Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Amaryllis

(9,523 posts)
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 09:19 PM Jan 2020

Just got back from Senator Wyden's town hall this afternoon, and he said that if Trump ordered

the bombing of cultural sites, he thought the military would refuse. Wow.

He said the Iran issue will be the biggest issue on people's agenda when they go back to DC tomorrow, and there is huge opposition both to what has already happened and even more to bombing cultural sites.

He talked about the issue for quite awhile, and mentioned the War Powers Act and that there will be a lot of action around it in the next few days. He said there has not been nearly enough oversight by Congress (as far as War Powers) for years now and pointed out that he was one of the lone votes against invading Iraq.

We will see what happens; if this is enough to get GOP on board with any kind of accountability or actual action.

48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Just got back from Senator Wyden's town hall this afternoon, and he said that if Trump ordered (Original Post) Amaryllis Jan 2020 OP
In my former military opinion, if Trump ordered the bombing of cultural sites Dan Jan 2020 #1
Just repeating what he said. It sure surprised me. He is on Senate Intel Committee. Amaryllis Jan 2020 #4
Absofrigginlutely shadowmayor Jan 2020 #14
An unfortunate reality, soldiers of the past may have had principles... ck4829 Jan 2020 #5
Actually I disagree with you here Dan Jan 2020 #9
I was thinking that soldierant Jan 2020 #15
Yes, they have an obligation to refuse an illegal order NewJeffCT Jan 2020 #20
Excellent explanation StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #23
Yes, you are correct. Dan Jan 2020 #25
Legal or illegal, it is perfecgtly clear that trumkp's orders pangaia Jan 2020 #31
Lots of things may be "wrong," but that doesn't mean the military should disobey an order StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #33
Yes, you are correct dware Jan 2020 #37
BULLFUCKINGSHIT!!!!!! dware Jan 2020 #36
This is a major problem for our nation. No better than the Nazis huh? triron Jan 2020 #7
Does my memory serve colorado_ufo Jan 2020 #21
Targeting cultural treasures for destruction. . . Collimator Jan 2020 #24
I remember the destruction of the Buddha's along the Silk Road very well colorado_ufo Jan 2020 #28
Even the US avoided Kyoto! pangaia Jan 2020 #32
I agree. It is naive at best to assume they wouldn't do it, and if there were some who refused, still_one Jan 2020 #26
That's my worry, as well. calimary Jan 2020 #48
He's wrong. That was a beautiful dream. NT enough Jan 2020 #2
Ehren Watada. mahina Jan 2020 #19
"...if this is enough to get GOP on board with any kind of accountability or actual action." scarletwoman Jan 2020 #3
Wow! But pukes will continue their allegiance to the traitor dictator. triron Jan 2020 #6
where was the town hall? Grasswire2 Jan 2020 #8
He talked a LOT about election security issues. He worked with Nancy Pelosi on the bill the house Amaryllis Jan 2020 #16
cool Grasswire2 Jan 2020 #17
Thank you for this info, Amaryllis Hekate Jan 2020 #18
Thank you for sharing, Amaryllis. KY_EnviroGuy Jan 2020 #10
tRump i no different than those isis nut jobs that destroy historic sites. nt yaesu Jan 2020 #11
trump bdamomma Jan 2020 #30
He is wrong. Because virtually nobody has ever held accountable for following illegal orders RockRaven Jan 2020 #12
Remember, with the GOP defacto7 Jan 2020 #13
Drumph is relishing the exercise of authority. BSdetect Jan 2020 #22
I'm sure the evangelicals.... getagrip_already Jan 2020 #27
Remember the neutron bomb? Cartoonist Jan 2020 #29
Thanks for this report, BlueMTexpat Jan 2020 #34
Unlawful orders that do not depend on self-survival bucolic_frolic Jan 2020 #35
How and when does the military determine if an order is illegal? StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #38
Uniform Code of Military Justice, Geneva Convention, etc. dware Jan 2020 #39
That doesn't answer my question StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #40
You're right, it didn't. dware Jan 2020 #41
The JAGs aren't normally consulted before a combat order is carried out StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #42
You're right, it is very complicated. dware Jan 2020 #44
I think you're right about that StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #46
I won't hold my breath. KentuckyWoman Jan 2020 #43
If Trump orders the the bombing of cultural sites they will be bombed into rubble. Autumn Jan 2020 #45
If the military was willing to assassinate a foreign leader, why would they hesitate to destroy Nitram Jan 2020 #47

