Several service members told advocacy groups they felt like pawns in a political game and assignment was unnecessary
California national guards troops and marines deployed to Los Angeles to help restore order after days of protest against the Trump administration have told friends and family members they are deeply unhappy about the assignment and worry their only meaningful role will be as pawns in a political battle they do not want to join.
Three different advocacy organisations representing military families said they had heard from dozens of affected service members who expressed discomfort about being drawn into a domestic policing operation outside their normal field of operations. The groups said they have heard no countervailing opinions.
“The sentiment across the board right now is that deploying military force against our own communities isn’t the kind of national security we signed up for,” said Sarah Streyder of the Secure Families Initiative, which represents the interests of military spouses, children and veterans.
That’s not how military orders work.
Tell me you never served in the military without telling me you never served in the military.
I think we are talking past eachother here. We can talk a lot about what an illegal order is; how there is training to disobey one, but that is talking about how things ought to be not how they actually are. For example, we all have agreed to not speed and taken training on it as well, yet it happens all too often. It is not unreasonable to believe that a soldier will follow an illegal order because they want to or there is enough coercion.
I would argue that the deployment orders for the 2003 Iraq war were illegal, but the people who refused to follow them are the ones who got in trouble.
How do they work?
Is it possible to refuse to follow an order because you believe it is illegal?
Yes.
They can be court martialed either way. Literally an entire movie about it and a phrase that gets used everyday. Cache 22
Sure and once the military court sees the order was illegal you’re not going to be held responsible
There’s a book called Catch 22. Looks like the made a movie of it. The book is the funniest thing I’ve ever read. Made me think about how crazy fighting is. Sort of like a funny Slaughterhouse-Five.
Neither mentioned illegal orders as far as I remember. Was the movie quite different?
Catch 22 isn’t about illegal orders. The contradiction is more about your own sanity/safety.
Basically yeah, you can refuse, but that’s the more absolute form. What you should do if you suspect the legality of an order is to ask it in writing, register that you don’t want to follow, but will comply.
Then afterwards you’ll be less responsible. Depends on what it’s about, you can’t just register a complaint about killing kids and then do it anyway, but like for milder illegal orders.