To obey or not to obey an order [split from Girl trouble]

[Craghopper]

whilst I am not commeneting on the Court Martial or the individual as I was not there

and we know that orders which are clearly illegal should be disobeyed-

however

I would say however that

as a Defence Forces- there should never be a time when any member decides that sure thats ridicolous

I am not going to obey that order-


and to me the sheep thing is the stupidest waste of manpower in the history of the world

but if I was detailed to do it- then I would be oing it thinking- this is a stupid waste of man power

but I would still do it.


Whereas you would not equate it as going absent off a Guard

I would - in fact if someone who decide by himself what orders he will and will not obey

how could one trust him overseas if the shit hit the fan

If he was resting and the Blackhole was been attaked - would he stay in bed and say - give me a shout in 3 and a half hours.



maybe I am an old fart and I subscribe to the dictum- obey all orders whether I like them or not

it would be interesting to hear from the younger members on this one.


without been a drama queen I think this is probably the thread that scares me most since I joined IMO

in that if this is the prevailing attitude in the Defence Forces- then we have seriously lost it


Sreenan you prick- this is all squarely your fault


Mods- if SCreaming Jim Shreenan is a member I take gladly the penalty points

As much as this kills me to say this...I agree with HH on this..If the Young Lad was detailed to report to his Orderly room/Company office well he should have carried out that order..simple as!! It makes no odds he was resting off.

[hptmurphy]

It makes no odds he was resting off.

Hmm... thats interesting , given the rest periods are at the discretion of the person who originally developed the detail.

No excuse ,an order is an order.

I'm all for questioning orders but only after they have been followed, this way the obligation to follow the order has been carried out and it can be clarified to recipient as to why it was issued in the first place without compromising the action required.

Act first..ask questions later would be the better line.

[Dazzler]

Hmm... thats interesting , given the rest periods are at the discretion of the person who originally developed the detail.

No excuse ,an order is an order.

I'm all for questioning orders but only after they have been followed, this way the obligation to follow the order has been carried out and it can be clarified to recipient as to why it was issued in the first place without compromising the action required.

Act first..ask questions later would be the better line.

Officer: Shoot those Villagers over there.

Soldier: Yes Sir. *Proceeds to shoot Villagers*

Soldier: Sir, may I ask why I had to shoot them?

Officer: Because I ordered you to.

I know that it should never get so extreme that this is the case, but that is effectively what you proposed.

[hptmurphy]

I know that it should never get so extreme that this is the case, but that is effectively what you proposed

Once the officer can justify it should be no problem.


Seriously though it has all changed , people now question things we may have done without question in the past. Fine..just make sure its done after the job is completed and not get in the way of the job in hand.

[Able]

Hmm... thats interesting , given the rest periods are at the discretion of the person who originally developed the detail.

No excuse ,an order is an order.

I'm all for questioning orders but only after they have been followed, this way the obligation to follow the order has been carried out and it can be clarified to recipient as to why it was issued in the first place without compromising the action required.

Act first..ask questions later would be the better line.

An Order is an Order and must be followed... the blatant disregard for an order carries consequences. If a member of the services on a 24hr duty receives an order during that duty period and fails to carry out that order they should be charged accordingly, whether he / she was carrying a weapon or picking mushrooms in the eff-in woods for 24hrs.
Even the appearance of a less than strict adherence to Military law would be detrimental to orderly execution of duties and the structure and moral (low as it may be) of the DF.

[Truck Driver]

Officer: Shoot those Villagers over there.

Soldier: Yes Sir. *Proceeds to shoot Villagers*

Soldier: Sir, may I ask why I had to shoot them?

Officer: Because I ordered you to.

I know that it should never get so extreme that this is the case, but that is effectively what you proposed.

UNLAWFUL order....

An Order is an Order and must be followed....

A LAWFUL order is a LAWFUL order and must be followed....

[Able]

A LAWFUL order is a LAWFUL order and must be followed....

What he said.... Thank you Truck Driver..

"Report to the CO's office when relieved"
“Report to the Duty Officer before going off duty”
Or any type of request along these lines I think would be considered a "Lawful Order"

On the other hand if the person bringing the charges screws up or just does it to cause hardship on the person been charged they should be held accountable for some type of leadership failure..