Dan

(3,524 posts)
1. In my former military opinion, if Trump ordered the bombing of cultural sites
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 09:27 PM
Jan 2020

Then I would hope you have pictures because they would be toast.

The only checks/balances against the POTUS exercising his military power is his removal from office. Anything else is a wet dream.

shadowmayor

(1,325 posts)
14. Absofrigginlutely
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 11:51 PM
Jan 2020

Call 'em targets and the bombs and missiles will fall. What they actually land upon matters not. For those who hope it's otherwise, bad news people. That's not how the military rolls.

ck4829

(34,966 posts)
5. An unfortunate reality, soldiers of the past may have had principles...
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 09:33 PM
Jan 2020

But in this age of resurgent nationalism, we're seeing the lowest of the low and the worst of the worst be soldiers for Trump.

If he gave the order to rape, they would rape. If he gave the order to murder children, they would murder children. If he gave the order to pillage from their neighbors, they would pillage from their neighbors. So if he gave the order to bomb cultural sites, they would do so without a second thought.

Dan

(3,524 posts)
9. Actually I disagree with you here
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 10:30 PM
Jan 2020

There are legitimate military orders, and then there are illegal orders.

Most soldiers are not like Donald J. Trump, they will not rape (via for pleasure or as a result of an order) nor follow through on an obvious illegal order. They have not only the right but a legal obligation to refuse an illegal order - and most would. There are very few military leaders like Donald J. Trump that would give such an order to rape someone, that’s not a tough guy but a wimp acting like what he thinks is a tough guy.

But a military mission to destroy a (or many) cultural centers - it would be toast. Not because the military member would necessarily want too, but the reasons behind the destruction would not necessarily be known - as such, it would be considered a valid military target.

Now, one day- we might want to speculate on how Iran might react. Personally, if I were Donald Trump Jr., I would probably be wearing a diaper to catch the shit that will one day come his way from the Middle East. Of course, he might be too stupid to realize that he is a legitimate target based on the actions of his daddy. There were reasons that we didn’t engage in assassinations (without deniability) in the past.

soldierant

(6,647 posts)
15. I was thinking that
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 12:10 AM
Jan 2020

it is almost a sure thing that there are some who would disobey. The questions are how many, and which ones. If enough in high enough positions would disobey, then, yeah, maybe. If not, then not so much.

NewJeffCT

(56,827 posts)
20. Yes, they have an obligation to refuse an illegal order
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 11:35 AM
Jan 2020

but, they're in the war zone and if their commander in chief tells them to bomb certain sites in Iran, they're probably not going to stop to check if the certain sites are legal.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
23. Excellent explanation
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 12:18 PM
Jan 2020

The issue seems to be that the military doesn't always know all of the reasons and details behind the orders they're given, so they can't second-guess an order just because, on its face, it might seem to be contrary to law. But some things, such as rape or genocide, cannot have any rational, strategic or legal basis, are obviously illegal, and therefore, the military would be justified in disobeying such an order.

Is that correct?

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
31. Legal or illegal, it is perfecgtly clear that trumkp's orders
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 04:16 PM
Jan 2020

to intentionally bomb Iranian cultural sites is at the very least wrong and clearly has nothing to do with anything other than his sick mind..!

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
33. Lots of things may be "wrong," but that doesn't mean the military should disobey an order
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 04:20 PM
Jan 2020

And the fact that you or I think it has nothing to do with anything other than his insanity is not enough to justify the military disobeying an order from the civilian commander-in-chief. That's a slippery slope we don't want to go down.


