Results 1 to 15 of 26

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny View Post
    I know the Marines enforces Art 87 (missing movement). I just wasn't aware if any of the other services do. I believe the Navy does as well. IF so, that's another charge against him.
    That's the principle charge against him.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Posts
    48,237
    Thanks (Given)
    34626
    Thanks (Received)
    26699
    Likes (Given)
    2540
    Likes (Received)
    10174
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    12
    Mentioned
    374 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    That's the principle charge against him.
    I thought it was disobeying a lawful order.
    “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny View Post
    I thought it was disobeying a lawful order.

    A movement order is a lawful order.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Posts
    48,237
    Thanks (Given)
    34626
    Thanks (Received)
    26699
    Likes (Given)
    2540
    Likes (Received)
    10174
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    12
    Mentioned
    374 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    A movement order is a lawful order.
    I see. So you're saying the movement itself is violation of an order. My interpretation of Art 87 is missing movement is a violation of Art 87. Art 92 is failure to obey an order.

    The Marines hammer you for both as separate charges.
    “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny View Post
    I see. So you're saying the movement itself is violation of an order. My interpretation of Art 87 is missing movement is a violation of Art 87. Art 92 is failure to obey an order.

    The Marines hammer you for both as separate charges.
    He may have been given OTHER lawful orders, too.

    According to The Army Times:

    Watada, 28, is charged with missing movement after refusing to deploy with his unit, the 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. The Army also proceeded with charges of conduct unbecoming an officer for statements he made to journalists and at a veterans convention.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums