Military Oath vs Tyrannical Government

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Voodoo_Child906, Sep 13, 2019.

  1. Voodoo_Child906

    Voodoo_Child906 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,175
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    Oath for Officers:

    "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; 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 on which I am about to enter."

    Our military pledges an oath to the Constitution and not the President or the government. Question is, how does a tyrannical government form with this kind of check placed on it. For instance, If the Executive branch ordered the dissolvement of the Supreme Court and Congress wouldn't Dunford and the other Joint Chiefs refuse the order and place the President under arrest?
     
  2. Fawlty

    Fawlty Moving toward your mother

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    35,398
    Likes Received:
    69,784
    Location:
    War Room Lounge
    In short, when things get that bad, order that would instill and uphold that value has already broken down and oaths don't mean so much. It becomes about choosing sides, interests and loyalties, etc.

    In theory, a president could come out of left field with blatantly dictatorial actions (and we'd smack them down), but in a strong democracy like ours or Canada's, for something like that to have a chance of working, it would require significant erosion of norms and values over quite a period of time, or some kind of crazy natural or economic disaster, or a military invasion.
     
  3. lilelvis

    lilelvis Yellow Card Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    5,337
    Likes Received:
    9,023
    Location:
    Front Row
    Just like everything else, it relies on the individual.
     
    Stoic1 and Lowmanproblems like this.
  4. DanSavage

    DanSavage Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    478
    1. Military personnel are instructed that they are not legally bound by the UCMG to follow an illegal order.
    2. The Constitution establishes three separate, but equal branches of government. The Executive branch has no authority to dissolve any of the Judicial branch.
     
  5. tramendous

    tramendous Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    11,252
    Likes Received:
    12,268
    Location:
    JustBleedistan
    Once you need the army to step in, the shit has hit the fan to the point of no return. You might also get the people 'restoring order' becoming the new tyrants. Anyways, a situation like this is highly highly unlikely and would need a lot of time to fester out of control that badly.
     
    Cubo de Sangre and Kafir-kun like this.
  6. Voodoo_Child906

    Voodoo_Child906 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,175
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    So in this case do you see the 2nd Am. and a peoples militia still being necessary? Or does our Military check make the 2nd Am antiquated?
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  7. Voodoo_Child906

    Voodoo_Child906 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,175
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    So as we stand right now a tyrannical government has almost no chance of taking power because of our checks and balances?
     
  8. Fawlty

    Fawlty Moving toward your mother

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    35,398
    Likes Received:
    69,784
    Location:
    War Room Lounge
    I'm not sure I understand how the limits of military oaths map onto this. It's antiquated for sure, but maybe it's actually a strong enough deterrent threat against tyranny-siding officers? Dunno.
     
    BarryDillon likes this.
  9. Lowmanproblems

    Lowmanproblems Red Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    7,895
    Likes Received:
    15,635
    Location:
    Missouri
    Oaths dont really mean shit. Most of the time it is just part of a ceremony. There is no magic holding people to their oaths.
     
  10. Voodoo_Child906

    Voodoo_Child906 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,175
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    2A supporters say that a regulated militia is a check against a tyrannical government, some believe the military and it's oath provide a better check. It sounds like you believe a well regulated militia is still needed?

    The question makes sense in my head haha, not sure if it does here.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  11. SIRGAY HARITONOB!

    SIRGAY HARITONOB! RED ARMY BELT

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    17,562
    Likes Received:
    44,388
    That's what guns are for
     
  12. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    23,009
    Likes Received:
    29,160
    I know this is not America and there are more checks and balances in place but this is a chilling expose on just how quickly the checks and balances in gov't can be bought and corrupted and or replaces once a new Leader can get a few key people in place.


    Well worth the 50 minutes to watch IMO.
     
  13. dissectingaorticaneurysm

    dissectingaorticaneurysm Night King Top Team

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2019
    Messages:
    5,547
    Likes Received:
    13,694
    Rule #3: Institutions will not save you. It took Putin a year to take over the Russian media and four years to dismantle its electoral system; the judiciary collapsed unnoticed. The capture of institutions in Turkey has been carried out even faster, by a man once celebrated as the democrat to lead Turkey into the EU. Poland has in less than a year undone half of a quarter century’s accomplishments in building a constitutional democracy.

