My challenge to the US military is simply this: Think! Think about the oath you swore upon entering the service.
Is it too much to ask of someone who swears an oath to think about what that oath means? This is no idle question, for the day might come when you will be morally compelled to take action based on that oath. I am referring to that part which states:
“…I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”
You do realize, of course, that if you are called upon to “defend the Constitution…against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” you might have to take military action (shoot to kill) some of your fellow soldiers. Are you prepared to do that? Have you been briefed so you’ll know when you might have to take such drastic action? Do you even know what constitutes an attack against the Constitution of the United States?
Are you aware that you did not swear an oath to defend the United States or its people? Your oath is to “support and defend the Constitution.” The United States and its people aren’t even mentioned in your oath. Are you okay with that?
When you enlisted, or accepted your commission as an officer, the swearing of the military oath was a quick affair mandated by federal law. However, that same federal law did not mandate any training on the meaning of that oath or what you would be expected to do as a consequence of that oath. An oath is a serious thing, which I’m sure you swore in all sincerity. If, however, the authorities which mandated this oath had been equally serious and sincere, they would have also mandated appropriate training for you to assure its proper execution.
And this they did not do. I would call that act of negligence a serious dereliction of their duty to you.
The Pledge and Three Oaths
The Pledge: There are four oaths which are at stake here – actually, three oaths and one pledge. First the Pledge of Allegiance which, being part of the Flag Code, has no force of law behind it. It is merely a formal device of etiquette which no one can be compelled to recite. I quote:
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands; one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.”
Again, this is “merely” a pledge and not a solemn oath or affirmation compelled by force of law. To my way of thinking, there are several problems with the Pledge:
· “I pledge allegiance to the flag [which is a piece of cloth]…” Say, what?
· “I pledge allegiance… to the republic…” The Pledge has the unique distinction, compared to the text of the oaths (which follow), of bonding the pledger to his country. I would have preferred that allegiance be pledged to the people or to the nation. But “the republic” is close enough.
· The US is not a place “with liberty and justice for all.” No one can quarrel with this assertion – this is simply the way things are.
The Military Oaths – Oath of Enlistment/Office: Federal law mandates that all enlisted men swear one kind of oath and officers swear another. Both oaths have these words in common:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that 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…So help me God.”
I highlighted the words above, just to reinforce that “allegiance” is not sworn to the United States or its people but only to the Constitution (which is what the word “same” refers to). That being the case, our servicemen should know what our Constitution means. But…that’s not expected of them nor is it drilled into them.
On to the enlisted man, who is expected to also swear/affirm the following: “I will 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.” The officer is NOT (as is the enlisted man) under oath to “obey the orders” of anybody!
The following text is not part of the enlisted man’s oath, so apparently nobody cares if he swears to “take this obligation freely…”:
“I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter…”
Oath of Allegiance mandated of all naturalized citizens
This oath (quoted below) is not mandated of those whom the Constitution calls “natural born” citizens – only of immigrants. This oath, similar to that for military officers cited above, states that new citizens shall “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States.” But…it does not require a Pledge of Allegiance to the United States itself or to its people. But it does require the forsaking of all formerly held “allegiance and fidelity” to other entities (described in the oath).
I find especially disturbing that this promise is included: “I will bear arms on behalf of the United States.” It doesn’t say “I will defend the United States and its people.” It implies that the new citizen could well find himself in the position of a mercenary (who bears “arms on behalf”) fighting undeclared wars of aggression.
Here’s the naturalized citizens’ oath in its entirety – read it and weep:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
My revision of our military oaths
This revision is for both officers and enlisted personnel, flowing from my own pen:
“I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will, even at the cost of my life, support and defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; and that I will obey all appropriate and lawful orders issued by the President of the United States and of the officers appointed over me, according to all US laws and international treaty obligations.” [The Tea Party will absolutely hate the inclusion of those last three words.]
This oath does not obligate a soldier to “defend the Constitution,” but it does mandate that he “support and defend” his country. Constitutions can change, which is why it’s important not to tie down our military to “defend” what could (and should) be replaced – I’m working on that! The people are important; the country is important; particular (and replaceable) Constitutions…aren’t important.
I wonder what would happen if a significant number of our troops decided to recant their original Oath of Enlistment/Office and, instead, swear to my revised version. Would that invalidate their enlistment contracts? How would the courts react if servicemen insisted on remaining in the service but only under the terms of this revised oath?
Closing thoughts
I am running for the office of US President in 2012, hoping to hand Barack Obama a well-deserved early retirement. If elected, I would be your Commander in Chief. But I would run things a bit differently, for I don’t see a serviceman as just a piece of meat who is to obey blindly and immediately. I expect our troops to use their minds and higher judgment. I consider you a valuable resource to our nation, too valuable to expect you to allow others to do your thinking for you.
There’s too much at stake to indulge in that.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Ten hut! What’s on your mind?”
No comments:
Post a Comment