Insubordinate army doctor asks for court martial:

[razark]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

... he is standing up for what he believes in and it concerns Obama.

His time to speak up and resign was January 2008. Waiting until he gets orders to move to a combat zone shows his true motivation. I seriously doubt he received no orders between Jan '08 and when he refused to go to Afghanistan. If he believed those orders were invalid, why didn't he speak up then?

[UnderseaLcpl]

Just because everything has been said doesn't mean I can't up my post count

Also, I'd kick his ass.

[August]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I'm slightly torn on this.This guy is standing up for what he believes in and can't blame him, taking orders from someone like Obama is blah.Then again, he's in the military and his job is to obey lawful orders of those above him, he doesnt need to be hung out to dry because he spoke up.an admin discharge would be fine.

That person is not standing up for what he believes in. Obama didn't start the war in Afghanistan, nor is Obama personally ordering this guy to go.

No, this filthy coward is using the birther controversy to try to weasel out of his commitment and I want to see him sent to Leavenworth at least.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I'm slightly torn on this.This guy is standing up for what he believes in and can't blame him, taking orders from someone like Obama is blah.Then again, he's in the military and his job is to obey lawful orders of those above him, he doesnt need to be hung out to dry because he spoke up.an admin discharge would be fine.

Yes, he does need to be "hung out" because he spoke up. A military officer doesn't get to pick and chose.

888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice president, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, commnwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

You keep letting your personal bias get in the way of your judgement and your grasp of facts.

[Bubblehead1980]

I'm not arguing what he did is right, just saying I don't think he should be hung out to dry.A discharge and send him home would be plenty in my opinion.

A discharge and send him home would be plenty in my opinion.

Rewarding criminal action, what a great idea.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

No he's not. He's either a coward, or he's placed his own personal political opinions ahead of his sworn duty to country, and to his comrades. Turning his back on both for personal reasons. That is NOT deserving of empathy. If Obama was really an issue he should have resigned his commison awhile ago as Platapus stated.

Agree.

I wonder how good is the President's command of Indonesian (language)? Better than my English?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I'm not arguing what he did is right, just saying I don't think he should be hung out to dry.A discharge and send him home would be plenty in my opinion.

Welcome to..."he is being made an example."

[Dowly]

The youtube vid:

[Jimbuna]

[Sailor Steve]

I just watched the first minute or so of the video and had to shut it off. Razark hit it on the head:

Originally Posted by razark

If he really had a problem with Obama than he should have resigned his commission in Jan 2008.

Don't you mean January 2009?

My only disagreement is that he should have resigned in November 2008, the minute the results were in. Then it would have meant something.

The military is not a democrocy. An oath of office is required, and here's what it says:

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

Just in case there is any question, the oath of enlistment is much more specific:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

An officer is allowed - and even expected - to disobey orders when the order is determined by that officer to be illegal. But the officer must be willing to stand up in court and show that his disobedience was for the good of the service, and that the order itself was both illegal and bad. This covers only the order itself, not the person giving it. If an officer has a problem with a superior the time to take it up is when the problem becomes apparent, not a year-and-a-half later when said officer recieves an order he doesn't like.

There is no room for maneuvering here - this man is a criminal and a disgrace to his uniform and needs to be treated as such. At the very least a bad-conduct discharge is in order.

[AVGWarhawk]

There is no room for maneuvering here - this man is a criminal and a disgrace to his uniform and needs to be treated as such. At the very least a bad-conduct discharge is in order.

Nailed it Steve!!!

[razark]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Don't you mean January 2009?

Uhmmm... no more posting after the gin and tonics for me...

No, I don't. I expect that anyone capable of rising to such a rank in the military should have already demonstrated their abilities at predicting the future ten months in advance. Yeah, yeah! That's it!

I think he could have made his point by resigning anytime between the election and the inauguration.

By the way, that quote was not mine.

Originally Posted by Platapus

If he really had a problem with Obama than he should have resigned his commission in Jan 2008.

Platapus was just agreeing with me ahead of time.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by razark

No, I don't. I expect that anyone capable of rising to such a rank in the military should have already demonstrated their abilities at predicting the future ten months in advance. Yeah, yeah! That's it!

If you can't get it the way it was, come up with the way it should have been.

By the way, that quote was not mine.

Platapus was just agreeing with me ahead of time.

On the other hand, if I can't get it the way it was, I'll just come up with a good hangdog look and try for the sympathy card.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The youtube vid:

It is so nice when criminals confess on video. And best of all, no Article 31 concerns