2016 Postmortem

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)

67. No, that is the LEGAL defintion

Thu Aug 27, 2015, 12:41 PM

Aug 2015

A CO objects to all war under any circumstances.

A CO CANNOT commit troops if in a position to do so.

This is the law in the US. If you are willing to fight a war under any hypothetical situation, you are not a CO.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

141 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Would a President who is a a conscientious objector be able to commit troops to a war? [View all] still_one Aug 2015 OP

Because we all know..... daleanime Aug 2015 #1

War is not good, but if someone literally bombed Chicago yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #4

the question implied nothing of the sort. however, when the U.S. was attacked during still_one Aug 2015 #8

As long as you recognize and admit Trajan Aug 2015 #128

The poll question wasn't in reference to any political party, it was in reference to CO's. MADem Aug 2015 #134

A POTUS takes an Oath in_cog_ni_to Aug 2015 #2

a good point, then the answer from that perspective would be yes still_one Aug 2015 #10

No, they don't any oath like that whatsoever. Read the constitution. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #72

If a foreign power attacks the U.S., wouldn't that be an attack against the Constitution of the U.S. still_one Aug 2015 #82

If a president is willing to take that as the meaing of the oath, then they cannot be a CO. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #85

got it, thanks still_one Aug 2015 #107

I knew that in_cog_ni_to Aug 2015 #108

A CO could certainly be eligible to be president. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #111

Probably but seems to me she/he would devote more thought to the action (s) ? BlueJazz Aug 2015 #3

Progressives bashing THE progressive candidate for objecting to war. HappyPlace Aug 2015 #5

It's all they've got n/t in_cog_ni_to Aug 2015 #9

Is this an unfair question, and why would it be? still_one Aug 2015 #77

I have been erasing those who would use such a specious argument Trajan Aug 2015 #131

Hitler fought bravely in the trenches of WW1 Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #6

And it's 1,2,3,4 HERVEPA Aug 2015 #11

except that wasn't the question, but feel free to start your own subthread still_one Aug 2015 #13

Would a candidate who was in the Air National Guard Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #44

Again not the question. It requires a simple answer, and I would expect, as most have responded still_one Aug 2015 #49

Its a stupid hypothetical Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #51

that's not the way it works here. Warren Stupidity Aug 2015 #137

ain't no time to wonder why....(NSFW) Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #17

Objecting to A war is not the same as objecting to ALL war. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #39

�There has never been a just war, never an honorable one-- Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #45

So if China developed technology where they are capable... MohRokTah Aug 2015 #47

So if Aliens attack us and move their ground troops in Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #48

Objecting to ANY war under ANY circumstance... MohRokTah Aug 2015 #50

How many friends have you buried? Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #53

Did you object to the U.S. involvement in WWII is a better question, after they were attacked? still_one Aug 2015 #54

Did you object to the U.S. involvement in the Spanish American War? Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #55

You are completely missing the legal definition of CO MohRokTah Aug 2015 #89

I'm not missing shit........the supposition is shit Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #112

Durhaime's Law Dictionary MohRokTah Aug 2015 #113

Well, Bernie obviously doesn't subscribe the the "bearing of arms" portion, that's for sure. nt boston bean Aug 2015 #123

Yep, there is no way in hell Bernie Sanders is a CO. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #130

Also, look at the military guidelines MohRokTah Aug 2015 #115

OK now look up the legal definition of law Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #116

. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #117

they have a MEGA-TRANSPORTER? Warren Stupidity Aug 2015 #138

So....what are you saying? Harry Truman is the same as Hitler? MADem Aug 2015 #41

So Harry Truman is George W Bush ? Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #46

I am not a conscientious objector, if that's your question. I'd prefer to not MADem Aug 2015 #91

You are the brave one Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #103

First you call me a murderer, next, you call me a keyboard warrior and a "Madam." MADem Aug 2015 #132

