Then We Guess We’ll Finally Find Out How Seriously They Take Their Oaths

Donald Sensing, in light of Barack the Tyrant’s recent decision to “ask permission” while at the same time declaring that he can do whatever he wants to regardless of the answer, makes a very interesting observation, should Barack the Bastard decide to truly go it alone:

But there is another component of what such a position might mean. Suppose my hypothetical news story comes true and Obama order the attacks even though Congress specifically withholds authority.

I would maintain that our flag-rank military officers are duty bound to disobey those orders.

He’s right. Except that everybody in the armed forces all the way down to assistant garbage bin emptier, third class, has a duty to disobey illegal orders, particularly orders that are given in direct defiance of the Constitution.

Remember “…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…”?

Sure, some may argue that that line has already been crossed numerous times, Barky’s undeclared, unapproved war against al Qaeda’s enemies in Libya being one of the most recent and glaring examples but, as Donald points out, it’s not de facto a crime if there are no consequences. Such as Congress doing their jobs, which they, under the “leadership” of Boner/McCockless, have shown a remarkable unwillingness to do.

Much like it certainly is illegal to lift the petty cash at the office whether you get caught or not, but if there are no consequences, who gives a damn? Similarly, if Congress refuses to oppose the unlawful, unconstitutional actions of Barky the Mad as they have ever since he was sworn in the first time, then who’s to say? If Congress won’t do their duty, then why should anybody else?

But in this hypothetical case, where Congress clearly denies Barky the authority to support his terrorist friends in al Qaeda and he goes ahead and does so anyways?

In that case, our armed forces will have a choice to make.

They can either obey their Oath, or they can commit treason.

There is no door number three.

Thatisall.

10 comments

  1. 1
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    The Israel newspaper Haaretz carried an analysis on Sunday by Amos Harel, a military analyst, saying that Mr. Obama’s postponement of a military strike against Syria suggested that he would be less likely to confront Iran on its nuclear program going forward, and that in the Arab world, he would now be “seen as weak, hesitant and vacillating.”

    “The Obama administration’s conduct gives us insight into the strategic challenge posed by Iran’s nuclear program,” the analysis said. “From an Israeli point of view, the conclusion is far from encouraging. The theory that the U.S. will come to Israel’s aid at the last minute, and attack Iran to lift the nuclear threat, seems less and less likely.

    “It’s no wonder that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is becoming increasingly persuaded that no one will come to his aid if Iran suddenly announces that it is beginning to enrich uranium to 90 percent,” it said.

  2. 2
    Library Czar growls and barks:

    and that in the Arab world, he would now be “seen as weak, hesitant and vacillating.”

    Sadly those are his good points.

  3. 3
    LibraryGryffon growls and barks:

    Library Czar @ #: I thought they already thought about him that way.

  4. 4
    LC_Salgak growls and barks:

    LibraryGryffon says:

    Library Czar @ #: I thought they already thought about him that way.

    That’s assuming they think of him as anything more than the dhimmi kuffir, , ,

  5. 5
    LibraryGryffon growls and barks:

    LC_Salgak @ #: I’d say the “weak” and “vacillating” and “hesitant” are good descriptions of a good little dhimmi kuffir.

  6. 6
    Library Czar growls and barks:

    Or as Ace put it Obama is deep in “Operation Enduring Hesitation”

  7. 7
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    They can either obey their Oath, or they can commit treason.

    Large wager on “treason,” please. It comes with a pension and continued power and status. The other one? Not so much.

  8. 8
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    LC_Salgak @ #:

    That’s assuming they think of him as anything more than the dhimmi kuffir, , ,

    Don’t rule out them thinking of him as “Our Man In Washington”

  9. 9
    Igor, Imperial Booby growls and barks:

    Anybody seen the Facebook and twitter pages with a member of the Armed Forces saying “I didn’t sign up to fight for Al Qaeda!”.

    The Game’s Afoot…

  10. 10
    rickl growls and barks:

    It’s even worse than what Sensing says. Karl Denninger pointed out the other day that, since al-Qaeda is a declared enemy of the United States, and at least some of the rebels are affiliated with them, attacking the Syrian government is an act of treason, whether Congress authorizes it or not.

    Sorry, But No (Syria)

    Second, however, and at least as importantly, the rebels are terrorist-affiliated. This isn’t speculation, it’s known fact. And not just “any” terrorists either — Al-Qaida. The taking of any action that assists them, no matter how much of a bastard the other side may present themselves to be, is taking arms in material support of a sworn enemy of the United States — and not only is that as dumb as it gets it also meets the black-letter definition of Treason.

    Now we might be able to weasel our way out of that if we had dropped our “State of Emergency” post 9/11 — but 12 years later it remains in force and effect, and as a consequence so does the formal US recognition of Al Qaida as a sworn enemy of the United States.

    So here we are, with a fetid “emergency statement” that has now turned into a lodestone being attracted to the side of an Aircraft Carrier and which will, if we strike Syria, instantly become black-letter commitment of Treason by Obama, every member of Congress who does not put an instant halt to this action before it occurs or who fails to impeach immediately if the operation goes ahead and which will also attach to every member of the Military that is involved in this action as well.

    Of course nobody in those groups will actually be prosecuted for same, which makes it even worse, because destruction of the actual overt act of Treason as a crime is arguably the worst possible thing that could ever happen in the United States.

    This act, should it proceed, when the history books are closed on the United States will mark the self-inflicted gunshot to the head of The Rule of Law in this country.