The time to prevent these situations is before we put someone like Trump in this position. Once he's in it, he has inordinate powers, especially with regard to the armed forces. I hope the "I just don't like Hillary so let's throw Trump up against the wall and see if he sticks" crowd now better understands why we shouldn't treat elections so cavalierly.

dware

(12,092 posts)
37. Yes, you are correct
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 09:06 PM
Jan 2020

and the poster that said that if Trump ordered the military rape, murder children, pillage, is full of it, 99.9% of military members would refuse to do so and so would the high brass.

Collimator

(1,639 posts)
24. Targeting cultural treasures for destruction. . .
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:10 PM
Jan 2020

. . . is SOP for the Taliban and other extremists. Remember the destruction of the Buddhas?


Oh, wait--another thought. Destruction of iconic buildings and other cultural monuments is also a standard trope in outer space invaders movies. Is Michael Bay directing this nonsense?

colorado_ufo

(5,715 posts)
28. I remember the destruction of the Buddha's along the Silk Road very well
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:27 PM
Jan 2020

It was heartbreaking. Also, so many of the artifacts and historic sites have been lost in Iraq and Afghanistan. After the top of Saddam Hussein, many treasures were lost to looters.

still_one

(91,937 posts)
26. I agree. It is naive at best to assume they wouldn't do it, and if there were some who refused,
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:24 PM
Jan 2020

they would have no problem finding those who would


calimary

(80,693 posts)
48. That's my worry, as well.
Wed Jan 8, 2020, 10:52 AM
Jan 2020

Unfortunately the title Commander-in-Chief comes with the title President. That’s how this civilian understands it, anyway.

mahina

(17,502 posts)
19. Ehren Watada.
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 06:11 AM
Jan 2020
https://couragetoresist.org/category/lt-ehren-watada/

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/6055734/court-martial-of-lt-ehren-watada-ends-with-a-surprise-conclusion/

Bless him and his family. Aloha ‘oe Bob Watada.

https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/when-can-a-soldier-disobey-an-order/


“The military is a hierarchical organization. Some degree of obedience to the orders of superior officers is required for the organization to function. But those who serve in the U.S. military are not automatons, and they are not asked to surrender all independent moral judgment when they sign their enlistment papers. American servicemembers are defending a nation of laws, not of men. Their obligation to obey the orders of their superiors does not include orders that are palpably illegal”.

scarletwoman

(31,893 posts)
3. "...if this is enough to get GOP on board with any kind of accountability or actual action."
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 09:29 PM
Jan 2020

I won't hold my breath.

The GOP will be all in, count on it.

Amaryllis

(9,523 posts)
16. He talked a LOT about election security issues. He worked with Nancy Pelosi on the bill the house
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:42 AM
Jan 2020

passed and is trying to get it voted on in the senate, but Moscow Mitch....Wyden has been all over this issue for years now, pushing for hand marked paper ballets, audits, and cyber security. Also for years He has been all over ES&S installing remote access software on voting machines and trying to bring accountability there.

Grasswire2

(13,564 posts)
17. cool
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 04:07 AM
Jan 2020

Everyone who cares about election security should be following the work of Jennifer Cohn. She gives a lot of credit to Wyden.

KY_EnviroGuy

(14,483 posts)
10. Thank you for sharing, Amaryllis.
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 10:39 PM
Jan 2020

This week will be interesting to say the least.

Let's all hope cooler heads prevail on both sides and we get this thing away from a fevered pitch.....

bdamomma

(63,650 posts)
30. trump
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 03:19 PM
Jan 2020

doing terrorist things he is no different from ISIS. This whole situation is so wrong. Iran does not want a war with this orange menace they even called him a terrorist who wears a suit. Very true.

RockRaven

(14,782 posts)
12. He is wrong. Because virtually nobody has ever held accountable for following illegal orders
Sun Jan 5, 2020, 11:43 PM
Jan 2020

(or instructions/edicts/directions if civilian) from POTUS in the lifetime of anyone in any government position today. They will follow illegal and immoral orders. And we know this because they have time after time already.