Well alrighty then Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #133

I think you did that all by yourself. nt MADem Aug 2015 #135

What conscientious objecter is running for President? SheilaT Aug 2015 #7

Sen. Sanders applied for CO during VietNam Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #14

this is not an attack. it is a simple question, and the answer is simple too, yes, for still_one Aug 2015 #19

It looks like an attempt to discredit him Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #20

If his CO application had been accepted, I'd be the first to say no way in hell would I vote for him MohRokTah Aug 2015 #43

If you are referring to Bernie, by that definition, he is not a "true CO" then. He supported still_one Aug 2015 #100

OR at least he is not a CO now. eom MohRokTah Aug 2015 #101

good points. I learned something from this thread still_one Aug 2015 #106

No, it is a simple question, one that may come up. None of the leading republicans that are leading still_one Aug 2015 #98

depend on the individual, does it not? cali Aug 2015 #24

The OP is simply a poll. I suggest you read this response, if you are looking for good basis on still_one Aug 2015 #104

To obtain CO status, you must object ot any war under any circumstance. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #31

You are correct, and anyone trying to parse the issue or place blame on you for being accurate MADem Aug 2015 #42

Vietnam wasn't self-defense. You left out the fact that he was a CO for THAT war. arcane1 Aug 2015 #88

There is no such thing as being "a CO for THAT war". stevenleser Aug 2015 #90

But he didn't just wake up one day and try it. Our massive war crime inspired him n/t arcane1 Aug 2015 #94

He objected to a war, he is not a Conscientious Objector. Here is the legal definition stevenleser Aug 2015 #95

Got it. Thanks for the link! n/t arcane1 Aug 2015 #97

His application was REJECTED. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #29

All I said was that he applied. Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #33

You didn't upset me. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #36

ok, thanks .. n/t Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #37

oh. The horrible shit war of the 60's and early 70's? That War? Warren Stupidity Aug 2015 #139

not necessarily. a conscientious objector would not have an issue engaging for defensive purposes still_one Aug 2015 #15

Actually, yes they would. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #40

I'm sure it would be a last resort, as it should be, but Yes. n/t Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #12

I think so too, and for defensive purposes if attacked still_one Aug 2015 #16

Vietnam was a different story. Anyone who didn't object Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #18

Vietnam Nam was based on a lie. that is not a good example in regard to the question i still_one Aug 2015 #21

Your timing is suspect. Motown_Johnny Aug 2015 #22

But that IS the question you are posing. Your OP is obviously about Sanders and the objection was Bluenorthwest Aug 2015 #34

See my #32 below. The OP accidentally asked a much more interesting question than they realized. stevenleser Aug 2015 #68

And I would feel much more comfortable TBF Aug 2015 #80

It would be fascinating to see him answer this question. It's a relevant one and there are stevenleser Aug 2015 #23

he's answered it by making it clear that he does not, across the board, cali Aug 2015 #27

I'd like to see him and all candidates answer the followup questions I asked to more completely stevenleser Aug 2015 #28

Also, see my #32 below. If he was a C.O., it means he said he can never support a war due to stevenleser Aug 2015 #35

maybe he never really was a conscientious objector even though he applied to be one. boston bean Aug 2015 #124

You are right, it is a valid question. still_one Aug 2015 #73

Would be able to? Yes. Would he? I hope not. Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2015 #25

If someone is willing to commit troops, they are not a conscientious objector. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #56

I would never in my life vote for a conscientious objector for president of the US. NEVER MohRokTah Aug 2015 #26

Sure. Some COs where so to avoid wars not necessary. mmonk Aug 2015 #30

That is not a Conscientious Objector according to the US legal definition. stevenleser Aug 2015 #32

There should be no problem protecting ones self or a country if you are President for defensive still_one Aug 2015 #59

A true C.O. would rather a foreign invader be invited to take over the country without a shot. stevenleser Aug 2015 #64

What you are describing is a pacifist, and I do not believe they are the same. still_one Aug 2015 #71

