thull
Well-Known Member
Brett, do you think it's possible for a Naval Officer to argue left leaning politics on this forum (in a way that criticizes said policy/war) without breaching his/her responsibilities to their position in uniform?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Blair admits Iraq a "disaster"
- Thread starter pourts
- Start date
Brett, do you think it's possible for a Naval Officer to argue left leaning politics on this forum (in a way that criticizes said policy/war) without breaching his/her responsibilities to their position in uniform?
Those are two distinct questions. You can certainly espouse liberal politics, but open criticism of the CinC, SecDef or their policies is at best bad form, and at worst a UCMJ violation.
Brett
For the sake of remedying ignorance, does that include ex-SecDefs?
thull
Well-Known Member
kind of ironic the very constitution military officers swear to defend with their lives in some ways ceases to protect them upon their oath.
i'm sure that's been voiced and retorted in 1000 different ways, but interesting nonetheless, and not intended as a slight to any party in any way. correct it or fill in with context as you (meaning anyone) see fit...just calling a spade a spade, as I see it.
Yeah? You try criticizing your boss in public and see how long you stay employed. Same principle, just with the potential for harsher penalties. Freedom always carries with it responsibilities.
Brett
Speech is far from the only right sacrificed in uniform...For a brief list...
Trial by jury, right to a speedy trial, all restricted search and seizure laws, Miranda rights, probable cause, habeus corpus, due process, bail...and this is just off the top of my head. We sacrifice so that others may enjoy...it is not a punchline, it is not an exaggeration. It would behoove anyone out there interested or pursuing this line of work to find a copy of the Constitution and really engage it. Read it, think about it...figure out just what it is that you are swearing an oath to do. Too many have no idea...and it shows. Not pointing fingers at anyone in particular...
How is that? All of those rights exist at the discretion of the chain of command. For instance, there are no evidentiary requirements for a Captain's Mast (habeus corpus, search and seizure). There is no guarantee of a court martial at sea. I guess I should say that they are not guaranteed all the time.
The only exception is NJP while at sea, and even that can be appealed. Captains mast still has to abide by all the rules regarding probable cause, searches and some evidentiary rules. Any Legal Officer who knows what he's doing must act as though every NJP case will go to a Court Martial, because if it does and the rules haven't been followed, then the whole thing is screwed and the CO looks like a clown. Lets also keep in mind that the violations that end up at NJP are the most minor and least consequential offenses. Anything serious is going to go to CM where the full protection of applicable rules and procedure will be followed.
I hear people say the exact same thing you did - it's a common misconception. Military members essentially have the exact same rights as civilians. I would refer you to the MCM and JAGMAN for more scintillating details about our military justice system.
Brett
I argue what some on this board would call 'left-leaning positions' all of the time while keeping in mind my responsibilities as a Naval Officer. I would argue they are the right, or correct positions, but that is a hard sell to some of the more rabid rightists here.......
