|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Point-Counterpoint An article on the surge from the viewpoint of soldiers on the ground|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
I guess that the term mutiny has never come up. The thing is that the officers given orders are appointed by the President and supported by Congress. When an order is given, there is no option to question that order. It is presumed those who give the orders know best and that presumption is mandated by the President and Congress. In the movie Crimson Tide, Gene Hackman said it best - "we are here to preserve democracy. Not to practice it." That is not just a phrase from a movie but the basis for all good order and discipline. If the order "take no prisoners" is given, then there must be a good reason for it and those of us taking those orders are not necessarily privy to the whys. That is the bottom line. |
|||
|
Experienced Member |
Just as you missed on the no federalization since WWII, you missed on this one too. The National Guard was there. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
Sorry for not considering that. You are correct. I can't speak to Army and NG makeup, only Navy and Marine Corps. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Try going back to your Senior NCO courses and you find just how wrong you are. Questioning an order is not the same as disobeying an order. There is such a thing an an illegal order and "Take no Prisioners" is one of them. How well did "I was just following orders" work at Neurenberg? Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
I stand corrected. |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
Well, the brig is full of folks who questioned orders. That is called insubordination. And through the Petty Officer Indoc we were all told that the Officers and Chiefs over us have Congressional backing.
As for Nuremburg I have to say this, you are going back to a time before we were in the service and this is as you brought up earlier in this thread, not applicable today. Realistically, there have been, to my knowledge, no orders to "take no prisoners". It is just silly, since we rely on HUMINT to glean information regarding clear threat to our personnel. It is as silly as saying that someone hollering fire in a crowded theater is protected by the First Amendment. Common sense, of which we trust our soldiers and the like to have, precludes such activity. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
As an example, I questioned an order and then ultimatly went over the officers head to get it stopped. I was ordered to run secure computer lines into a non secure tent that was not staffed 24 hours. This is a violation of Army Regulations and information security. Had I just blindly followed the order without question I would have been just as wrong as the officer. We both could have ended up in jail.
Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I would put a similar situation to you in a triage situation. You have two Marines who are wounded, one a shoulder wound, one a sucking chest wound. The Commander of the Marine with the shoulder wound orders you to work on him first but you know if you do not take care of the more serious would first he may well die. What do you do?
Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
That is the reason for NJP (Article 15) proceedings. Chances are, you would have only had an NJP to go to and that officer would have had to explain why he gave that order. In that case, his testimony would have mitigated the issue. However, he technically could have taken you to NJP for insubordination. You were in a "no win" situation in that case. But I did not say that it is right to follow those orders every time, but that the Congress places more trust in the ones giving them than those taking them.
|
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
As for the wounded scenario, there is a thing called "positional authority". The Corpsman of a Marine Unit has a tremendous amount of authority. HMs are the MOs for the Marine units. The Medical Officer on a ship may be a LT but he answers to the Captain only. The same goes for the HM. So, in a real sense, the HM is the superior.
|
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
By you having the clearance and responsibility for the security of the system, you had the superior authority with regard to that issue. In my experience, we had TASOs, or Terminal Area Security Officers. I was the one for my division because I ran Sick Call and knew the system better than most. I was charged with all security issues with regard to the computer system, protecting patient info, etc. No officer had authority over me except the XO or CO. If I saw a breach, I was to bring that to the proper authority in the chain.
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I agree partially with that, except I was not insubordinate. I explained why it was against Regs (also an order). I had the time tobe able to go over his head in this instance. He could have tried NJP but I would not have signed it. NJP is "vountary" and you do not need to accept it. At that point they can let it go or can push it to Court Marshal. I guarantee he would not have won that as it was an illegal order that violated Army regs. I understand positional authority, in a way that is not much different than my senario, you would go over his head to the MO. But for the example, your LT is not there. It is just you the two wounded Marines and the CO of one of them. would you let the one Marine die to follow orders when you know both will live if you treat the chest wound first? To take a stand like that is very difficult when their is not the time to go over his head. In a situationlike that you have to be damn sure you are right and the officer has given an illegal order, because you will end up charged unless the officer realizes he is wrong. If you are not 100% right you will be punished and during war that is up to and including death, although I do not think that has been used in a while Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
The problem was he was the ISO. Some time later he discussed the issue with me and knew it was wrong, but the DBC (full bird) had ordered him to do it. He was actually glad I had gotten it stopped. He was an LTC and wanted to make COL and did not want a less than top block OER. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
But the medical person on site has authority beyond the CO. Chances are the CO is not the person there, but just a Platoon Commander or Platoon leader. In that case, there is no need to go over his head. It is automatically the authority of the Corpsman. That is the way it is set up in the Navy Department. I don't know about the Army, though.
