Sgt. Donald Buswell - American Patriot?

The chain-of-command represents the President who in turn acts according to the Constitution. The burden of proof to disobey orders - or regulations - anywhere along that chain rests with the person making the decision to do so. That strongly encourages such person to be certain of their decision. In a case like this no such claim to a higher allegiance could be rightly made. The regulations that were broken are all legal. From the article there's no indication SGT Buswell claimed such a defense. The SGT used the military's computer systems to spread his own personal conclusions and did so using words that could stir up dissention and from a level far below any responsibility for making such conclusions or issuing statements about them. Whether he is technically right or wrong regarding the events of 9/11 makes no difference in the specifics of the charges.

 

Mindless killers. That's just what we want in the military.

I would not have made a good fit in the military. Before I kill someone, I usually like to know why.

btw, where exactly did the good Sgt. disobey orders in this?

I don't buy into the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, but just because the Sgt. believes there are unexplained elements surrounding it doesn't mean he has to be punished. Nor does it mean he is degrading his country or his President.

Based solely on this email, the military was wrong, yes, wrong to do anything at all to the Sgt. (Now, I wait for "them" to come get me and put me in prison for dissenting.)

This is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.

 

The military develops trained killers but not mindless killers. Every person in the US military from top to bottom is known for thinking and acting to meet the situation at hand. Every person is also trained to understand and follow the chain-of-command and work as a team to accomplish the mission. There's nothing "mindless" about them.

 

There is if they're not allowed to think and "not allowed to question orders", as Bro. Curtis said.

Still, there was nothing illegal about what the Sgt. said. He did not question orders in his email. There is no order forcing people, military or otherwise, to agree with the so-called official reports around 9/11. Which report, btw, is the "official" report? Would it be the 9/11 Commission report that President Bush doesn't even fully endorse??? Is he a traitor?

The President, military, and even the servicemen like the Sgt. serve the U.S. Constitution and the people it protects.

If they are "not allowed to question orders", then what, pray tell, is stopping this country from becoming a military dictatorship??? So, a rogue General decides to take over and the troops, who are "not allowed to question orders", mindlessly follow him? That's foolishness.

(In case you all haven't realized it by now, I do not buy into the theory advanced that our servicemen are legally "not allowed to question orders" and are, therefore, mindless killers, even though none of that applies to the Sgt. here since he did not disobey or question any order given to him.)

 

Members of the military are not required to follow illegal orders but they assume the burden of making such a decision. They have to show that the order was illegal. The command of war fighting does not permit debates in the field. There can be a measure of discussion during planning, lessons learned, etc. but it is not a democratic process. Every member of the military does serve the nation but they do so according to the orders given to them through their chain-of-command. They don't have the option to pick and choose what, when, where, or how they want to do things. That's why military leaders carry such a heavy burden. Mistakes are made but without such a policy there would be complete chaos and collapse in battle.

The SGT disobeyed the regulations - regulations are orders - that were quoted in the article. Further, the content of his message could spread dissension among his peers and others. Further, he is not in a position to draw any official conclusions or make statements or give any reports about the events of 9/11. That's what landed him in trouble. It's a shame because he probably was a good solider. It's not the first time people have made this kind of mistake.

We don't have a military dictatorship in this country for many reasons. One is that we maintain civil control of the military departments through the President. We also instill in our military command structure a strong allegiance to this principal and to the basic law of the Constitution. Every trainee can name the Secretary of Defense and of their respective service in their chain-of-command.

 

Then thanx for not serving.

You have absolutely no idea what being in the service is about, so I'll consider the source.

 

You're off base and getting off topic.

No one was ordering Buswell to kill anyone when he decided to use a military resource to state his personal opinion, however misguided.

If you can't see the difference, then you would not have been a good fit for the military. "Mindless" is the last thing they want in a soldier.

 

You know, even with my time being as worthless as it is, your comments are not worth wasting it on to respond to any longer.

btw, you have absolutely no idea what believing in the Constitution is about, so I should have considered the source.

