Replies

If, say, a General Wesley Clark ordered a unit you commanded to round up enemy prisoners immediately taken in battle, make them dig a long deep trench and then execute them, would you:
a. Follow the orders to the letter, and then challenge the orders afterwards.
b. Ask for authentication of said orders.
c. other action

I would follow orders. This happened during World War II to German soldiers taken prisoner by Americans, as dramatized in HBO's "Band of Brothers". It was nasty, but it was done.

What if the orders were modified to include enemy civilian population?
You're in command of an tank platoon, say in Washington, D.C. and are ordered to fire upon a very large tent encampment by the Anacostia River you know to be occupied by civilians, men, service veterans; women; and children. What would you do?

I would follow orders. This happened in 1932 when the US Army attacked the unarmed Bonus Army camped in DC. President Hoover authorized Generals Douglas MacArthur and George Patton to take action, and this was the action they took. Granted, it ruined Hoover's reelection bid, but no one attempted to court-martial MacArthur or Patton, despite calls from some to do so. Hoover took full responsibility.

Even today, no one comdemns the actions of MacArthur, Patton, Eisenhower and other officers for the measures taken against ordinary citizens peaceably asking Congress for redress in 1932. Hoover gets blamed, but not those who followed the Commander in Chief's orders.

If, say, a General Wesley Clark ordered a unit you commanded to round up enemy prisoners immediately taken in battle, make them dig a long deep trench and then execute them, would you:

a. Follow the orders to the letter, and then challenge the orders afterwards.
b. Ask for authentication of said orders.
c. other action

I would follow orders. This happened during World War II to German soldiers taken prisoner by Americans, as dramatized in HBO's "Band of Brothers". It was nasty, but it was done.

I would follow orders.

Interesting...that you didn't chose to have the orders authenticated before following them.

I was thinking of a real situation, the massacre of the Polish Officers by the Red Army and the Malmedy Massacre of US prisoners by the Wermacht.

In the instance of the Bonus Army assault, your are mistaken. Hoover specifically ordered no assault to take place. MacArthur exceeded his authority and IIRC ignored direct orders from Hoover transmitted by Eisenhower and proceeded to attacked unarmed former brothers in arms and their families burning them out with the resultant deaths.

The Bonus Army Marchers sought early payment of the bonuses promised them as signed into law by the Congress of the USA. That a minority contingent of Wobblies was among them was used publicize them as a . socialist threat to the nation. Sounds similar to the events at Waco
[A side note; my first post at FR was about the Bonus Army.]

If then:

Obama orders federal troops into Washington, D.C. (1968 DC riot precedent), orders them to disperse The National Tea Party Protest and the ROE include lethal force

Because of foreign deployments reservists are called up to confront the Tea Party. You are among the reserve officer.

Is your answer still:

I will follow orders?

"I, Publius (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)

And I'll shoot all the miserable sons-of-bitches that Obama tells me to.

Note the difference between the officer's oath and the enlisted oath below.

...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."

The officer's oath requires loyalty to the Constitution and all enemies foreign and domestic, not to officers above them.

There was a more recent event in Washington, D.C. In August 1963, 250,000 people marched through town to the area around the Washington monument where Martin Luther King delivered his famous speech.

I wasn't in the crowd but I was nearby at Fort Myer in Arlington National Cemetery serving as a Sp4 with The Old Guard. During the week before the rally, the battalion practiced riot control tactics armed with M1 rifles with fixed bayonets. On the morning of the rally, officers ordered live ammo issued to the NCOs as we loaded into deuce-and-a-half trucks strung with chicken wire where we sat for hours on alert waiting to move out.

During that time, the colonel commanding the Bn went from truck to truck telling the troops to follow orders and “men, you may have to kill some Americans today”.

That was a far different time 46 years ago. Thankfully, the whole episode turned out peacefully, we never moved out, nobody got killed and we went back to business as usual burying lots of dead soldiers. Today there is the possibility of another “Freedom March” on Washington and I'm concerned about how the military will be ordered to react this time when citizens object in mass to the loss of their freedoms. So far these ‘tea party’ demonstrations have been peaceful. But the tone is getting angrier as the economy deteriorates and the politicians take more freedoms from the people in their power grab.

I'm likely to be in the crowd this time and advise any others with me to prepare for the worst. Based on my experience, the military will follow orders as it always has, just like Publius said.