Under the law, they are. eom MohRokTah Aug 2015 #76

A C.O., by legal definition, is an extreme and absolute pacifist. stevenleser Aug 2015 #78

Thanks, appreciate the information still_one Aug 2015 #109

WOW, it appears 90% of the responders have no idea what a conscientious objector really is. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #38

Not true. If the U.S. was attacked, based on the oath the President took, he would do whatever was still_one Aug 2015 #57

If somebody is willing to uphold their oath with the use of troops, then by definition, they were.. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #60

Exactly. nt stevenleser Aug 2015 #62

That is your definition. still_one Aug 2015 #63

No, it's not our definition. It is the legal definition in the US. nt stevenleser Aug 2015 #65

Bernie Sanders supported troops in Kosovo. He also did not support the vote in Congress to oppose still_one Aug 2015 #69

Excellent information. That raises more questions. stevenleser Aug 2015 #74

Bernie Sanders was NEVER a CO MohRokTah Aug 2015 #79

Right but what did he say in that application and why was it rejected. stevenleser Aug 2015 #84

I'd like to know the aswer to that. MohRokTah Aug 2015 #87

No, that is the LEGAL defintion MohRokTah Aug 2015 #67

I don't think that's right. A true C.O. objects to all war and killing as unacceptable. stevenleser Aug 2015 #61

I had almost forgotten at first until mmonk's above post said unnecessary wars. It jogged my memory stevenleser Aug 2015 #58

Fuck War! whatchamacallit Aug 2015 #52

Yes. But he'll be seen as a hypocrite and a coward for it. BlueCaliDem Aug 2015 #66

If we are talking about Sanders, it would depend on what his application for C.O. status actually stevenleser Aug 2015 #70

As far as I know, Sanders is the only C.O. running. Also, he supports P.B.O.'s use of drones, BlueCaliDem Aug 2015 #93

Nobody called FDR a coward ... Trajan Aug 2015 #129

Wouldn't it be nice to have a president who refused to commit troops to war? Vinca Aug 2015 #75

Depends which war. Iraq? Sure. WWII? Absolutely not. nt stevenleser Aug 2015 #81

It's a moot point since Congress can declare war, but the President can't. Vinca Aug 2015 #92

In this world? NO WAY! eom MohRokTah Aug 2015 #83

We haven't had a constitutional legal war since WW2 just so called police action Ichingcarpenter Aug 2015 #96

Fascinating question. The president's defense... sanatanadharma Aug 2015 #86

I think Sanders would be a good CIC. Problem is, I think the majority of voters will doubt that. Hoyt Aug 2015 #99

Just as important, I think people like Putin and Kim Jong Un doubt that. stevenleser Aug 2015 #114

Wasn't Richard Nixon a Quaker? DBoon Aug 2015 #102

All that proves is that he likely wasn't an observant Quaker. stevenleser Aug 2015 #110

A more interesting question HassleCat Aug 2015 #105

Dumb and disingenuous question. nt ladjf Aug 2015 #118

The presidency's responsibilities provide the context to necessarily "evolve." Sanders would. ancianita Aug 2015 #119

I think a CO would evolve on the issue to truly provide for the common defense & welfare NowSam Aug 2015 #120

I think you are right still_one Aug 2015 #121

Obviously that would depend on the nature of his/her conscientious objection. HereSince1628 Aug 2015 #122

Bernie's not against committing troops if necessary but only as a last resort. beam me up scottie Aug 2015 #125

Isnt the right question who would you rather have, someone who wants to commit troops at the AllFieldsRequired Aug 2015 #126

There is another OP right now titled "Bernie Sanders: Silent partner of American militarism".... djean111 Aug 2015 #127

Would the beliefs Spirochete Aug 2015 #136

Thank for sharing The Daily Horseshit. nt. Warren Stupidity Aug 2015 #140

patience my ass reddread Aug 2015 #141