• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Trump Believes Military Will Obey His Illegal Orders

Why would you think there's some line the military wouldn't cross? Is there something in their recent history which suggests they have this kind of line?

The post-WWII trials resulting in both imprisonment and, in some countries, execution of Nazi soldiers that claimed to be "just following orders"... is that not recent enough to "count"?

No. Who is going to be imprisoning or executing American soldiers for war crimes? Your country is pardoning them for them right now and nobody else is going to put US soldiers on trial. I fail to see whom it is that you feel will be enforcing this "no war crimes by American soldiers" rule.

I understand your response. deserved. I'd just like to say one thing in our defense... it is Trump, individually, that is pardoning war criminals, not "America".
If there were no picture of that soldier floating around white supremacist sites as a trophy of some sort, then the pardon never would have happened.
 
No. Who is going to be imprisoning or executing American soldiers for war crimes? Your country is pardoning them for them right now and nobody else is going to put US soldiers on trial. I fail to see whom it is that you feel will be enforcing this "no war crimes by American soldiers" rule.

I understand your response. deserved. I'd just like to say one thing in our defense... it is Trump, individually, that is pardoning war criminals, not "America".
If there were no picture of that soldier floating around white supremacist sites as a trophy of some sort, then the pardon never would have happened.

Well, in terms of the current discussion, Trump IS America. If he gives soldiers illegal orders and those soldiers obey those orders, would there be any kind of negative legal repercussions affecting those soldiers? I can't see any scenario where the answer to that question would be anything other than "Fuck, no".

Even if he's voted out at the end of the year and a new President comes in with a specific mandate to prosecute the people who committed crimes under Trump's watch, do you think that guy is going to spend time going after soldiers instead of political appointees and have his agenda derailed by being accused of being anti-military?

There's no downside to obeying those orders aside from morality and the people in question are US soldiers, so that's not much of a thing.
 
No. Who is going to be imprisoning or executing American soldiers for war crimes? Your country is pardoning them for them right now and nobody else is going to put US soldiers on trial. I fail to see whom it is that you feel will be enforcing this "no war crimes by American soldiers" rule.

I understand your response. deserved. I'd just like to say one thing in our defense... it is Trump, individually, that is pardoning war criminals, not "America".
If there were no picture of that soldier floating around white supremacist sites as a trophy of some sort, then the pardon never would have happened.

Well, in terms of the current discussion, Trump IS America.
no, not in any terms whatsoever.
If he gives soldiers illegal orders and those soldiers obey those orders, would there be any kind of negative legal repercussions affecting those soldiers?
yes. they would be imprisoned (or worse) for war crimes. Being pardoned happens after that... something Trump will not be in a position to do by then.
Even if he's voted out at the end of the year and a new President comes in with a specific mandate to prosecute the people who committed crimes under Trump's watch, do you think that guy is going to spend time going after soldiers instead of political appointees and have his agenda derailed by being accused of being anti-military?
I think such a president is potentially around the corner and the "purging of all things Trump" will be praised as a "restoration of America".
There's no downside to obeying those orders aside from morality and the people in question are US soldiers, so that's not much of a thing.

well, that, and prison, and possibly death row.
 
All things being equal, Trump is quite clearly telling the troops, he has their back if they commit any "illegal" acts when following his orders.

Then we'd have to impeach him again, I suppose.

Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.
 
Why would you think there's some line the military wouldn't cross? Is there something in their recent history which suggests they have this kind of line? These are the guys who were photobombing themselves torturing people at Abu Ghraib.

There might be a small subset of soldiers who would be a bit mopey about it, but these are American soldiers. They'll do what they're told and pass of the moral implications of that to someone else while not particularly caring.
There was a report on the radio that at least a few generals have chimed in saying they would NOT obey an illegal order. In this case, they were specifically talking about cheetolini's threat to take out cultural sites.

It will be interesting to see what happens (at least what we, the public hear about) if something like this does occur. You may have noticed, though, that quite a few high ranking Pentagon officials resigned in the week prior to the assassination. So maybe the 'good ones' are leaving. :/

OK, but having the order carried out 20 minutes later because someone resigns in protest and another guy gets promoted to his position isn't really "stopping" something.
That's my concern as well.
 
All things being equal, Trump is quite clearly telling the troops, he has their back if they commit any "illegal" acts when following his orders.

Then we'd have to impeach him again, I suppose.

Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.
 
Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.

Good luck doing that without machine guns. :innocent1:
 
Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.
If it is a last resort, it really isn't even an option. People that think the 2nd Amendment protects us from tyranny are just deluded.
 
Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.

How would that help you in any way, shape or form?
 
Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.

Good luck doing that without machine guns. :innocent1:

funny. but...Why? do you believe the military or police will be using machine guns against a well armed militia that is defending American Democracy?.. or even use tear gas, for that matter? I don't. I think they would politely step to the side and say, "the man you are looking for is over there".
 
Who is going to impeach, convict and remove him? Nobody currently in power, that's for sure. So we should count on the next election?
If he pronounces the election "invalid" all it takes is for Moscow Mitch to agree and we're fucked with no recourse.

There is always the 2nd Amendment as a last resort to preserve American Democracy.

How would that help you in any way, shape or form?

The knowledge that millions of Americans are armed to the teeth, and gun murder rates show they are not afraid to use them, would give pause to any would be King from so much as getting out from under his bed in the morning.
 
Good luck doing that without machine guns. :innocent1:

funny. but...Why? do you believe the military or police will be using machine guns against a well armed militia that is defending American Democracy?.. or even use tear gas, for that matter? I don't. I think they would politely step to the side and say, "the man you are looking for is over there".
What part of civilians being armed is relevant here, regarding the military choosing whether to fire on American Civilians?
 
How would that help you in any way, shape or form?

The knowledge that millions of Americans are armed to the teeth, and gun murder rates show they are not afraid to use them, would give pause to any would be King from so much as getting out from under his bed in the morning.

Most of those Americans armed to the teeth are totally fine with Trump being God Emperor. And even if they weren't; whilst armalites are great for turning schools into crime scenes, they accomplish fuck all against an armoured battalion. Charlton Heston would have lasted five seconds against a Marine Expeditionary Unit.
 
Back
Top Bottom