SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This post partially motivated in response to fustakrakich journal post: https://soylentnews.org/~fustakrakich/journal/4779
I don't really expect that civilians understand the real issues at stake here. Some will, most won't.
Bottom line, in this issue, is whether the military answers to civilian authority, or it does not. Like it or not, President Trump is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. Soldiers and sailors in the enlisted ranks don't get to pick and choose which officers they will follow. Junior officers don't get to pick and choose their own superior officers. And, flag officers don't get to pick and choose who will be elevated to the office of Commander in Chief. Things just don't work that way.
That was true when Obama was president, when Bush 1 and 2 were president, when Clinton was president, Ford, Reagan, Carter, and the other 40 or so presidents.
Military discipline is not threatened by Trump's decision - it is threatened by the rebellion of flag officers.
Further, streiff explains clearly how this rebellion is based on nothing more, and nothing less, than hypocrisy.
Read on, be enlightened, and enjoy.
To be quite honest, there is a lot of bullsh** being slung about here. First and foremost, Gallagher was tried by a jury and acquitted of all but the most chicknsh** of charges. It was a verdict that expressed revulsion at the tactics of the Navy JAG officers carrying out the prosecution and their minions in the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and a total rejection of the evidence presented against Chief Gallagher. Even the court-martial convening authority thought the punishment meted out went too far and he intervened to prevent Gallagher from being reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. The whole episode, as I’ve posted before, was nothing more or less than an admiral who was torqued because a court-martial panel did not give him the verdict he wanted decided he’d take his pound of flesh.
On the subject of war crimes, the United States has never severely punished war crimes by our own troops, even in egregious cases. William Calley served some three years of a life sentence in house arrest for the My Lai Massacre. His commander, Ernest Medina, was acquitted. (I, myself, made the pilgrimage to V.V. Vick Jewelers at Cross Country Plaza where Calley worked.) The soldiers convicted of kidnapping, raping, and murdering Phan Thi Mao in 1966 served a mere four years of a life sentence before being released. I’ve posted on two cases from Sicily in 1943 were some 72 Italian and German prisoners were executed by two Americans. One was acquitted based on a “following orders” defense, the other was sentenced to life but served less than a year before being restored to duty and eventually receiving an honorable discharge. In short, Clint Lorance served longer for a war crime than any other American ever convicted of one, in fact, he served nearly as a long as all previous convictions combined.
Every senior officer who was interviewed for the CNN and New York Times articles, at a minimum, violated the UCMJ. Their statements were, where not outright contemptuous (Article 88 of the UCMJ), manifestly detrimental to the maintenance of good order and discipline by expressing the opinion they did not trust President Trump’s decisions. This issue with the pardons for Gallagher, Lorance, and Golsteyn is not the first instance of rebellion. We’ve seen this as the military hierarchy fought tooth and nail to continue to allow transgenders into the military despite an order to cease doing so (imagine this, a straight man with braces is barred from enlisting but a person who is unbalanced psychologically and taking several varieties of drugs is cleared). We saw a military judge tie the UCMJ to the rack and torture it in order to allow the duplicitous, if not outright treasonous, Bowe Bergdahl go free in order to take a jab at President Trump. All of this calls into question whether the military command structure would actually obey President Trump when called upon to do something that they viewed against their institutional interests or if they would take action favorable to their perceived prerogatives despite a presidential order to the contrary. This, by the way, is not something unique to the past three years. If you’ll recall, Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki was fired because he tried to do an end run to Congress around Don Rumsfeld to preserve a redundant artillery system that he had championed. So the rot is deep and long standing but only clearly visible today.
citations found in source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-sabotaging-his-military/2019/11/21/6b46199e-0cad-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-undercuts-his-military-leadership--and-dishonors-troops-who-uphold-our-values/2019/11/24/67702788-0d66-11ea-8397-a955cd542d00_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/24/firing-richard-spencer-trump-recklessly-crosses-another-line/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-ill-advised-pardons-will-damage-americans-view-of-the-military/2019/11/21/5c356fda-0c9a-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/27/politics/pentagon-concern-trump-decision-making/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/30/us/politics/trump-seals-eddie-gallagher.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_on_Hill_192
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @04:48PM (12 children)
Civlians? This sounds more like the raving of some 4F soldier-wannabe open-carrying his Bushmaster. The funny thing is, after the Bush and Trump administrations are finished, there will be no valor to be stolen from the US military, only vicarious torture, murder and mayhem.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday December 02 2019, @06:17PM (11 children)
I think you need to look up the word "valor". It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything remotely resembling civility.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @01:09AM (10 children)
OK, we'll go back to honor, honor and courage, which require, at minimum, that you do not kill helpless persons, like children, the wounded, or a Prisoner of War. Gallagher's crime was all three. Coward. Taking pot shots at civilians? The men under his own command turned him in.
Back in the 'Nam, we had other ways of dealing with yahoos like this. As an acquitance's parrot used to say, "Frag the Chief, arrrwwwk! Frag the Chief!"
Took the US Military a generation to overcome the destruction of good order and discipline that Vietnam caused. And now I am not sure that it ever did. And of course we cannot expect any appreciation of a soldier's valor from a Mercenary like TMB.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday December 03 2019, @05:40PM (9 children)
A) Children who are combatants don't get their age respected.
B) He was declared not guilty in court on everything but taking a picture, or am I mistaken? You reckon you're a better judge of the UCMJ and the evidence you never saw than that court martial, I take it?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @11:00PM (8 children)
Wrong, under the International Laws of Armed Conflict, children cannot be combatants, even if they are.
None of the facts of the case were disputed. The only question was whether Gallager's stabbing the child is what caused his death. The man is no soldier, and no American. The Panel of Officers failed in their duty, and there was command interference in the final outcome. All Americans should be ashamed. Especially veterans.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:11PM (2 children)
Bullshit. Anyone trying to kill you is fair game. Period.
There was command interference in the verdict? Citation needed.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @11:05PM (1 child)
Which is why we always give the "subject" of firing squad a last cigarette, and an AK with two full banana clips, taped together.
You really know nothing of the laws of war. Report to your JAG Officer, immediately.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday December 06 2019, @05:55PM
Shit analogy. We don't give enemy combatants weapons or smokes either.
Look, I can tell you the truth but I can't make you hear it if your ears are covered by your asshole.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 05 2019, @01:07AM
WTF is this "Panel of Officers" you refer to? Do you mean the military court? Court martial? FFS, you can't even spell UCMJ, let alone understand it.
Hail to the Nibbler in Chief.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 05 2019, @01:19AM (3 children)
If some kid is shooting at you, and you refuse to defend yourself, then you deserve your Darwin award. You're welcome, enjoy it!
Hail to the Nibbler in Chief.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @08:38PM (2 children)
Back during 'Nam, returning soldiers took offense at being called "baby-killers". Seems now vets are proud of killing children.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday December 06 2019, @12:20AM
Key word in your statement: seems. Maybe it does seem that way to you.
Hail to the Nibbler in Chief.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Friday December 06 2019, @12:33AM
https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/14-year-old-girl-tried-to-rob-woman-who-shot-her-in-the-chest-police [fox32chicago.com]
Hail to the Nibbler in Chief.