Kelly, in a statement, said he learned of the threat from Hegseth's social media post. He detailed his public service prior to joining the Senate representing Arizona, including 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm and four space shuttle flights at NASA.
"If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work," Kelly said.
"I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution."
The threat to prosecute Kelly follows a purge at the Pentagon of senior members of the U.S. military, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the head of the Navy and the director of the National Security Agency.
The decision to recall and potentially prosecute Kelly could also be seen as a message to those recently dismissed officials, who have stayed silent following their removals.

Rachel VanLandingham, a former Air Force lawyer now at Southwestern Law School, said she had never seen sitting lawmakers called back to the military involuntarily, and that Kelly would have a strong legal case to get a preliminary injunction since there was no evidence of probable cause.
"He has strong legal standing to say 'Absolutely not. I'm not going to do this'," VanLandingham said.
Hegseth's remarks also could undermine any Pentagon effort to prosecute Kelly since they amounted to a clear case of undue command influence and could be used as evidence that Kelly would not be able to get a fair trial, she said.
The prosecution of Kelly would raise questions about free speech rights and the separation of powers under the U.S. Constitution. It is also the latest example of Trump's administration seeking punishment of those Trump sees as political opponents.
Since returning to the presidency in January, Trump has occasionally called for imprisoning adversaries and his Justice Department has targeted critics such as former federal officials John Bolton and James Comey.
A federal judge dismissed criminal charges against Comey on Monday.
The Pentagon cautioned that all retired service members could be subject to recall.
"All servicemembers are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A servicemember's personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order," the Pentagon said.

>>1459830
Trump is absolutely seething and it's hilarious.

>>1459830
Didn't Hegseth have to quit because he would have been dishonorably discharged and prosecuted for all the illegeal shit he did in the military along with being a total drunkard.

Doing this the same day Trump's bimbo "attorney" got laughed out of court trying to prosecute James Comey and Letitia James for hurting Trump's feelings is a bold move on the part of the Trump admin.
Not a smart move, or a productive move. But a bold one.

>>1459830
>urge U.S. troops to refuse any illegal orders.
Ok real question here. I'm not military, so correct me if I'm wrong, but don't military member swear an oath to uphold the Constitution? Not many of them are juris doctors or study law at all, and 99% of the time, something being "illegal" is different than something being "unconstitutional"

So what I'm getting at here, I really don't think normal military people or even many officers are qualified to make a determination on what is and is not lawful, making this claim, in my eyes, kind of dumb.

I'm pretty sure they have the right and the responsibility to not follow orders which are unconstitutional, but as far as unlawful goes I'm going to be honest, some dude who idk loads shells into artillery, or orders batallions of truck drivers to deliver shit, aren't really qualified to make determinations on what is and is not lawful.

Isn't there some sort of process already in place for someone to report something they think is unlawful? Like I don't know reporting it to some sort of law enforcement agency?

>>1459837
Don't confuse bravery with stupidity.

>>1459830
What illegal orders have been issued?
Demiggers are a cursed.

>>1459843
You're asking the wrong question
The real question is what they could charge Mark Kelly or anyone else with for making a video saying "You don't have to follow illegal or unconstitutional orders"
The fact that Trump's goons won't even speculate what they could charge him with tells you how unserious these threats are.
Here's the video in question by the way, for anyone who hasn't seen it
https://x.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/1990774492356902948
I'd love for any of the Trump shills (not talking to the anon I'm responding to) to actually watch it and point to the part they found most objectionable.

>>1459836
No.

>>1459846
None, so why are they saying he told them to disobey orders?

>>1459847
>You're asking the wrong question
No, I'm not.
If you can't answer my question and you agree that most military people aren't qualified to determine what is lawful, just say so.

>>1459847
>The real question is what they could charge Mark Kelly or anyone else with
It literally says "sedition" in the very first sentence you retard

>>1459851
If a soldier gets orders to fire on a crowd of peaceful protestors on American soil, or to storm the Capitol and arrest every member of the opposition party, I think even the most crayon chewing jarhead can figure out those aren't a legal orders and they should not follow them

>>1459854
No qualified prosecutor will ever file sedition charges based on that video
The Trump team might trot out some bimbo who's never prosecuted a case in her life to act as a "US attorney" in order to file the charges, but they'll immediately be laughed out of court, like what happened today with Comey

>>1459847
Its a Choose Your Own Adventure court case.
>>1459851
>If you can't answer my question
The sealioning has begun.

