Liberal Forum

MR-7 » 24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm

Calling for mutiny or coup based upon political ideological differences alone should be prosecuted, especially when leadership being the source.

He clearly broke the law and should have known better. 18 U.S.C. § 2387 — Activities Affecting Armed Forces General: (a)Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States: (1)advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or (2)distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States—

Pentagon threatens to prosecute Senator Mark Kelly by recalling him to Navy service

**** kelly. He is a treasonous piece of ****.

MR-7 » 24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm

Calling for mutiny or coup based upon political ideological differences alone should be prosecuted, especially when leadership being the source.

He clearly broke the law and should have known better. 18 U.S.C. § 2387 — Activities Affecting Armed Forces General: (a)Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States: (1)advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or (2)distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States—

Pentagon threatens to prosecute Senator Mark Kelly by recalling him to Navy service

**** kelly. He is a treasonous piece of ****.

jerrab » 24 Nov 2025, 8:08 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 8:08 pm

yep------------------

A military superior giving an illegal order to kill is a serious matter where the service member has a legal and moral obligation to refuse it, and a superior could be held responsible for the illegal order. Refusing a manifestly illegal order, such as one to commit a crime or a war crime, is not grounds for punishment and can be used as a defense in court. International law and the rules of armed conflict make it clear that a service member cannot be excused from criminal responsibility for following such an order.

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

jerrab » 24 Nov 2025, 8:03 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 8:03 pm

asshole--------

There has been no evidence that the boats and their occupants were planning armed attacks against the United States justifying the use of military force in self-defense,” he said. “The Trump Administration has claimed that the United States is in an ‘armed conflict’ with unspecified drug trafficking groups but the drug traffickers’ actions to traffic drugs do not fit the accepted international definition of an armed conflict.

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

jerrab » 24 Nov 2025, 8:10 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 8:10 pm

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

First, the U.S. is not in an armed conflict; as many commentators have observed, no country or organized group has attacked or used armed force against us. Nor can a plausible claim be made that such an armed attack is imminent. Consequently, most legal experts have concluded that the United States is NOT engaged in an armed conflict and that the strikes are NOT lawful. Once an armed conflict has been deemed lawful, LOAC applies to regulate the conduct and application of our armed forces. All of this is to say that the DOJ spokesman’s suggestion that LOAC is applicable here is wrong. So is his second point suggesting that orders issued consistent with LOAC are legal. It incorrectly presumes that any order given in the LOAC context is per se lawful and hence must be followed, “no ifs, ands, or buts.”Of course, lawful orders must be followed, but simply stenciling “LOAC” on an order does not make it lawful, even if the label had been correct (which this one isn’t). A LOAC-related order may be unlawful, as can an order that arises in the law-enforcement context, which I think is what you are currently actually dealing with

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

jerrab » 24 Nov 2025, 8:03 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 8:03 pm

asshole--------

There has been no evidence that the boats and their occupants were planning armed attacks against the United States justifying the use of military force in self-defense,” he said. “The Trump Administration has claimed that the United States is in an ‘armed conflict’ with unspecified drug trafficking groups but the drug traffickers’ actions to traffic drugs do not fit the accepted international definition of an armed conflict.

Beekeeper » 25 Nov 2025, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 7:17 am

Yer an IDIOT.

These "boats" are FULLY ARMED WITH DEADLY DRUGS THAT ARE KILLING AMERICANS!! GUNS aren't the only thing that kills people you *** PIECE OF ****!!

Huw **** STUPID ARE YOU, anyway??

So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.

BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........

Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.

Beekeeper » 24 Nov 2025, 5:56 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 5:56 pm

Let's CALL **** on your **** POST!!

WAR is about killing people. More of them than ours. PERIOD!!

And when THREATS from another nation on THIS COUNTRY HAPPEN, people have to follow MILITARY ORDERS to eliminate the threat. PERIOD!!

That's what a MILITARY IS FOR, **** MORON!!

Stop. You are looking even MORE STUPID as time goes on.

So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.

BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........

Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.

MR-7 » 25 Nov 2025, 8:09 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 8:09 am

@jerra b  ​​​​@Blackvegetable  and questions mother ****?

MR-7 » 25 Nov 2025, 7:19 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 7:19 am

Jesse Watters Praises Investigation into Democratic Senator: ‘You Have To Make Examples Out of People’Fox News’ Kennedy weighed in, “I think that Senator Kelly might have violated the FAFO [F*ck Around, Find Out] doctrine and he’s gonna find out the hard way that there, unfortunately, are consequences.”
 She added, “You know, these people aren’t civilians. They’ve sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and they know what that means. They know what that means better than we civilians do, but they make a video like this trying to make a plea to people in the armed forces, and what they’re really trying to do is imply that things that you might disagree with are also illegal.”

Looks like Minnie Me could face a military tribunal. Worse thing that could happen, loss of benefits, loss of rank, dishonorable discharge. But hey, he's grifting enough off the American people as a senator to cover any loss and then some. 

MR-7 » 25 Nov 2025, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 7:57 am

@jerra b ....any questions Ignoramus

jerrab » 24 Nov 2025, 4:40 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 4:40 pm

he said illegal thereforth any objection proves the orders were illegal.

nefarious101 » 25 Nov 2025, 9:07 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 9:07 am

the nutsack reply above is proof that people who vote need to be tested for having the intelligence TO vote responsibly

ROG62 » 24 Nov 2025, 6:00 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 6:00 pm

Nope...and not one of those idiots in the video even know of one...
 
Also, their feefees need not apply as there's a military code regarding orders and chain of command...

ROG62 » 25 Nov 2025, 12:23 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:23 am

Trump's not in the military...you lose...

Beekeeper » 25 Nov 2025, 8:53 am » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 8:53 am

Here's the IRONY of all this **** @jerra b  is trying to make issue out of...

HE CAN'T NAME A SINGLE "Illegal order" TRUMP HAS GIVEN!! He can ONLY regurgitate the OPINION HIT PIECES of other LWNJ ASSHOLES who ALSO can't name a single ILLEGAL ORDER GIVEN!!

Neither can the LOSERS who made that **** IDIOT LACED VIDEO!!

Desperation has fully set in for these LEFTIST ASSHOLES!!

• Violation of International Law: Critics argue the actions may violate international law and U.S. laws against murder and assassination because drug cartels do not fit the traditional definition of non-state armed groups. International law permits force in self-defense against an imminent armed attack, a rationale experts say falls short in these cases.
• Civilian Targeting: Under international law, even criminal suspects are considered civilians and cannot be deliberately targeted with lethal force unless they pose an imminent threat. Experts suggest the administration has not provided evidence of such immediate threats, and historical precedent for maritime drug interdiction has focused on non-lethal seizure and arrest.

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:23 pm

====================

• Violation of International Law: Critics argue the actions may violate international law and U.S. laws against murder and assassination because drug cartels do not fit the traditional definition of non-state armed groups. International law permits force in self-defense against an imminent armed attack, a rationale experts say falls short in these cases.
• Civilian Targeting: Under international law, even criminal suspects are considered civilians and cannot be deliberately targeted with lethal force unless they pose an imminent threat. Experts suggest the administration has not provided evidence of such immediate threats, and historical precedent for maritime drug interdiction has focused on non-lethal seizure and arrest.

Huey » 25 Nov 2025, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:28 pm

Yeah, we get all that.  Now where are the illegal orders Trump as issued.