Those who serve in the military are in a difficult position. The oath taken by enlistees states, “I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
The internal conflict between supporting and defending the Constitution and obeying orders is at the heart of the dilemma of honor and duty. Those who accept that the Presidential chain of command is by nature constitutional, lack a proper understanding of history and professes an even greater ignorance of current affairs.
Ever since Congress abrogated their lawful war power authority to declare war, the military-industrial complex has embarked on a path of global empire. The consequences of such un-American internationalist imperialism have turned the country into a hollow shell of a once great nation. NeoCons and their liberal cousin counterparts champion perpetual interventionism and continuous overseas deployment, and deny this stark reality.
False flag operations used as incessant excuses to expand the permanent war machine, demean and ultimately will destroy the moral purpose of our country. Propaganda and disinformation used to spread the jingoism fever infects the body politic. Those who remember the disgusting treatment, upon the separation from service, of Viet Nam draftees welcome the positive homage of recent military personnel.
However, there is an attitude that challenges all the flag waving and medal awards. Gary D. Barnett presents a viewpoint that is not shared by most military brass. Mr. Barnett writes in Thank You for Your Service? No Thanks!
What service is actually being praised by those conditioned to say these empty words? Why are they thanking and praising nearly every soldier they see?
Is it because hatred of the U.S. is increasing, and new enemies are being created in the Middle East and all around the rest of the world?
Is it because thousands and thousands of innocent people are being killed now in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and many more are being threatened?
Is it because 20,000,000 to 30,000,000 foreigners, mostly innocent civilians, have died just since World War II due to U.S. interference and war?
Is it because indefinite detention without due process, torture, assassination, and rendition are now common and accepted practices?
Is it because suicide rates among American soldiers have increased 80% since the Iraq War began?
Is it because mental problems now send more military personnel to the hospital than any other cause?
Is it because destruction and separation of military families is rampant?
Is it because civil liberties have all but disappeared due to so-called terrorism legislation? (Terror legislation would be more accurate).
Is it because of the creation of the USA PATRIOT Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA, TSA, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS)?
Is it because of the massive buildup of killer drones abroad and at home?
Is it because the huge deficit spending to support multiple aggressive wars is causing economic chaos?
Is it because of the surging number of double amputees of American soldiers?
Is it because of increasing energy costs due to the United States unwarranted presence in the Middle East region?
Is it because the domestic police have now become a brutal militarized force, bent on controlling the entire population?
This perspective fundamentally challenges the underlying foreign policy that structures military expenditures to project superpower force at the expense of actual domestic defense.As long as the National Security Council and the State Department pursues the policeman of the world policy, the military will be asked to implement unnecessary austerity that perpetuates the corrupt “world community” dominated by a financial tyranny. No wonder that the blowback against our real interests is the only sure response that comes from such foreign adventures.
Full Spectrum Dominance is no substitute for true national security.
The war on terror is an excuse to divert attention from the accelerated loss of rights and freedoms. Each step may seem insignificance and subtle, but the direction is always undeniable. Fear from any foreign threat seldom extends to the measures instituted by the domestic authority. Willingness to forget that legitimacy for your government is based upon your consent is epidemic. People are eager to demonstrate their devotion to the State, as they surrender their birthright as if it meant nothing.
The source of the scourge that underpins obeying unlawful orders stems from a false obedience. Criminal civilian commands are not legitimate authority. The unconstitutionality of the National Defense Authorization Act is clear. Brian J. Trautman, a military veteran writes on the NDAA,
This year’s legislation contains highly controversial provisions that empower the Armed Forces to engage in civilian law enforcement and to selectively suspend due process and habeas corpus, as well as other rights guaranteed by the 5th and 6th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, for terror suspects apprehended on U.S. soil. The final version of the bill passed the House on December 14, the Senate the following day (ironically, the 220th birthday of the Bill of Rights). It was signed into law by President Obama on New Year’s Eve. With his signature, for the first time since the Internal Security Act of 1950 and the dark days of the McCarthy era that followed, our government has codified the power of indefinite detention into law.
Nothing new about laws or executive orders that strip constitutional protections, so what can an honest American serving in the military services do in response to their duty? Stewart Rhodes, founder of OathKeepers talks about the NDAA and provides the answer in the video Organizing a Military Stand Down Against NDAA. PFC Bradley Manning comes to mind when an active service personnel reveals the sins and dictates of the foreign policy elites. Kim Zetter reports in Wired,
Manning is charged with 22 violations of military law for allegedly stealing records and transmitting defense information in violation of the Espionage Act, among other charges, which could get him up to life in prison if he’s convicted. In chat logs, Manning said he leaked the cables because he felt that the world needed to be aware of military activities that he believed were potentially illegal.
The Bradley Manning media coverage is an essential blackout of the extent that the foreign policy psychopaths who provide the orders for the military establishment is the cause of the anguish and death that responsible soldiers endure.
The officer corps ultimately bears the heaviest burden for enforcing illegal orders. The basic principle that honorable duty resides in the protection of the nation, should be accepted. However, the practical application falls dramatically short when the military substitute the office of the Presidency as the essence of the nation. Willingness to follow the commands of a dictator directly leads to the Gary D. Barnett assessment.
Where is the line that needs to be drawn that neutralizes the treason that routinely comes out of the corridors of power? The Pentagon is comprised of careerists that all too often are willing to sacrifice the safety of the American public for their own advancement. War games never take into account that the immediate enemies of our country hold office, administer imperial policies and work for the financial oligarchy.
The globalists are more than plutocrats; they are the ultimate and true enemy. The critical duty that military resides in a commitment to a genuine America First foreign policy. The Commander and Chief, no matter who occupies the Oval Office, is a mere selected puppet that is on a short leash.
The military needs to refuse unlawful orders by standing down, and standing up for a constitutional republic.
SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. SARTRE is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact firstname.lastname@example.org