So will Kelly be refusing this 'illegal' order, or will he be eternally damned as a filthy seditionist?
Dodging the draft was a seditious act too, Trump, Curious how those 'Bone Spurs' diappeared, eh...?!
>>1459836
Yes.

>>1459843
>aren't really qualified to make determinations on what is and is not lawful.
That's the primary issue.
Regular soldiers are basically kids jacked up on energy drinks, PTSD and carrying firearms. They aren't constitutional or legal scholars, but they would be wholly accountable if they decided to disobey direct orders.
Democrats (who have previously denied Trump's legitimacy as POTUS and made a show of telling people that everything he does is illegal) are now trying to signal to these kids that they don't have to obey the supreme commander of the US armed forces.

>>1459866
>denied Trump's legitimacy as POTUS
Was Eisenhower? JFK? Before answering, consider their previous careers.
Did Trump serve in the military?

>>1459866
>"Don't follow illegal orders"
>"OMG DEMONCRATS ARE TELLING SOLDIERS TO DISOBEY DADDY TRUMP!!!!!1!!"
MAGAts really telling on themselves lately

>>1459866
>who have previously denied Trump's legitimacy as POTUS

Rich words coming from the party that couldn't accept the 2020 results.

>>1459868
>call Trump a russian spy, fascist, tyrant, nazi etc etc (basically everything the US government is historically known for killing in conflicts)
>make up lies about the shit he's doing to justify these claims, up to and including claims that he's putting American citizens in internment camps
>provide materiel support to antifa via donations through USAID and trained via OTI (read: section of USAID trained on how to overthrow foreign governments)
>do a big wink wink nudge nudge in the direction of the military, telling them that they don't have to obey their commander if they don't feel like it, many of which are first generation spawn of illegal migrants
>act surprised

>>1459866
>>1459869
Trump literally whined about the 2020 election being stolen yesterday during his five hour long Twitter meltdown

>>1459870
>antifa
Antifa is not a group.

>>1459871
You fell for the BBC psyop, sorry anon.

>>1459874
Fix you bot, Ranjesh. It's spitting out gay jibberish again.

>>1459870
I imagine that makes a lot of sense in your version of reality. The problem is that that version isn't real.

>>1459875
>he doesn't know
The BBC was responsible for editing the Trump speech to make it look like he was calling for an insurrection.
>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/03/bbc-report-reveals-bias-donald-trump/

>>1459870
>>1459870
>many of which are first generation spawn of illegal migrants
Right winger last ten seconds without showing open contempt for rank and file of armed forces challenge: IMPOSSIBLE!

>>1459871
To the credit of Trump he understands his voter base is retarded so he does it for show.

>>1459878
What does that have to do with Trump whining about the 2020 election being stolen yesterday during his five hour Twitter meltdown?

>>1459870
Turns out trump is actually all of those.

>>1459878
KEK they just abridged the speech.

>>1459868
Yeah because it's not like we have a history of Generals in the military doing treasonous shit against Trump.
*RING RING*
Hang on, I got a phone call... Hello? Well hi General Milley! How's the pardon?

>>1459887
So if one of those treasonous generals were to tell the troops under their command "Storm the White House and drag Trump out by his cankles", you believe those troops should obey that command, correct?

>>1459887
>treasonous

It was insubordination *at best*.

>>1459834
>>1459843
>>1459847
Sedition is a very serious crime. Either a few democrats get executed or this will spiral into a civil war.

>>1459890
So is insurrection, and how'd that go for the J6 people? All pardoned, $500,000 payout for the congressmen whose phone records were subpoenaed (not even tapped)?

>>1459891
There was no such a thing, all was manufactured by democrats.

>>1459890
You've been squealing "CIVIL WAR!" since Obama won in 2008, no one cares Tim

>>1459892
Ok, Ivan.

https://i.imgur.com/wWzw5Yi.jpeg

>>1459891
>All pardoned
Shouldn't those all be voided since it was done by auto pen, ergo not actually trump's signature and just a forgery?

