Liberal Forum

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm

You're an idiot, you post crap that you have absolutely no idea what it means.

I  know what it means-- you however have no idea of military law.
 

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm

You're an idiot, you post crap that you have absolutely no idea what it means.

-------------------------------------------

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.
• Examples include orders to target civilians, commit torture, or falsify documents.
• The military oath is to the Constitution, not to any individual, so service members are required to follow orders that align with the Constitution and law.
• Following an unlawful order does not excuse the individual from responsibility; the "Nuremberg defense" is not valid in this context. 

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 8:46 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:46 pm

I  know what it means-- you however have no idea of military law.

Post the illegal order.....or shut your ignorant mouth.

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:42 pm

You're an idiot, you post crap that you have absolutely no idea what it means.

you are one of the millions of uneducated that trump loves so much--------------
--------------------------------------------------One of the lawmakers, Sen. Elissa Slotkin, told The New York Times that she had heard from troops currently serving that they were worried about their own liability in actions such as the ones in the Caribbean.This is not the first time Trump has put members of the military in situations whose legality has been questioned. But a large percentage of service members understand their duty to follow the law in such a difficult moment.We are scholars of international relations and international law. We conducted survey research at the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Human Security Lab and discovered that many service members do understand the distinction between legal and illegal orders, the duty to disobey certain orders, and when they should do so. The ethical dilemma

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 8:54 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:54 pm

you are one of the millions of uneducated that trump loves so much--------------
--------------------------------------------------One of the lawmakers, Sen. Elissa Slotkin, told The New York Times that she had heard from troops currently serving that they were worried about their own liability in actions such as the ones in the Caribbean.This is not the first time Trump has put members of the military in situations whose legality has been questioned. But a large percentage of service members understand their duty to follow the law in such a difficult moment.We are scholars of international relations and international law. We conducted survey research at the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Human Security Lab and discovered that many service members do understand the distinction between legal and illegal orders, the duty to disobey certain orders, and when they should do so. The ethical dilemma

Post the illegal order or shut your mouth.

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:56 pm

Post the illegal order or shut your mouth.

Just as I thought.

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:56 pm

Post the illegal order or shut your mouth.

Can any of you other **** come to Granny's aid?

BV, rKelly, Roshambo, JohnnyBoo, LowIQTrash.....you going to let her twist in the wind?


 

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 9:11 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 9:11 pm

Can any of you other **** come to Granny's aid?

BV, rKelly, Roshambo, JohnnyBoo, LowIQTrash.....you going to let her twist in the wind?

Post the illegal order.....you can save the six libturds from the treason sentence....anyone?    

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 9:15 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 9:15 pm

Post the illegal order.....you can save the six libturds from the treason sentence....anyone?  

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.
• Examples include orders to target civilians, commit torture, or falsify documents.

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 10:22 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 10:22 pm

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.
• Examples include orders to target civilians, commit torture, or falsify documents.

Uh....no.

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 9:15 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 9:15 pm

Post the illegal order.....you can save the six libturds from the treason sentence....anyone?  

lol trump KNOWS the strikes are illegal/ he admits it


         

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 10:28 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 10:28 pm

Uh....no.

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.

--------------------------------------------

show where in military law a member has to obey an illegal order.

go.

Mrkelly » 27 Nov 2025, 7:25 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 7:25 pm

Posting the same pic over and over DOES NOT explain how in one post you ask for a link to the numbers and then after you get that link you then rant you don't care what the did in 2024 and then imply you didn't ask for them.

Why are you running from words, AGAIN!

RebelGator » 27 Nov 2025, 8:52 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:52 pm

Post the illegal order.....or shut your ignorant mouth.

Kill yourself    
 

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 8:33 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 8:33 pm

wrong------  based on military facts-----

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) says that service members must “obey any lawful general order or regulation.” There is a strong presumption that orders are lawful under military law, according to the NIMJ. But service members are allowed to disobey unlawful orders—and they could even be prosecuted for carrying out patently unlawful orders, such as war crimes.

see....just like I told ya....you're an idiot

you didn't need to go to the doctor to find that out....just ask around

like I said...I can point things out for you but I can NOT help you understand those things​...that's up to you​​​​​​

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 10:43 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 10:43 pm

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.

--------------------------------------------

show where in military law a member has to obey an illegal order.

go.

if I’m in battle and I shoot an enemy combatant and kill him is that breaking the law?

jerrab » 27 Nov 2025, 10:43 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Nov 2025, 10:43 pm

• A service member is legally obligated to refuse orders that are "manifestly illegal," or orders that are clearly and obviously against the law.

--------------------------------------------

show where in military law a member has to obey an illegal order.

go.

so....you can not post an illegal order of any kind

you've just reduced your argument to "Barking Dog" status

you arguing nothing....just apologizing for insurrectionists and seditionists 

nefarious101 » 28 Nov 2025, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

28 Nov 2025, 10:48 am

so....you can not post an illegal order of any kind

you've just reduced your argument to "Barking Dog" status

you arguing nothing....just apologizing for insurrectionists and seditionists

Is barking dog like gaslighting?

BuckNaked » 28 Nov 2025, 12:40 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Nov 2025, 12:40 pm

Is barking dog like gaslighting?

worse....it's forced gaslighting...a refusal to shut up even tho they know they are wrong 

 

Dems sure didn't want soldiers to ignore orders to get the vax.