Good bye.

 

You probably need to have a bit thicker skin to debate here.

 

My skin is plenty "thick", you know that better than anyone here.

I just don't like having my comments dismissed because I didn't serve in the military. Many people, unfortunately, treat it like the private men's club or a "secret order" and don't wish to hear opinions from anyone not within their little group.

Since certain people in this thread obviously have no desire to hear my take on this issue since "I have absolutely no idea what being in the service is about" (other than serving your country, I suppose), then there really is no point for me to continue posting to that/those individual/s.

 

No doubt, that. People throw the stupid word around, but cannot take facts presented to them. So I'm the bad guy.


The constitution does nothing for servicepeople. As I stated before, they are covered under the U.C.M.J.

 

I'm stating that you know NOTHING about the service, so you calling something they do "stupid" is meaningless. If you didn't call something you don't know anything about stupid, your statment wouldn't be dismissed.

And yes, us ex-service people are willing to defend it's institutions. When you can use some respect in yer tone, you'll get it back. In the mean time, expect vets to bite you when you call them "mindless".

 

In my book, anybody who served honorably regardless of for how long he/she served is a patriot. I think this soldier served honorably.

Demotion ? No. Dressing down ? Yes. Disloyal ? No. Stupidly impatient ? Yes.

If he had anything to say, he shoulda kept quiet about it, just served, write down his thoughts, and when he gets outta his uniform, then he can yakitty yak all he wants. Elmer Hubbard, anyone ?

 

People can be very protective of that which they've lived especially if the stakes are as high as they are in the military.

 

There is a process, following the chain of command, where you can challenge an order, after the fact. If it is found you were given an unlawful order, the officer would be held responsible. You just cannot have people questioning orders they don't like.

 

This story originally hit the street in August 2006. I guess news must be a bit slow today so this was a good consipracy story to bring up. But what eventually happened to SFC Buswell? Was he actually punished or simply reassigned to other duties? Does anyone have the details?

 

These all refer back to 2006 events. What I'm wondering is what eventually happened. Was the command investigation concluded or dropped? What were the findings? Was a criminal investiagtion made? Were charges prepared? Was non-judicial punishment administered or was more serious action taken? Was he demoted? Was he simply reassigned? Where is he today and what's he doing now? Somehow this story seems incomplete because we don't have the whole thing.

 

All else aside, what order was violated?

This sounds like a personal grudge against the man for voicing an opinion, not going against an order, that was different than a higher ranking officer.

 

I might know more than you think I do. I have worked for some large corporations that had idiots at the helm, so that is very similar to the military. (As a citizen, I should be within my rights to call the President an idiot. Time was when I wouldn't say that, but he has demonstrated that he has no respect for the citizens of this country or our Constitution. So, he is either a liar and bordeline traitor, or he is an idiot. I'll go with the latter for now.) Btw, when did I use the word "stupid"? I said all the hoopla worked up against the Sgt. was dumb. I know as much about this situation as anyone else here. We all only know what we have read. Based on what I have read, punishing the Sgt. in such a severe way was unwarranted.

I have plenty of respect for the servicemen. I can't tell you how many family members I have serving in the military right now. I deeply wish I had been in the physical shape to enlist after 9/11. Ask Dragoon68 about that. I even talked with him about it. Policy is what I have the big issue with, and, as far as the "mindless" comment goes, in my post following that I pointed out that I was being facetious. Perhaps I should have pointed that out in the same message and we could have aoided this little spat. I was simply taking your comment to it's logical conclusion. I realize that our troops are not "mindless killers" (that was probably too strong of language, even joking, and for that I apologize).

Institutions are not necessarily good. Any article, order, or book which goes against the Constitution, which every single citizen in this country is protected by, ought to be rescinded immediately. There ought to be nothing higher than that document legally applicable to anyone in this country, including soldiers.