>>1459843
Good post

>>1459889
>unironically batphoning China and telling them that you won't obey POTUS if he decides to go to war
>"""insubordination"""

>>1459898
Do you seriously not understand the autopen controversy with Biden? Are you seriously this obtuse.

>MAGAts: 'Biden using autopen is wrong!
>MAGAts: 'It's okay when Trump uses autopen!'
Hypocrisy. It's hardwired into the DNA of rightards.

>>1459918
So you have absolutely no idea what the autopen controversy was about. None whatsoever.

>>1459888
Uh, no you idiot. Where the hell did you get that impression from when I'm clearly mocking the fact that we have generals who already got away with committing treason?

>>1459889
>It was insubordination *at best*.
Imagine if I told the press that if FDR was planning to invade Germany I would get on the phone and let Hitler know right away. What do you think they would call that? Oh yeah, treason. Better yet, imagine if during the Cuban Missile Crisis I went to all the underlings under Kennedy to make sure he couldn't launch any missiles at the USSR. But that would just be insubordination *at best*, right?

You fucking leftists are the cancer killing America.

>>1459915
No, and I don't care. And I don't care if Trump did it either. I'm just being a fucking piece of shit because I'm a Democrat.
I have no morals and no set beliefs, but I list for power so I can sit at home, collect welfare, and draw furry porn while applying violent friction to my genderless crotch nub.

>>1459921
>Better yet, imagine if during the Cuban Missile Crisis I went to all the underlings under Kennedy to make sure he couldn't launch any missiles at the USSR
I think it's funny you bring this up because the sole reason the Cuban Missile Crisis didn't turn into a nuclear war was because a Russian submarine Chief of Staff refused to go along with orders from the other two senior officers to launch a nuclear missile.

>>1459925
Was that treason?

>>1459925
I'll answer that for you, it wasn't because he was one of the three men required to authorize nuclear launch on that sub. If he was one of the underlings on that ship and tried to stop the three in charge then you'd have something to compare.

>>1459921
Saying "we're not going to do this thing, but if we ever are, I'll give you a heads up" is not treason.

On October 30th there were reports china was fearing an invasion so Milley told them they weren’t going to attack to ease tensions. Would you rather he do nothing and risk China preemptively attacking? Then on Jan 8, after trump tried to overturn the election and criminals stormed the capital, Milley told China the US is still stable. Would you rather he say nothing and let them think the US is collapsing? Milleys actions helped the US snd showed stability

>>1459950
>Would you rather he say nothing and let them think the US is collapsing?
I would prefer it if Milley was charged for treason because he decidedly chose to reassure a foreign adversary that he would disobey a direct order if called to war.

>MAGAts: 'It's okay when Trump uses autopen!'
So you have absolutely no concept of hypocrisy

>>1459923
I'm glad you're at least honest with stuff, I may not agree with you but at least you're honestI'm glad you're at least honest with stuff, I may not agree with you but at least you're forthcoming

If only MAGAts could be so honest and forthcoming

>>1459950
>Saying "we're not going to do this thing, but if we ever are, I'll give you a heads up" is not treason.
And once again I'm going to frame it in the context of WW2. Nobody would call this treason if he told Hitler "we're not going to do this thing, but if we ever are, I'll give you a heads up"? Be honest.

>>1459923
Holy shit I haven't seen seethe like this in a while kek

The important thing is that President Trump cannot issue an illegal order for his military to file, at least not since last June and the USSC so ruled.

So telling soliders to not follow illegal orders is just something to rile up everyone. There are no illegal orders possible anymore.

>>1459962
>WW2
>I'll give you a heads up

Japan told the US they were going to attack them before Pearl Harbor. Hitler did a declamation of war.

>>1459925
Nobody was under orders to fire a nuclear warhead during the b59 incident you lying sack of crap.
This submarine lost its radio and they thought a war may have started because they were getting attacked with depth charges by Americans.

Nobody disobeyed an order to fire a nuclear warhead and you literally just misrepresent fact whenever you want to push your false narrative

>>1459960
>>1459963
>he doesn't know

>>1459965
Just because Trump himself won't get in trouble, doesn't mean the act is legal.

