Why are the military oaths different, regarding the President?

[Xerothermic]

Per Military.com​

The Oath of Enlistment (for enlisted):​

"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 Oath of Office (for officers):​

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

 

[Prose]

Officers have the responsibility and authority to disobey an order if it goes against the constitution even if issued by the president. Enlisted do not. Similar to a check and balance.

 

[Bocephus]

The conflict would seem to be when the defense of the Constitution was from an enemy that was in the person of the president.
Then obviously the “spirit of the oath” would be the deciding factor.

 

[MGYSGT]

All enemies foreign and domestic. You would need a sympathetic jury to claim that, even if it was true.

 

[Xerothermic]

All enemies foreign and domestic. You would need a sympathetic jury to claim that, even if it was true.

That's no lie.

 

[300_whisper]

Officers have the responsibility and authority to disobey an order if it goes against the constitution even if issued by the president. Enlisted do not. Similar to a check and balance.

In theory yes…in practice…absolutely not

 

[Conaso]

Officers have the responsibility and authority to disobey an order if it goes against the constitution even if issued by the president. Enlisted do not. Similar to a check and balance.

WRONG!!!! Where does it say enlisted personnel do not have responsibility to disobey an unlawful order?

Military members failing to obey lawful orders issued by their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) outlines the crime of willful disobedience by a military member a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 covers willful disobedience of a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 conveys what constitutes the crime of disobedience of any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be "willful" under this article).

These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. Not only should an unlawful order not be obeyed, obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders.

What to Know About Obeying an Unlawful Military Order

Military discipline and effectiveness are built on obedience to orders. Here is what you need to know about obeying an unlawful command.

www.thebalancecareers.com

 

[Prose]

WRONG!!!! Where does it say enlisted personnel do not have responsibility to disobey an unlawful order?

Military members failing to obey lawful orders issued by their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) outlines the crime of willful disobedience by a military member a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 covers willful disobedience of a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 conveys what constitutes the crime of disobedience of any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be "willful" under this article).

These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. Not only should an unlawful order not be obeyed, obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders.

What to Know About Obeying an Unlawful Military Order

Military discipline and effectiveness are built on obedience to orders. Here is what you need to know about obeying an unlawful command.

www.thebalancecareers.com

I didn't say enlisted do not have the responsibility to disobey an order, I said they do not have the authority. This is the difference between leader and manager or officer and enlisted. I happen to know the UCMJ, the oaths, and how these things came to be. I don't write from the authority of a google search.

Enlisted have the responsibility not to obey an unlawful order while officers have the authority to act against them. This thin line is what is referred to as mutiny on one side, but lawful authority on the other. There are almost no instances of disobeying an order and not getting charged with sedition, but the oath of office for officers clearly outlines how it is supposed to work if the constitution is disregarded by the government. Officers have an "out" and the enlisted that follow the officer get to ride his coattails, but not on their own authority.

 

[PigButtons]

I didn't say enlisted do not have the responsibility to disobey an order, I said they do not have the authority. This is the difference between leader and manager or officer and enlisted. I happen to know the UCMJ, the oaths, and how these things came to be. I don't write from the authority of a google search.

Enlisted have the responsibility not to obey an unlawful order while officers have the authority to act against them. This thin line is what is referred to as mutiny on one side, but lawful authority on the other. There are almost no instances of disobeying an order and not getting charged with sedition, but the oath of office for officers clearly outlines how it is supposed to work if the constitution is disregarded by the government. Officers have an "out" and the enlisted that follow the officer get to ride his coattails, but not on their own authority.

Thank you for your clear explanation. It's greatly appreciated.

 

[Conaso]

"Officers have the responsibility and authority ... Enlisted do not."

I understood you to mean "enlisted do not" have the "RESPONSIBILITY" to disobey an unlawful order. I guess my mind centered on the word "responsibility." Mea culpa.

Notwithstanding your knowledge of the military ethos and regulations, what obligation does an enlisted have, moral or otherwise, and on what authority, to disobey an illegal order?

 

[davidjoe]

It may have to do with obeying, rather than questioning, a combat deployment order given by reason of an engagement initiated by the POTUS.

 

[300_whisper]

All I know is if you tell your boss you’re not doing something, get ready for the consequences.

I tried flexing my LT might on my commander when she made a stupid decision during a combined arms assault on a position in Afghanistan, and I paid dearly for it. Lol

It sounds good on paper, and it instills trust in the civilian population but in practice it doesn’t really pan out. Unless it’s something as clear cut as “hey kill these innocent civilians” you’re probably going to lose the disobeying an unlawful/unsafe/immoral order argument. Ask all the anti COVID vaccine guys how that went.

 

[divingin]

Officers have the responsibility and authority to disobey an order if it goes against the constitution even if issued by the president. Enlisted do not. Similar to a check and balance.

I never knew that (the enlisted part.) Interesting.

 

[TIMO]

When making that decision to disobey an order, pick and choose the fight you are about to start.
Just my 02
Tim

 

[Intell]

I think it would be cool if the President actually had to defended the constitution like his oath says.
When was the last time a politician was charged with failing to defend the constitution? They all take the oath, then most violate it within hours or days.
As soon as they lay plans for new laws that violate it, there should be a quick arrest and trial.

 

[Delfuego]

This site is for accurate shooting. There are a million places in the internet you can bitch about politics.

 

[Prose]

The type of man that would end his career standing up for the constitution has been driven out of the military via vaccine mandate, queer celebration, and many other social experiments. The type of hard men that enforce our laws and guarantee our rights are no longer celebrated or revered. They are punished, retrained, or separated. "It can't happen here" has already happened.