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
So you will just keep dodgeing
Make up your own situation then You have no situational authority and you are given an order you know is illegal. Do you follow it? Yes or no? Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
You basically had the authority to override his order. As you said, had he pushed for NJP or Summary Court, he would have looked very foolish and incompetent for not knowing what he was doing was wrong.
And I didn't say you were insubordinate. But that would have been his position, a position which you would have beat him on. |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
I do what the Manual of the Medical Department dictates and that is a higher authority than he. I would follow it to the letter. Not to mention my oath as a Hospital Corpsman. I would perform my duty, that is a no-brainer, I would treat the one more serious. But that is not a realistic scenario as the Marine Officers with whom I have been associated know the policy, regs and law.
|
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
Look, it is well established that policies within the Army are significantly different from those of the Navy. We look at the same picture, just from different perspectives. The law is clear. We cannot break the law. What we can do is offer mitigation and receive a suspended sentence.
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
This was the point i was trying to make, because the order is illegal you have the authority to over ride it, but as I said you better be absolutly sure youare right. This was the point about questioning a questionable order. If you just refused, the insubordination charges might stick, which goes back to the "Sir do you mean let them go?" question. A simple refusal would not have worked. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I agree that it may not be realistic but as I said it was an example. You would still be refusing the order but would be inthe right to do so, as opposed to blindly following any order given. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
You also have to weigh the potential threat to your person and unit. Is it prudent to waste time questioning the order when a threat could mean obliteration of the unit, or do you follow it and presume that he is competent? As I said, it is a no win situation.
|
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
In one sense, yes. But the reality is that he has no authority over me.
Have you been following the case of Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich? I think he did the right thing and he is being demonized by the media. I agree that had he stopped to consider other possibilities, he and his platoon would have received posthumous honors. |
|||
|
|
SUSPENDED NEMESIS |
Well, my friend, I have to hang it up for the night. My buddy and I are going diving tomorrow in the Gulf of Mexico and I need to be ready to go fairly early. If this thread is still going on Sunday when I get back, I will gladly engage you in other mental combat at that time.
 |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Enjoy your trip and be safe; not so safe that you don't have fun but you know. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
|
banned |
An article on the surge from the viewpoint of soldiers on the ground. What the hell happened to the orginal post that I thought I was reading about until Pete and Tom started their BS.
If this original story came from the NY Times then I can see that it is as leftwing as can be. Reminds me of the time when I was in Vietnam when the NY Times and some of the other louse's from the news media wanted some stories about the fall of Quang Tri. These sorry SOBS wouldn't report a damn thing positive about the war, but would report anything negative even if it wasn't true. Things haven't changed a bit since Vietnam to Iraq for the liberal news media or the the sorry azz Demo-rats, has it?????? This message has been edited. Last edited by: MACVTM19, |
|||
|
New Member |
LOL I agree my friend..... I have noticed they never want to report negative things the militant Islamists do either. Just look at their one sided reporting of the situation in Lebanon when the Israelis went in to stop the rocket attacks on their citizens. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Hmm well that was a week ago that it was being discussed, at least this was bumped so you could see it and comment, the other identical thread that came out at the same time dropped to oblivion three weeks ago. Beyond that. the story did not come from the NYT, it was printed there. I do not agree with some of thier conclusions as it goes against what I saw there. Seeing how they are just getting to the end of their tour I was there for abut half thier tour. I also think they are talking about some things they would not see at their level so not all of what they bring up is by observation, but is opinion based on what they heard. Forget the dog, Beware of Owner |
|||
|
Member |
I have to disagree with you on the cohesiveness, at least as concerns Rangers. In 18 months of training together, we will see more training and or combat than any guard unit will see in 10, 20 or even 30 years. When you train one weekend a month and two weeks a year, you can't anticipate each other's movements when you are training 300 plus days a year with unlimited ammunition and a budget where a single battalion has more money then the entirety of all guard units combined. I understand why people might think that you will be more cohesive being from the same home town; however, how much more cohesive can you be than eating, sleeping, drinking together 24/7? It is like saying a local softball team that has been together for 20 years will be able to take on the Yankees. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
|
|||
|
|
New Member |
areyouapatriot,
You are not making a fair comparison when you compare a Ranger unit to an Infantry unit regardless of it being a Regular Army unit or a Guard unit. True Ranger units are basically a light Infantry unit however the standards are higher and Ranger units get far more funding for training and equipment than even an Airborne Infantry unit. To be fair why don't you compare like units like a Regular Army Mechanized Infantry unit or a RA Light Infantry or Airborne Infantry unit to the same in the Guard. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Point-Counterpoint An article on the surge from the viewpoint of soldiers on the ground