>>1459969
He doesn't care

>>1459960
>>1459963
>being this new, it has never heard of larping

>>1459915
Turns out Biden didn't use an autopen.
Trump did, it's perfect chance to turn yet another weapon of the enemy against them.

>>1459923
>>1459960
>>1459963
Now THIS is samefagging and the false flagging the far right is know for.

>>1459915
>controversy
Just another mythical thing for Trump to complain about Biden over. There's literally no law against using an autopen.

>>1459915
I understand Republicans needed something to distract from the Epstein files in the two week window where they were pretending "Autopengate" was an actual controversy
Then WSJ released the story about Trump's love letter to Epstein so they needed something more explosive, which led to Trump dragging Tulsi Gabbard out of whatever broom closet he has her working in to make "Russiagate" a thing, which had even less staying power than "Autopengate"

>>1459966
Once again.... WOULD IT BE TREASON ... if a US general in WW2 were to promise Hitler he would tell him if the US planned to invade? Yes or no.

Yes, Allied generals told Hitler of invasion plans
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fortitude
...only, they were a deception

>>1459992
How you frame your theoretic has nothing to do with Milley. I see your poor debate tactic and will not go down that path as I am not your monkey.

Milley said "If we attack we will let you know". The comment was cleared with the National Security Advisor before given. If anything he was doing America a favor by keeping China guessing.

If you wish to understand what treason is, you can look it up in the Constitution. It's the only crime defined in there afaik.

>>1459995
>How you frame your theoretic has nothing to do with Milley. I see your poor debate tactic and will not go down that path as I am not your monkey.
Then I'm done asking questions and I'm just going to say what your worldview is because I'm tired of playing this fucking game with such bad-faith monkeys on /news/.

Yes it was treason. Milley told a rival nation, that we're constantly posturing militarily against, if we were to sneak attack them he would let them know. Therefore, if there was any kind of attack, China would know about it and Americans would get killed. That makes it treason. If this was 1944, Milley would still be rotting in a jail cell. We've locked up people back then for far less. The only fucking reason he got away with all of this (and the bullshit with Afghanistan, but that's a separate topic) is because Orange Man Bad and any charges brought up against Milley would have the media bursting into tears about how much of a dictator Trump is, how dare he do this to a veteran (who fucked over soldiers), this is just petty revenge for making him look bad, blah blah blah.

You're only sucking Milley's cock because he went against Trump. If he pulled this shit during Obama you would demand Milley's head while crying about how much of a racist white guy he is.

So I don't want to hear any bitching about Trump going after politicians for telling our military they don't have to obey their fucking commander in chief. They're incorrect *at best*.

>>1459999
>Therefore, if there was any kind of attack, China would know about it and Americans would get killed.
NTA but you know the key issue with your statement is this didn't fucking happen lol

https://files.catbox.moe/chr3vu.png
Now THIS is the type of schizophrenia that the /news/ leftist has a reputation for

>Leftist
Now that's an old Republican forced meme term

>>1460000
>if there was
>this didn't fucking happen lol
No shit. 10/10 reading skills.

>>1459999
>Milley told a rival nation, that we're constantly posturing militarily against, if we were to sneak attack them he would let them know.
So he told them we would have a Declaration of war. That's it, there is nothing beyond that.

If you think a Declaration of war is treason, you have a problem with the war of 1812, the spanish-american war, mexican-american war, ww1 [3 countries], ww2 [3 countries0, korean war, vietnam war, afganistan, iraq.

>>1459999
stay on topic faggot

>>1460004
>So he told them we would have a Declaration of war.
That is not what he fucking said. Look up the god damn quote. In addition, Milley also did not tell Trump about these conversations, and allegedly told his author - while he was still in the military - that he "felt no absolute certainty that the military could control or trust Trump." This motherfucker has violated so many articles of the UCMJ it's not even funny, and yet he'll still get a pass even without Biden pardoning him, because Orange Man Bad. Stop wasting you time trying to defend the backstabbing, blue-falcon cocksucker. He's a fucking traitor. The end.

>>1460010
>"felt no absolute certainty that the military could control or trust Trump."

The guy's credentials are a mile long over the course of decades and you're objecting to his judgement of Trump. Your name is either Ivan or you're a streetshitter, there is no other option.