BSdetect

(8,989 posts)
22. Drumph is relishing the exercise of authority.
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 12:12 PM
Jan 2020

He has become addicted to destroying enemies - real or imagined.

He will escalate matters trying to avoid impeachment at any cost.

The Iranians are perhaps only slightly less insane.

He must be removed asap.

getagrip_already

(14,225 posts)
27. I'm sure the evangelicals....
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:24 PM
Jan 2020

Would love to blow up the mosque on the temple mount.

How's that for a cultural target?

Cartoonist

(7,297 posts)
29. Remember the neutron bomb?
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 03:13 PM
Jan 2020

Supposedly it would kill everyone with radiation while leaving buildings intact.

BlueMTexpat

(15,348 posts)
34. Thanks for this report,
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 07:33 PM
Jan 2020

Amaryllis,!

Wyden is one of the "good guys."

He was also in good company with his vote against the IWR.

Both of my Senators from MD - Sarbanes and Mikulski - also opposed it. As did Ted Kennedy.

There some others who also opposed it.

It's too bad that other Dems did not follow their lead.

bucolic_frolic

(42,651 posts)
35. Unlawful orders that do not depend on self-survival
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 08:57 PM
Jan 2020

should be ignored in my opinion. Military engagement is not anarchy. Even Cadet Bone Spurs, the military school genius, should remember that.

dware

(12,092 posts)
39. Uniform Code of Military Justice, Geneva Convention, etc.
Mon Jan 6, 2020, 10:26 PM
Jan 2020

The vast majority of military members would absolutely refuse to follow an illegal order, of course there are bad apples in the military, just like in any other occupation, but for the most part, we have very good people in our Armed Forces.

dware

(12,092 posts)
41. You're right, it didn't.
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 09:41 AM
Jan 2020

I believe it would fall to the JAG to determine if an order was illegal or not and I believe that if there is any doubt, the JAG would be consulted before such order is carried out.

Hope that helps.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
42. The JAGs aren't normally consulted before a combat order is carried out
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 10:08 AM
Jan 2020

Among other things, the JAG is not privy to any more information than the combat officers have.

For example, if the president orders an attack on a compound, there may be good reasons for it based on classified intelligence the president and his advisers have that the officers have no access to or knowledge about. It's possible that that information is what makes the action a valid military operation and not a war crime. But the officers aren't going to delay carrying out the order while they consult their lawyers, who have no way of knowing the rationale or purpose behind the order.

This is what makes all of this very complicated. But we have to be very careful about expecting the military to assess and second-guess the orders of their civilian command. The key is not to demand the military protect us and the world from an irresponsible commander-in-chief - that's not their job - but to make sure we don't install irresponsible people in the position in the first place.

dware

(12,092 posts)
44. You're right, it is very complicated.
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 10:16 AM
Jan 2020

I guess it would fall to the SecDef to determine if the order is illegal or not,

SecDef Esper has indicated as of this morning that bombing Iranian cultural sites and civilians is a war crime and it seems he would refuse to follow an order from the Mango Menace to implement it, and I'm fairly certain the JCS and on scene commanders would follow the SecDef and JCS recommendation not to follow it also.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
46. I think you're right about that
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 10:47 AM
Jan 2020

It seems that the SecDef saw to it that the troops didn't have to decide whether to obey the order since he made clear he wouldn't convey the order in the first place.

KentuckyWoman

(6,666 posts)
43. I won't hold my breath.
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 10:11 AM
Jan 2020

The Syndicate knows Mitch will protect them from any accountability. They are free to murder and rape and pillage at will. No one will stop them.

If anyone thought this horde would have even the smallest respect for the law they were idiots. They ran on the fact they had no respect ... the gloves are off now.

Edit to add it would seem any military leaders willing to stand up have already done so and retired rather than take orders. The only thing left now seem to be the yes men willing to help destroy the world.

Nitram

(22,663 posts)
47. If the military was willing to assassinate a foreign leader, why would they hesitate to destroy
Tue Jan 7, 2020, 06:14 PM
Jan 2020

cultural sites?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Just got back from Senato...