights as a civilian. The government can do whatever they want with you, and there is nothing you can do about it.
Article 34 trumps all other articles. Trust me it was emphasized when I was in the military. Now everyone has their own political opinion, but when you are in the service you keep it to yourself. That is the way it was and my guess it still is..