>>1460011
actually his name is esl shill

>>1460011
>The guy's credentials are a mile long over the course of decades and you're objecting to his judgement of Trump.
What is Article 88 of the UCMJ? Since you're too fucking stupid to pick up the context I have to spell it out for you.

>>1460012
Are you evading a ban?

>>1460014
why would i be? i don't think your hurt feelings are a bannable offense faggot

>>1460015
>trolling
>spamming
IDK why I'd think that.

>>1460013
>What is Article 88 of the UCMJ?
>Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) prohibits commissioned officers from using "contemptuous words" against certain high-ranking government officials and institutions

Now you're putting yourself in a smaller and smaller box. Listen to you, crying because the guy said what we would do [declare war], now you've moved on to this.

>>1460017
so you tell on me every time i call you out for being a hypocrite who spams and trolls, is what you're saying.

what a faggot

>>1460018
Like saying the military can't trust Trump - the guy in charge of the military. Thank you for playing retard.

>because the guy said what we would do [declare war]
He still didn't say this, no matter how many times you repeat the lie.

>>1460022
weren't you told to stay on topic, faggot

>>1460022
then what did he say? tell us otherwise.

>>1460022
>saying the military can't trust Trump - the guy in charge of the military
he said it when biden was president and trump was a citizen, hence the biden pardon [stating this fact only to help you with the time-line of events], but that's ok I understand your IQ being so low because your skin is literally the color of shit.

>>1460020
I don't spam and troll, and you have the same fucking routine no matter who you're trying to annoy.

>>1460024
>"felt no absolute certainty that the military could control or trust Trump."
>ackhtchuallie he was talking about Biden
Holy shit. The leftists on /news/ are fucking amazing.

>>1460027
it's your job to post egregious lies(trolling) every single day multiple times a day(spamming)

>>1460028
that is not at all what i typed. your reading comprehension is poor.

>>1460029
You're a fucking schizo who thinks everyone is the same poster.
And you've never contributed anything of worth.
Absolute worst poster.

>>1460031
you're esl and mad, and i think it's funny when pointing this objective fact out triggers you. sorry esl shill

>>1460030
I'm not playing your hair-splitting game. Milley was clearly talking about Trump while both Trump was in office and Milley was serving in the military. You're not allowed to do that, this is a UCMJ violation he got away with (one of many). I've already proven Milley is a traitor, now you're just quibbling with me over whether he's insubordinate or not - which he clearly is.

>>1460033
stay on topic faggot

>>1460033
>Trump while both Trump was in office and Milley was serving in the military
Who was president in October of 2024? And I'll give you a hint, it wasn't Trump.

>>1460035
When did Milley (allegedly) say that quote?

>>1460036
when did you become allergic to context

>>1459890
Where's the sedition, dumbfag?

>>1460037
When you figure out how to do some basic research and look up all the things Milley said and did let me know. I can only spoonfeed you so much when you keep shaking your head and crying "nuh uh". I've wasted enough of my time here so I'm going to end it as simply as I can for you subhumans:

Trump already had to deal with treasonous faggots like Milley, so don't complain when he has to go after people trying to undermine his control of the military - again!

>>1460042
do you larp as a white american off the clock too, faggot

you are all babies. the real stance to take is "fuck all of you, i hope you all die immediately." but you're not me so you can't actually take that stance. sucks to suck. please die immediately.

>>1460042


It's getting mad.

>>1460044
Based.

Fascists apologist would also call James Schlesinger a traitor for making sure Nixon didn't start World War III.
And a reminder, it's the constitution, not the president who is the supreme law of the land, even if conservatives want you to believe the president is a king.

>>1460042
Trump should delegate the thing to Hegseth, its the military, just activate the guy and throw him in the brig for a year or two, give him a rude cellmate too, he'll get back with the program.

>>1459830
Can Hegseth just drink-drive himself around a tree already

>>1460040
its the politicians, they're trying to stop us from killing venezuelans. they need to butt out, its Trump time.

>>1459866
>>1459843
Pretty much this.
Law breaking is what law enforcement agencies are for. Soldiers aren't trained on US domestic law, telling them it's ok to disobey orders if they think it's unlawful is kinda dumb.
They should be reporting things they think are unlawful to law enforcement agencies.

