It seems that every time I post an article about our wildly out of control federal government, some individuals--primarily Libertarians and anarchists--demand to know why the United States military deploys to wars and are committed to actions that the writers and their friends disagree with; as though generals decide on their own when to deploy troops and overthrow governments (including our own). While I dont think that they are really as ignorant about the U.S. armed forces as they appear to be (since many often claim to know everything about the U.S. Constitution), I will admit that at least some may be as ignorant as a rock about the laws that govern our military. I hope, for those who may be genuinely confused, that this note will provide some basics for how and why our military does what it does. The Army predates the country itself. It was established June 14, 1775, by the Continental Congress, which was convened in Philadelphia, May 10, 1775. Comprised of Minutemen and a pickup army of New Englanders, the new Continental Army was initially commanded by General George Washington. Following the Revolutionary War, and the ratification of the United States Constitution, the provision and authority for the U.S. military was clearly articulated by law in that document of our nations founding. To answer the question at the beginning of this note one must understand the laws governing its authority and provision. The first term that defines the armed forces is contained in that part of the Constitution that provides for the militarys necessary funding. Article I, Section 7 says, All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. Simply put, that part of Congress most closely identified with the People of the United States--the House of Representatives--get the first word on what the military is to do. If the military is to be a dormant force to be used at a later time, but not trained or maintained, they can make that a limitation of the federal budget. Obviously, if they seek to provide a more robust capability of the military, they will enlarge and specify areas of military expenditure they desire. Article I, Section 8, sub-paragraphs 10 thru 16 further declares that, The Congress shall have Power ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; [and] To exercise Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings ... . Section 10 of Article I concludes Congressional authority in matters of the armed forces such that, No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay. Command authority of the armed forces is contained in one single paragraph of Article II, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution. That paragraph declares, The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into actual Service of the United States ... . So, what does that mean? Very simply, it is an act of absurdity akin to blaming the existence of guns for crimes committed with guns to complain about members of the armed forces following orders and deploying to combat in cases where someone may disagree with said action! Military personnel do not get to decide where the military will deploy, or the wars that we must fight. While service members are never absolved of personal crimes on the battlefield [one can never claim a defense for following an illegal order if they knew that the order was illegal at its core]. While we are obligated to serve, we are equally obligated to fully comply with our commanders orders. Since the president of the United States is constitutionally vested with command authority, and that authority has not been constitutionally voided by means of impeachment and conviction, the members of the armed services must obey, deploy to combat, and conduct their mission responsibilities to the best of their abilities maintaining integrity with their oath of office. So, who decides when the president, the Commander-In-Chief, no longer has a legal right to command the military--and have his orders obeyed? The Congress of the United States! The only latitude that a service member has rests solely in their own right to allow the terms of their enlistment/obligation to expire; or, as I did when I decided in 1992 that I could not serve the duly elected president who would assume command on January 20, 1993, William Jefferson Clinton. In my case, I determined that I could not serve a commander who had, when I was in Vietnam, done everything he could to bring about our defeat in the field to Communist forces. Knowing that he had, previous to his election, while a graduate student at Oxford University, traveled to the seat of world-wide communist power at the Kremlin in the Soviet Union (winter-spring 69-70) where he met with Communist Party leadership and known KGB oberatives. Further I knew that he had already established a long record of communist associations working in the office of Sen. J. William Fulbright heavily influenced by pro-communist Bernard Fall and Chinese Communist apologist Owen Lattimore. Further, yet, Clinton had worked in England for the Vietnam Moratorium Committee, a U.S. antiwar group which was helping a Communist-dominated coalition called the New Mobe organize Fall protests at Oxford beginning in the Summer of 1969. I was trained to fight communists--not serve them--, so, because of all of that--and more--knowing that I could not salute my Commander-In-Chief I resigned my commission, having long since completed my service obligation. I left the Army.* So, who decides where the U.S. military goes to war? It is the People of the United States through the power of the ballot! If you believe that the American military is fighting in a place where they do not belong, dont blame the military, blame the American People--because it is the American People who elect both the congress and the president! And dont think you can support the troops and oppose the battles they fight. We have a saying in the Army, Dont p*ss down my back and tell me its raining! Finally, why am I critical of the general grade officers who are closest to the president? It is not because they follow bad orders. It is because they elect to--as the White House puts it--choose to suck it up and salute when they know they should say No! It is because I believe that those stars carry a hell of a lot more responsibility than end of month pay--and privilege. I believe that we the People authorize those officers to use those stars for the Peoples business--which includes covering their troops, Marines, and sailors and protecting them from p*ss poor leadership and bad politics! I believe that unlike Admiral Mike Mullen and General Martin Dempsey, the senior most members of the armed forces have an obligation to truly advise the president--and Congress--to really speak truth to power, to maintain integrity with the men and women they lead--and if the president refuses to hear it, to tender their resignation too! We ought to see a high turn-over of general grade officers under a president like Obama! So, the next time some dummy writes that the military should rise up and remove the president, or refuse to deploy to conflict, remember that the Constitution does not give them that latitude--the People, through Congress is responsible to do that! *Note: Although I resigned my commission (did not retire) in 1993, I returned to duty following the enemy attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, as a sergeant at the age of 51. I was subsequently promoted to staff sergeant in 2004. Later still, at 54, while awaiting assignment to the United States Army Drill Sergeant Academy at Fort Benning, Georgia, I was instead reappointed to my earlier grade of captain in infantry branch. I was then ordered to attend the Civil Affairs Officer Qualification Course at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and assigned to duty with Provincial Reconstruction Team-Farah, Afghanistan. I deployed to Afghanistan at age 55. I retired from the Army upon completion of duty. I consider it a great honor to have served my country in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and everywhere in between. One last thing. As Merle Haggard said (with my own modification), When youre running down my (military), man, youre walking on the fighting side of me.
Posted on: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 02:04:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015