Skip to comments.Military Commanders issuing orders do so on behalf of the President (LTC Lakin)
Posted on 08/07/2010 8:22:35 PM PDT by bushpilot1
Much has been said the orders sending Ltc Lakin to Afganistan were not from President Obama but from his military commander.
All military orders are from the President. In the book titled Military Law and Precedents by Colonel William Winthrop on page and 20 it states the following:
"Military Commanders giving orders represent the Commander-in-Chief, the President."
I’d love to see 5000 troops refuse orders on the same basis as Ltc. Lakin.
In this economy, troops who refuse to obey orders will easily be replaced by troops who won't.
Shall we slowly hand our military over to the Left as we did academia 40+ years ago?
Regarding Lt. Col. (and doctor) Lakin - just last night (I believe) Anderson Cooper had him and his lawyer on and got extremely antagonistic with them. I then decided to look for a couple of clips. Below is a good one - you can then just follow more from there. Also a retired Naval commander Walter Fitzgerald who’s pursuing the same issue (and being vilified for it).
It’s also referred to as the “Chain of Command.”
I thought you might be interested in this thread. Bushpilot has posted some information regarding military orders and the commander-in-chief.
OMG! This has to be one of the more ridiculous comments posted. You honestly believe 5,000 troops would just be swapped out with a bunch of unemployed auto workers or Las Vegas blackjack dealers?? Really?? No ... really??
I know that because a skilled technician with years of experience is best employed filing orders and supervising butt-details, while waiting on his own orders for a new career field.
It's always the same. It's always FUBAR. And we muddle through.
Didn't that happen in WWII?
Nothing, absolutely no screw up since before Hadrian, is new under the sun.
And yet we keep winning. So far.
He is a pro-Obama troll who does not want to check for Obama’s birth certificate.
Feel free to do some research and report back.
Troops like you could be replaced with lefties if they make it out of basic, patriots are harder to replace.
Maybe you'd like to research the matter just a little bit before you dismiss it.
The military pays pretty well and there's a lot of perks. Filling the ranks with more "agreeable" political viewpoints wouldn't be difficult at all.
Sorry, but this was YOUR claim, not mine. If you think it can happen, you need to support it. If it were all that easy, Obama could have drafted a bunch of these people already to help improve the unemployment situation. Your comment remains ridiculous.
Yes, I could be replaced very easily. Fortunately for you, I'm not going anywhere.
patriots are harder to replace.
You think the Left can't muster a formidable fighting force? History speaks differently. Look up the Red Army, the Khmer Rouge, the Viet Kong, The People's Liberation Army and learn differently.
If conservatives are encouraged to quit the ranks, the ranks will be filled one way or the other. I can't believe this is a matter of debate.
It's not quite that easy. There is currently no draft and contrary to birther handwringing, Obama has not yet assumed the position of dictator.
Your comment remains ridiculous.
Really? Academia wasn't transformed into a Left-wing institution overnight. It took about 15-20 years, --a blink of an eye in the calendar of social change. The military could be transformed in the same way, in less than a generation, from a conservative institution to one in which conservatives are very uncomfortable coming to work.
Don't be naive.
ARGHH!!! When is Jim gonna let us edit our posts?
Umm... That would be Viet Cong, Victor Charlie, yada, yada, yada...
No. You think the Left can't replace good conservative service members with liberals? It's already happening.
Let's not make it happen faster.
Nice job moving the goalposts. You claimed these people could be replaced 'easily' (your word, not mine) and then you said it's not that easy. Obviously you can't support that argument, which was ridiculous, so you're trying to engage in a different argument. Typical and ultimately even more laughable.
Easily overnight? No. Easily after a few years? Absolutely. A few years isn't a long time. Think about it. If we start showing the door to conservative now, by 2015 --a mere five years, we could have a thoroughly liberal indoctrinated military. The Left would salivate at such a prospect.
You seem to be in disbelief by my suggestion that encouraging a conservative defection from the ranks would result in a military that is transformed leftward.
Why is this? Do you honestly think this can't happen?
I'm going to bed. I won't be posting any more on this thread tonight but I'd be more than happy to continue this debate after about eight hours.
And with this comment, you disprove your point about the American left's ability to fight. You just can't make up comedy like this. Too rich.
Why do you think they called it a gorilla war? ;-)
>> the Viet Kong,
yeah, yeah - I know you posted a correction...
You haven't answered my question.
I'm saying the military can be transformed, if we let it, from a largely conservative institution into one that is liberal. This transformation, under the right political atmosphere, will take a few quick years but can be accomplished by fostering an environment that encourages conservatives to leave the ranks while retaining and enlisting liberal service members, --much the same as what America allowed to happen to academia back in the 60s-70s.
Do you agree or disagree?
You’d have to double or triple the pay to get liberals to enlist as readily as conservatives.
It’s possible that a mass refusal to obey orders would be political devastation for Obama, because it would elevate the eligibility question. (Could be that’s why you’re pushing back.)
You haven't asked any questions worth answering. First you say 5,000 troops can be replaced easily, then you can it won't be that easy. Then you brag about the ability of the left to fight, but you only support that with foreign examples. Did we forget Vietnam and the left's aversion to all things military?? And you epitomized this aversion by loudly proclaiming you were running off to bed (not setting a good example of steely grit and determination). Again, thanks for the laughs. Do you know what the word caricature means??
Not in this economy. All branches of the military are meeting their enlistment quotas. Reenlistments are at record highs. Advancement opportunities are at record lows because nobody is getting out.
You can look it up yourself.