>>1460078
You're fucking retarded. US soldiers are specifically taught that they have both the right and the RESPONSIBILITY to disobey unlawful orders. All these guys did was remind them of this fact.
>Just report them to the cops bro
Yeah I'm sure the pigs will be a big help when you've got a jumped-up lieutenant screaming at you to put a Hellfire through a family because he thought one of them had a gun in his pants.

>>1460081
>US soldiers are specifically taught that they have both the right and the RESPONSIBILITY to disobey unlawful orders
And democrats are decidedly telling them that doing lawful things, like if they were called upon via the Insurrection Act, would be an illegal order.
They are scared that Trump is going to call up the military to put down all of these domestic terrorists in blue states. Because they only have been allowed to exist through Dem negligence, and in some cases outright support. They have no problems with police and ICE getting shot in the neck on street corners. Only if they suffer consequences for their own actions.

>>1460101
>And democrats are decidedly telling them that doing lawful things, like if they were called upon via the Insurrection Act, would be an illegal order.
Wow that's cool but they also didn't say that lmao.

>>1460101
Take your fascist bullshit and fuck your own face with it. Cheering for authoritarianism when it benefits you is pathetic. Lick boots bro

>>1459891
J6 people were tourists wronged by the democrat dictatorshit. Hopefully republicans will do something this time and stop the democrat sedition. Unfortunately Trump doesn't have enough executive power to punish them as they deserve for writing his name all over the Epstein list.

>>1460081
Anon, that is 100% sedition.

>>1460185
What is? Not following an illegal order? Or telling people they do t have to follow an illegal order?

>>1460183
You know we have eyes right? We can literally watch the videos or Trump supporters attacking Police with Trump flags outside the capital. We can watch them break windows with police riot shields they took from injured police. We can watch A fucking stupid bitch repeatedly ignore a direct command from a police officer to not breach a barrier protecting senators and ignoring those orders and getting her traitor ass shot in the fucking face.

We can see all that with our own eyes. Your stupid fucking misinformation does not work except on the willful ignorant who already want to believe it.

>>1460101
Good post.

>>1460081
>Yeah I'm sure the pigs will be a big help when you've got a jumped-up lieutenant screaming at you to put a Hellfire through a family because he thought one of them had a gun in his pants.
>I'll take shit that hasn't happened in the US, and will never happen, for $500 Alex.
You're no better than the right-wingers calling for another civil war.

>>1460191
>Or telling people they do t have to follow an illegal order?
Lying to invent a justification not follow a lawful order. And literally trying to tell servicemen that they shouldn't obey the CiC.

>>1460312
What made you think I was talking about things happening in America? This sort of shit has actually happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

>>1460191
And we saw the same with BLM. and we also saw Democrats literally supporting it and enabling it.
However, we also saw Trump say, "Go home", but with BLM we head it was just a "Summer of love".
So, no one thinks you actually care about anything but gaining power.

>>1460355
>What made you think I was talking about things happening in America?
>Yeah I'm sure the pigs will be a big help
That part.

>This sort of shit has actually happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yeah more bullshit. Were there civilian casualties in Iraq/Afghanistan? Sure. But at no point did a fucking "jumped-up lieutenant" see a family of unarmed civilians and ordered an apache to waste the motherfuckers just because "he thought one of them had a gun in his pants" - and if I'm wrong please provide the fucking footage!
>in before you post a video showing a completely different scenario where the "family" consists of military-age men

All of that said, this is just a pitiful deflection away from the dissent Mark Kelly is trying to sow amongst our military, that they don't have to listen to their Commander in Chief.

>>1460376
>literally

>>1460331
If you're given an illegal order, it's your duty to not follow it. That 'not following' is not a suggestion. It's an order. I think neverserved's have this weird idea that soldiers are these empty, unthinking vessels with no individual capacity for critical thought. I get it. Uniformity and tradition make differentiating all the people already in camouflage hard enough, but here's the thing. Once you've actually been in it for even a year or two, you PRAY to finally get the chance to tell your SNCO or DIVO to go fuck himself. We don't have to be reminded about not following unlawful orders. If anything, we're looking for that opportunity like hogs hunting truffles.

