Eliminatus said:
Just part of the process and he already acknowledged and accepted it. They put a gag order on him which he blithely ignored and kept posting to social media detailing the current events as they were happening
You cannot possibly believe that was an insurrection. If we had a real insurrection, they would have easily overwhelmed those cops and a lot of leftist politicians caught in the capitol would have been hanged on the spot. These were just naive clowns seeded with ANTIFA agitators in red hats who walked into the capitol while the cops waved them in, made fools of themselves and left. Not a single Dem traitor harmed.Strong Men Armed said:
the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol
Forever?CharlieBrown17 said:Eliminatus said:
Just part of the process and he already acknowledged and accepted it. They put a gag order on him which he blithely ignored and kept posting to social media detailing the current events as they were happening
This is what I think a lot of Mil and non mil are missing. Pre confinement is being used because it was obvious he was going to keep doing the action(s) that he was being punished for if he wasn't confined.
74OA said:
I can imagine what that same LtCol would do to one of his subordinate officers or NCOs if they similarly took to social media to publicly denounce his judgement and integrity.
If discipline goes, everything goes.
I have zero doubt about Carter being a very decent human being. And the reserves were one way of dealing with those disagreements AND being politically active to promote change in national leadership and policy direction. That served the nation better in historical hindsight than remaining silenced in a military job in my personal circumstance and opinion; a major point of disagreement with Carter was pardoning those who fled the draft on his first day in office in 1977. Perhaps you cherished your economic security and/or your position in the military over your right to publicly speak as an American citizen and perhaps your concept of rule of law/discipline was willing to overlook willful evasion of the lawful military draft. That was certainly a popular opinion at the time. I could not do so.Strong Men Armed said:
And therein lies our difference, UTexan… you left active duty over policy issues for which you blamed President Carter, which was your prerogative. I served on active duty during the entire Carter presidency, and did not agree with some policies, but I thought I was serving the nation, not a particular President or administration. In fact, I can't recall any officers with whom I served - senior, peer, or subordinate - wrestling with their conscience about whether to stay or resign due to political policies, in any administration.
Yet, you stayed in the Reserves… continued to take the king's shilling despite despising the king. That's weak, bro. Whatever… your right to make that decision.
BTW… I knew one of Carter's Marine One pilots. He described Carter as very personable, low maintenance, and treated the military folks who served around him with dignity.
Whatever the rationale, a serving officer cannot publicly express contempt for his superiors, nor repeatedly defy lawful orders to desist without suffering the consequences. Both actions are clear violations of the UCMJ and to give Scheller just a slap on the wrist would send a message to all servicemen that discipline can be flouted with impunity.UTExan said:I have zero doubt about Carter being a very decent human being. And the reserves were one way of dealing with those disagreements AND being politically active to promote change in national leadership and policy direction. That served the nation better in historical hindsight than remaining silenced in a military job in my personal circumstance and opinion; a major point of disagreement with Carter was pardoning those who fled the draft on his first day in office in 1977. Perhaps you cherished your economic security and/or your position in the military over your right to publicly speak as an American citizen and perhaps your concept of rule of law/discipline was willing to overlook willful evasion of the lawful military draft. That was certainly a popular opinion at the time. I could not do so.Strong Men Armed said:
And therein lies our difference, UTexan… you left active duty over policy issues for which you blamed President Carter, which was your prerogative. I served on active duty during the entire Carter presidency, and did not agree with some policies, but I thought I was serving the nation, not a particular President or administration. In fact, I can't recall any officers with whom I served - senior, peer, or subordinate - wrestling with their conscience about whether to stay or resign due to political policies, in any administration.
Yet, you stayed in the Reserves… continued to take the king's shilling despite despising the king. That's weak, bro. Whatever… your right to make that decision.
BTW… I knew one of Carter's Marine One pilots. He described Carter as very personable, low maintenance, and treated the military folks who served around him with dignity.
In the current administration, you have a C-in-C whose decisions unnecessarily cost the lives of troops with myopic explanations as to how he didn't recall getting other policy advice from the DoD or Joint Chiefs, who would have retained a ground force presence with control of Bagram. I understand where LTC Scheller is coming from. Perhaps his personal integrity did not allow him to wait until his separation had been finalized before speaking out. He was taking a huge risk and he knew it. Props to him for his personal courage and conviction, knowing that he was having to violate principles of discipline and order that he held dear to bring public attention to this fiasco. And now he will pay for it in a procedure which will do no credit to anyone involved.
Quote:
He cannot have it both ways, and I reiterate with absolute confidence that he would not have tolerated similar public disrespect and disobedience from his own subordinates.
There is no "get out of jail free card" for exercising individual conscience. An officer deliberately and repeatedly violated the UCMJ and must be held accountable. Period.UTExan said:Quote:
He cannot have it both ways, and I reiterate with absolute confidence that he would not have tolerated similar public disrespect and disobedience from his own subordinates.
Correct as that may be, the law of individual conscience must be higher than the UCMJ. Recall that famous speech and book by Smedley Butler before Congress after he retired: he stated military (while fulfilling the vital function of national defense against foreign aggression) also made the world safe for the American ruling political/economic elite class. Butler retired, then complained publicly about the tasks to which he had been put. As stated, I had extreme reservations about Carter policies, one of which was to passively, or incompetently assist with Marxist takeover in southern Africa. Reagan's constructive engagement and gradualist reform in southern Africa (as opposed to Carter's Andrew Young-led State Department) was much more helpful in checking Communist aggression in that region.
Now you're cherry-picking your Presidents. Let's not forget that President Reagan's feckless diplomacy and rules of engagement were directly attributable for 243 American warriors sent back in caskets from Beirut. Listen, all of them (Presidents) had their successes and failures. Most of us who serve in uniform and read history understand this, as well as the concept of being in uniform and forfeiting the right to "vote" on the missions we're assigned. Feel free to grouse about them when you're separated or retired... your First Amendment right.UTExan said:Quote:
As stated, I had extreme reservations about Carter policies, one of which was to passively, or incompetently assist with Marxist takeover in southern Africa. Reagan's constructive engagement and gradualist reform in southern Africa (as opposed to Carter's Andrew Young-led State Department) was much more helpful in checking Communist aggression in that region.
Strong Men Armed said:Now you're cherry-picking your Presidents. Let's not forget that President Reagan's feckless diplomacy and rules of engagement were directly attributable for 243 American warriors sent back in caskets from Beirut. Listen, all of them (Presidents) had their successes and failures. Most of us who serve in uniform and read history understand this, as well as the concept of being in uniform and forfeiting the right to "vote" on the missions we're assigned. Feel free to grouse about them when you're separated or retired... your First Amendment right.UTExan said:Quote:
As stated, I had extreme reservations about Carter policies, one of which was to passively, or incompetently assist with Marxist takeover in southern Africa. Reagan's constructive engagement and gradualist reform in southern Africa (as opposed to Carter's Andrew Young-led State Department) was much more helpful in checking Communist aggression in that region.
LtCol Scheller simply refused to obey a directive that required him, a serving officer, not to voice his personal opinions in social media. Now he'll suffer the consequences.