The military is one of the last few jobs with full health benefits anymore. And paid leave. And the base pay + BAS + BAH, etc. --even for a lowly E5 like myself is pretty good. And you're under contract so your job is guaranteed for a few years anyways.
They don't need everyone to be liberal, --just the officers. Molding the enlisted ranks will be easy.
Good fail, drew. Nothing you posted says that liberals are enlisting as readily as conservatives. I guess if you go on and on about basic stats, it sounds like you’re addressing the point that was made.
The left only has an aversion to things military when it fits in their agenda. As for turning the military - it's already happening. Fastest at the officer level. If you have a bit longer memory than your signup-date suggests, you'll remember that the Clintons were actually running deep research on how big a segment of the US military would be OK with firing on American citizens, and that Waco was an actual trial balloon in which not only American military but foreign (British) was used. Against American citizens and their children, by the left.
It fits their agenda today. The left is upset Obama hasn’t gotten us out of Iraq by now. The left is upset that we escalated the effort in Afhanistan. Obama signs up the left for organizations like ACORN and SEIU. There’s little evidence the military has changed. In case you forgot, IFP Clinton cut a lot of military spending and he continued base closings and realignment. We went through the Bush years hearing how conservative the military is. Obama has had little time to reverse that, and if it’s like other things he tries to do, he’s not succeeding.
If you think the military today is monolithically conservative, keep burying your head in the sand. I can assure you it's not.
The Left wins by slowly transforming institutions. If conservatives want to speed this process up by encouraging a conservative defection from the ranks out of spite towards Obama, rest assured this transformation will happen quicker.
Wow, you’re really good with the monolithic blanket claims, but not so good with substantiating your claim. I didn’t claim the military is ‘monolithically conservative,’ so good strawman there, by the way.
The results of the digging done by the Clinnton admin was that at the time, 20-25% of the military would be straight up with attacking Americans and would follow such orders. That was around 2000, and the numbers should still be around. You should also be aware that the current administration is nothing but a continuation of the Clinton administration, and that this is fairly easily provable.
You also see the officer level sliding leftwards like a set of curling stones. Wtf do you think, exactly, hides in the term "perfumed prince"??
It's easy to think that all the armed factions and terrorist groups of the world are muslim. Actually, armed conflict involving communist groups (mostly maoist) is all over the place. For the US, look up Jericho. Far, far left. Black orientation. Hooked up with islamic groups in the US, but also CIRA and INLA in Ireland, ETA and the Breton liberation army,
As for the left agenda, it hasn't changed at all. It has remained static for a generation. And they're happy with troops - if they can use them.
I'm curious, what branch of the military do you currently serve?
Whether I’m in the military or not doesn’t make you right. You’re establishing a logical fallacy to avoid supporting your claims. Try again, drew, and come up with a real rebuttal if you have one.
You still haven’t provided an independent source for these claims.
If you want to chew on something, we can look at the voting surveys from 2004 and 2008. Republican voting stayed about the same while Democrat voting appears to have increased ... 10 points better for Obama than for Jo.Ke., although Obama was a much, much better candidate. With Republicans holding steady at a solid two-thirds in two elections, there’s not much room for liberal growth in the military. Then you add in the failure of Obama to improve the economy and his sliding approval numbers ... why would we assume there’s going to be any dramatic shift in the future??
Well, this explains why your observations are different from mine.
I didn’t post any observations. Just responded to your poor and ridiculous comments in a manner as was deserved.
Oh please. The communist thing? Perfumed princes? Clinton's little project a decade ago? The curious continuity of the current admin?
Really, I wish you would get the wool out from between your ears, and maybe you'd be able to make some kind of case. Any kind ;). Please elucidate, or at least try to be lucid.
I just provided you a link to survey results of the last two general elections. Playing dumb isn’t a good strategy for you.
Maj. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, commander of U.S. Army Recruiting Command, said the Army took in 170,000 men and women last year, which was about the size of the population of Newport News, Va.
According to Bostick, thus far in fiscal year 2009, which began in October, the regular Army is at about 105 percent of goal, and the Army Reserve is at 112 percent of its goal.
"It's the best start we've had in about six years," Bostick said. "I'm fully confident we'll accomplish the 78,000 mission for the regular Army and 26,500 mission for the Army Reserves."
It's done through attrition all the time.
If you think the military today is monolithically conservative, keep burying your head in the sand. I can assure you it’s not.
I have been in 23 years and I still find that baffaling that everyone thinks that the military is some conservative bastion. I was especially saddened in 2008 when many military folks voted for Obama especially on the officer side. I know that I will be blasted for even mentioning this but the truth does hurt sometimes.
Got news for you, boobs. A pollster survey from 2008 trying to say something about party affiliation or political outlook isn't worth sh*t, in context. What the dems did back in 99-2000 was find out how many soldiers would fire on americans. Period.
You have provided nothing, as expected - except a lot of hot air. Are you, by any chance, Polarik in disguise? Your posting style is oddly similar :)).
Maybe you’re not understanding. I didn’t say that recruiting is down or that recruiting efforts haven’t been growing or aren’t successful. What Drew was suggesting is swapping out 5,000 new troops ON TOP of regular recruiting activities. This would be 5,000 troops leaving in addition to the normal attrition rates. Then he followed by claiming there’s a ideological shift going on (still unsubstantiated) that is supposably going to be filled through enlistment efforts, but without showing proof. We’re supposed to simply accept his anecdotal observation as authoritative.
Wow, since you offer nothing but namecalling and unsubstantiated claims, I’ll assume you can’t refute what I posted, so I accept your concession. Perhaps you should find a wet paper bag to test your wits against, although it’s not a sure thing you’ll win.