>>1460444
Indeed. Quite literally.

>>1460380
Thinking that being reminded of their duty is dissenting is seditious, and leads to the erosion of good order and discipline. Implying that they'll be expected to violate their oaths is both nonsensical and unpatriotic. A lawful order isn't just whatever CiC says. That you fail to grasp that proves you never served, never could, and never will.

>>1460447
>Literally support BLM

>>1460450
Yes, they did. And not just the Democattle voters, but the Demonic elected officials.

>>1460452
Damn, that sucks. How about you stay on topic?

>>1460453
The topic was: Democrats are huge faggots, liars, and assholes. And throwing them in Guantanamo Bay to be sexually molested, which they'd enjoy, should be official US policy.

>>1460454
Crazy that Demonic (un)elected officials are causing mayhem. They should resign or be thrown out of office. QED esl brownoid shill

>>1460455
What?

>>1460456
The Bangladeshi you're arguing with is upset, and she's just CTRL+V'ing buzzwords to incite replies and ragebait.

>>1460448
>Implying that they'll be expected to violate their oaths is both nonsensical and unpatriotic.
And that's exactly the narrative these dems are trying to push on our military. The 'Oh they just said to disobey 'illegal' orders' line is just wordplay. The game they're playing is obvious.

>That you fail to grasp that proves you never served, never could, and never will.
lol whatever helps you cope easier.
>The fact that you don't approve of politicians encouraging insubordination and mutiny is proof you never served!

>>1460461
>What they actually said is just wordplay, think about what I interpret them as saying!
Says the anon who still doesn't realize that it is literally in the oath you swear to in the military that you can't obey illegal orders lmao.

>>1460462
lmao the guy says I never served and then says some stupid shit like this... mmm mmm mmm
>literally in the oath you swear to in the military that you can't obey illegal orders
Where does it say that? Because I remember a part about obeying the orders of the President. Not so much the part in the oath where it says obey the orders of the president, except when his political opponents tell me otherwise.

>>1460463
Article 92, UCMJ, dipshit. Second section. And don't just Google it, actually find the .gov. Most websites abbreviate it.

>>1460464
>Article 92, UCMJ, dipshit.
That's not the oath of enlistment, dipshit. Do you need me to find it for you, or do you think the Chinese bot you're using can get it right next time?

>>1460465
Okay, saar, here you go, since you asked so nicely.

"I solemnly swear to 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"

I was saving your retarded ass the trouble of then moving the goalpost to ask which Article.

>>1460466
>it is literally in the oath you swear to in the military that you can't obey illegal orders lmao.
>pulls part of the oath up
>it literally doesn't say anything about illegal orders lmao
>it literally says "I solemnly swear to obey the orders of the President of the United States"
Thank you for saving me the trouble, retard.

>>1460468
Nice job ignoring the Uniform Code of Military Justice part, which explicitly says troops must disobey blatantly unlawful orders.

>>1460470
>It literally says X!
>It literally does not say X.
Apparently I need to find the definition of literally for you.

literally

[lit-er-uh-lee]
Phonetic (Standard)
IPA
adverb

in the literal or strict sense.

She failed to grasp the metaphor and interpreted the poem literally.

What does the word mean literally?

in a literal manner; word for word.

to translate literally.

actually; without exaggeration or inaccuracy.

The city was literally destroyed.

in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually.

I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume.

Or to put it in a way your monkey ass would understand: 字面上

>>1460471
Hey, did ya hear? You're in the running for the gayest fucking faggot award?

>>1459834
I'm seething

>>1459830
Maybe he would have asked what the fuck did you just fucking say about me you little bitch?

>>1460479
Did your dad drop out of the race?

>>1459830
This is just fucking retarded. You can't force a guy back into the military just to prosecute him for something he didn't even do IN THE MILITARY

>>1460081
>You're fucking retarded. US soldiers are specifically taught that they have both the right and the RESPONSIBILITY to disobey unlawful orders. All these guys did was remind them of this fact.
And all Trump did is remind them that if they commit sedition they could be charged and possibly executed.

And now it's come out that the double tap on that boat after its crew were shipwrecked was an illegal order, because shipwrecked people are explicitly called out as not valid targets in our own military's big book of rules. Womp womp.