Insubordinate army doctor asks for court martial: - Page 4

Jimbuna · 08-13-10, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Up north in the UK we say "it's a tunnel, not a funnel"

Damn!!....wrong way around, "it's a funnel, not a funnel"

frau kaleun · 08-13-10, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Damn!!....wrong way around, "it's a funnel, not a funnel"

Is this one of those "one hand clapping" thingies?

08-13-10, 04:30 PM

Obama doesn't want a court martial because it would require the introduction of evidence by the accused to defend his position.

I predict an honorable discharge.

Takeda Shingen · 08-13-10, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Is this one of those "one hand clapping" thingies?

Yes! Been dying to pull this one up again:

EDIT: Dang. You said one hand clapping. I like this gif anyway.

frau kaleun · 08-13-10, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Obama doesn't want a court martial because it would require the introduction of evidence by the accused to defend his position.

As has already been noted many times in this thread, his position is indefensible. He's a serving officer in the US military. He can believe what he likes about Obama but he cannot disobey an order that is not, in and of itself, illegal.

August · 08-13-10, 04:49 PM

His orders do not come from the President!

His Commanding Officer and the Department of the Army are the ones who ordered him to Afghanistan, not the President of the United States.

POTUS would never be called to his coming Courts Martial because as he is not the one whose orders were disobeyed.

Is this too complicated a concept for you to understand?

08-13-10, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

His orders do not come from the President!

His Commanding Officer and the Department of the Army are the ones who ordered him to Afghanistan, not the President of the United States.

POTUS would never be called to his coming Courts Martial because as he is not the one whose orders were disobeyed.

Is this too complicated a concept for you to understand?

But his questioning Mr. Obama's right to be president was the basis of his argument . To be prosecuted, even under the uniform code of justice, allows a person to bring and supeana evidense.

frau kaleun · 08-13-10, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

But his questioning Mr. Obama's right to be president was the basis of his argument . To be prosecuted, even under the uniform code of justice, allows a person to bring and supeana evidense.

Who the President is when the order is given is irrelevant. He has an obligation to do his duty. And from what I've read he didn't seem to have a problem doing it under Obama's administration until he got ordered into a combat zone. Convenient, no?

August · 08-13-10, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

But his questioning Mr. Obama's right to be president was the basis of his argument . To be prosecuted, even under the uniform code of justice, allows a person to bring and supeana evidense.

And if that is the sole basis of his argument it will be a short trial. He disobeyed the orders of his immediate Commanding Officer. That is all the Court will need to put this guy in Leavenworth where he belongs.

08-13-10, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Who the President is when the order is given is irrelevant.

Sounds good. But it isn't the law. If the President isn't the president by law, which is the man's contention. Then what?

August · 08-13-10, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Who the President is when the order is given is irrelevant. He has an obligation to do his duty. And from what I've read he didn't seem to have a problem doing it under Obama's administration until he got ordered into a combat zone. Convenient, no?

Darn convenient and very telling too. If Obama ordered him to go to Afghanistan then he also ordered him to do every other order this coward has obeyed since Obama was elected. What's the difference between all those and this one?

The answer is cowardice, pure and simple.

frau kaleun · 08-13-10, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Darn convenient and very telling too. If Obama ordered him to go to Afghanistan then he also ordered him to do every other order this coward has obeyed since Obama was elected. What's the difference between all those and this one?

The answer is cowardice, pure and simple.

It certainly seems to look that way. But I don't even care if it is.

I have no doubt that there were fine men and women serving in the armed forces under Bush who may have had doubts about the whole election fiasco that happened back then... and if one of them had pulled something like this, some of the rightwing blowhards would've been screaming bloody murder over it. Good grief, I can remember when just openly disagreeing with administration policy as a private citizen could get you branded a traitor.

Some things are above politics. I've never served in uniform but even I understand that. You accept a commission, you take the oath, you DO YOUR DUTY. Period. If nothing else you do it for the people serving next to you and if that doesn't count for something then maybe you chose the wrong profession.

This is like... a cop refusing to respond to call for backup because he doesn't like the new police commissioner and thinks there's something shady about how he got the job. It is beyond unacceptable and there is no honor in it.

krashkart · 08-13-10, 05:51 PM

I'll add something my Dad once told me about the military:

"You are government property from the time you sign up to the time you leave"

He went on to say that you follow orders: you go where you are told when you are told to do so; you do what you are told to do, when your are told to do so, etc. Sounded pretty harsh to a kid that preferred to kick around the boonies daydreaming all afternoon.

"What?? They won't let me do what I wanna do?"

"No, son. And they will not ask you to do something. They tell you. And you do it! Now mow the lawn."

Jimbuna · 08-14-10, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Darn convenient and very telling too. If Obama ordered him to go to Afghanistan then he also ordered him to do every other order this coward has obeyed since Obama was elected. What's the difference between all those and this one?

The answer is cowardice, pure and simple.

Time for another one of these:

krashkart · 08-14-10, 08:48 AM

I'm lost.

08-13-10, 04:49 PM	#51
August Wayfaring Stranger Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 23,200 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	His orders do not come from the President! His Commanding Officer and the Department of the Army are the ones who ordered him to Afghanistan, not the President of the United States. POTUS would never be called to his coming Courts Martial because as he is not the one whose orders were disobeyed. Is this too complicated a concept for you to understand? __________________ Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.

08-13-10, 04:30 PM	#48
The Third Man Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Obama doesn't want a court martial because it would require the introduction of evidence by the accused to defend his position. I predict an honorable discharge.

08-13-10, 05:51 PM	#58
krashkart Navy Seal Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,292 Downloads: 100 Uploads: 0	I'll add something my Dad once told me about the military: "You are government property from the time you sign up to the time you leave" He went on to say that you follow orders: you go where you are told when you are told to do so; you do what you are told to do, when your are told to do so, etc. Sounded pretty harsh to a kid that preferred to kick around the boonies daydreaming all afternoon. "What?? They won't let me do what I wanna do?" "No, son. And they will not ask you to do something. They tell you. And you do it! Now mow the lawn."

08-14-10, 08:48 AM	#60
krashkart Navy Seal Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,292 Downloads: 100 Uploads: 0	I'm lost.