You said — “The most logical way to avoid lies is to not say anything at all.”
Well, they certainly don’t have to go spouting off before they have all the relevent information, that’s for sure. I suspect a lot of that is done that comes back on them.
At some point they’re going to have to say something, and not indefinitely into the future, before they speak. But, a bit of care on the matter would go a long ways.
We have never had an uprising against the President, well maybe once, but he fought us to unconditional surrender at Appomattox.
The President only has to obey the law. Clinton was not impeached for using our Military improperly.
I watched all the coverage of Lynch and I never saw a Military spokesperson intentionally lie about anything. I actually heard spokespersons say to reporters, "if what your fellow reporters are saying is true, then Pvt. Lynch might be a hero." Or, "we will have to wait for further information before I can answer that question." And the reporters questions are always the stupidest idiotic foolishness that cause anyone that has been in the military to cuss in private company. I saw plenty of Retired officers that voiced opinion as so called experts on behalf of the networks. The lies and drivel among that pack of jackals was astronomical.
As for the Pat Tillman event, I don't think any good is served by publicly disclosing instances of friendly fire or supposed atrocities that our military may have committed in battle. [The same goes for the Border Patrol]
The UCMJ is harsh enough on personnel without Commanders having to make rules of engagement that bring Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines in greater harm to avoid public recriminations.
Gen. Sherman said "War Is Hell" (we know something about that in Georgia)! Asking our military to abide by the whims and wishes of armchair civilians is lunacy.