    Of course, the United States has much stronger institutions than Germany did in the 1930s, or Russia does today. Both Clinton and Obama in their speeches stressed the importance and strength of these institutions. The problem, however, is that many of these institutions are enshrined in political culture rather than in law, and all of them—including the ones enshrined in law—depend on the good faith of all actors to fulfill their purpose and uphold the Constitution.

    The national press is likely to be among the first institutional victims of Trumpism. There is no law that requires the presidential administration to hold daily briefings, none that guarantees media access to the White House. Many journalists may soon face a dilemma long familiar to those of us who have worked under autocracies: fall in line or forfeit access. There is no good solution (even if there is a right answer), for journalism is difficult and sometimes impossible without access to information.
     
    7437, Falsedawn and Fawlty like this.
  14. Whippy McGee

    Whippy McGee Meme Master

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Messages:
    8,397
    Likes Received:
    36,745
    Location:
    Huntington Beach, CA
    If a President O'Rourke, Harris, Booker, or the other nutters calling for gun seizure, ordered the U.S. Military to seize the arms of the U.S. populace, we can only hope our members of the military take that oath seriously and do not follow such an order.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
    lilelvis likes this.
  15. Voodoo_Child906

    Voodoo_Child906 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,175
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    That does bring up an interesting possible scenario in 2020. If Trump loses by a narrow margin and he declares that illegals tipped the vote in key swing states he may declare the election null and void and refuse the peaceful transition of power. Whatever way the supreme court rules will enrage the other side and all hell may break loose.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  16. Fawlty

    Fawlty Moving toward your mother

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    35,398
    Likes Received:
    69,784
    Location:
    War Room Lounge
    Not sure, but no I don't think either the military oath or the second amendment are very good checks against tyranny, at least the expected tyranny. Like today, 2A supporters barely even notice how tyrannical this administration is. Most would be on the side of tyranny. No idea why people have so much trouble seeing that their gun-warped concept of "patriotism" is just as likely to back tyranny as it is to fight it (probably more so in America).
     
  17. Falsedawn

    Falsedawn Realest Negus Alive Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    17,145
    Likes Received:
    42,887
    Location:
    Za Warudo
    I'd think that would be rightfully be seen as a coup, validation of Trump as a dictatorial figure, and possibly the spark for another civil war even pre Supreme Court judgment. Think more along the lines of the day the announcement was made. Plausible deniability would be firmly out the window for a statement like that. You can't just publicly proclaim the usurpation of democracy and wave that off as a joke. Not if you're the president, anyway. Anyone defending that would be truly lost.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  18. Fawlty

    Fawlty Moving toward your mother

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    35,398
    Likes Received:
    69,784
    Location:
    War Room Lounge
    We really shouldn't underestimate that possibility. He would have the support of at least what, 20% of people as a low estimate? Maybe as high as 35-40% depending on circumstance.
     
  19. Whippy McGee

    Whippy McGee Meme Master

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Messages:
    8,397
    Likes Received:
    36,745
    Location:
    Huntington Beach, CA
    "We the People" would be defending ourselves from a tyrannical government. One that does things like:
    • Weaponize the IRS against political opponents (Obama)
    • Weaponize the DOJ against political opponents (Obama)
    • Trample on 4th Amendment Rights with massive demasking of U.S. Citizens (Obama)
    • Trample on the 2nd Amendment by seizing arms (Current Democrat Candidates)
    The Founders armed the citizens to stop tyrannical governments, both foreign and domestic. They determined it was a natural born right to be able to defend yourself against tyrannical rule. Leftist are all too willing take that right way and they show incredible high levels of tyranny.
     
  20. xcvbn

    xcvbn Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    14,007
    Likes Received:
    12,156
    Glad to see you're coming around on the decay of society front

    We don't get a cult leader like Trump as president without substantial disintegration
     
    Cubo de Sangre, 7437 and Fawlty like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.