Well I certainly can't say I understand war. :) But aren't other countries like North Korea .. aren't their people controled by their military. Wasn't Iraq before we went over there? Or how about Pakistan?

I guess I think that the Military here has some checks on it, so they aren't controling us as a people. Am I missing something? How to we prevent the Military from abusing their power?

And don't the soldiers just follow orders? What if the military is doing something awful, do the soldiers have anyone they can go to??

Oh ya, and why would a president be commander in cheif if they have never been in the military.

Oh ya and if they were in the military doesn't that mean they might have more power to get away with things we might never know about?

Your right, I dont have a bloody clue.. LOLOLO

yes you are required to refuse an unlawful order

but if you do you BETTER make sure your right

Lt Calley and the My Lai massacre. they all said that they were just following orders and thier next set of orders sent them to Fort Leavenworth prison

But who does the soldier go to if they think something is really wrong? Let's say before there is a chance to have to refuse?

you have to go up the chain of command

first you request the order that you think is unlawful be given in writing

then you just refuse to do it

then you'll be arrested and you use the illegality of it as a defense. and having the order in writing becomes evidence for the defense

then either you or the officer giving the order will be punished. thats why you BETTER be right

All the countries has a leader. Be it president, king, dictator, etc.
They are at the top of what is called the chain of command.
If a grunt has a problem, he takes it to his platoon leader, platoon leader takes it to the first sargent and on and on up the ladder.
If no action is taken, the grunt can go over their heads. There is a uniform way to do it. I don't remember what the process is.
The Generals in the pentagon answer to congress and the president. Sure, they can abuse their power but, there is so much competition between the services wanting their funding, it wouldn't be a wise carreer choice for any one General to act illegally.

Being just a grunt has it's good sides and down side.
Good side, if you follow an illegal order, whoever issued the order gets th' shaft.
Downside, the grunt usually dies before the one who gives the orders.
TJN and Quiet make excellent points.

Come on Boo N. Korea is lead by a dictator who is in charge of the military. Iraq was Hussain.
Our military does have as you say checks on it thats our comander in chief and government. You don't have to worry about our military controlling us as long as our government doesn't order it.

Damn just when it gets really interesting in here I have to bloody sleep. I appreciate the detail you guys. Fascinating. Hmmm, another question if you please...

Is this why this administration is reluctant to go after Chaney and others, because of congress. Congress is made up of both republicans and democrats correct?, so I am assuming those that went along with the decisions to go to war were both republican and democrat. So I am thinking that their are skeletons in the closets on both sides, so they don't want to address the Iraq war?

oh wait, wasn't it that Bush went to war with out the approval of those he was supposed to include in the decision. and wasnt that congress?

I know he is a dictator which I assumed meant that he can tell the military to go after his own people even, right? Sorry TJ, I admit I am not clear on this stuff that is why I generally don't comment much one war threads.

But I am happy that we have the checks as I though, but that is also why I was confused about just letting the military handle things..

I do appreciate the education, my family members never talked about that part of the miltary.