(a) That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation; (b) That the accused had a duty to obey it; and (c) That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation. (2) Failure to obey other lawful order. (c) Duty to obey order. (i) From a superior. A member of one armed force who is senior in rank to a member of another armed force is the superior of that member with authority to issue orders which that member has a duty to obey under the same circumstances as a commissioned officer of one armed force is the superior commissioned officer of a member of an-other armed force for the purposes of Articles 89, and 90.
Szegedy-Maszak makes the statement that the Abu Ghraib Prison was “an island where conventional morality no longer applied” (Szegedy-Maszak 212). She is insinuating that conditions in military settings where present at the Abu Ghraib Prison that would make violent and torturous behavior acceptable. Szegedy-Maszak states that there are three factors that can be put into place within a social environment that will allow for a person’s conventional morality to no longer apply: authorization, routinization, and dehumanization. She translates authorization as the effect of a person of authority allowing torture, violent behavior, and breaches of morality, and then
Upon the general’s arrival he was not shown the proper customs and courtesies (i.e., hand salute). It was only after the general told the Marines to render the proper customs and courtesies that anyone rendered the general a hand salute and valediction. When taken individually, these are microcosmic events within the Marine Corps; however, the behaviors are not limited to Camp Lejeune alone and indicate a growing antipathy toward authority and disrespect for customs and courtesies. The Marine Corps should reexamine its roots of professionalism, good order, and discipline via professional development (e.g., unit-level development to the Staff NCO Academy (SNCOA)) and resharpen its professional saw, which after years of war has been dulled and its focus shifted from professional development in favor of combat proficiency. The assertion is that combat proficiency—a skill—can supersede professionalism—an attitude.
Maintain a good appearance is essential for all members of the armed forces, especially for the U.S. NAVY. It looks simple, and we should always be able to carry out this mission, no matter what. Not having just a simple thing like a belt makes us look uneven. By the simple fact of having forgotten belt, we could also forget send a message instead, and for not sending a message we could end up losing the lives of our shipmates, or even worse, lose the war. Having a uniform ready at all times will teach us discipline.
Military bearing is what determines if a soldier actually lives by the seven army values. If a soldier displays themselves in a disorderly conducted manner they definitely do not live by the seven army values. There are many aspects that determine if a soldier really does have military bearing or not. Is it the attitude of the soldier that determines if he or she has military bearing or not, or is it the actions that the soldiers abide by that does so? In many instances one may think that it’s the actions of the soldier that determine if they have military bearing or not but in reality it is both aspects that determine if a soldier has military bearing Does a person that moves in formation differ from one that disrespects a non-commission officer?
Main claim The paper ‘Professional Integrity and Disobedience in the Military’ by Jessica Wolfendale argues that if the military’s primary function is to protect the nation and serve moral good, then the military, at both institutional and individual level, should have, not only the permission, but the duty to disobey direct orders from the state to go to war if these orders conflict with the principles of jus ad bellum. Wolfendale further argues that there is a discrepancy between the military’s professional integrity and the generally accepted fact that the military should ultimately obey the state. The inconsistency lies in the fact that the guidelines of the professional integrity in this case would have prohibited the execution of many orders given by states through the years, and since there are few to none accounts of the military disobeying state orders. Opposing point of view The generally accepted opinion is, that the military professionals cannot be held accountable for the morality of an order issued by the state. It is widely recognised that the military and the soldiers individually are part of a community that would demand of them to put their personal and professional values aside to serve the moral good.
Following orders also instill discipline within the ranks. Orders come from the top ranks down to the lower ranks. Following those orders ensures everyone is on the same page to get the task done in the most efficient manner possible. If someone does not follow the orders given for a task and decides to do the task in their own way, the risk of failure is increased and more likely. It can have a very costly outcome The first lesson of leadership is learning how to follow orders.
For my violation I fell under Article 91. and could have lead to lesser charges, in which I would be sentenced thru UCMJ which is the uniformed code of military justice. What I am going to talk about is Article 91 in which I violated by disrespect to a NCO. Article 91 is as follows insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, NCO or Petty Officer. Any warrant officer or enlisted member who strikes or assaults a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, while that officer is in the execution of
If a Marine see’s you doing something that you would normally deem worthy of a ticket or a written warning then you’re setting a bad example and making yourself and other military police officers look like bags of ass. This is an unforgiving job, leading marines is not debatable, policing them should be one of your main priorities. You should be making sure that they are doing what they are supposed to be doing at all times. There should be no conflict with the rules and regulations, if there is then you might as well call yourself a
Hence when the purpose is not met then there is definitely a need for corrective measures. And this cannot be met if laws were meant to be rigid or fixed. The basic ultimatum of a law is to ensure that under all circumstances it serves its basic purpose. when a law does not seek to know the circumstance or the situation under which it has been over ruled, it cannot determine if a certain case has been found guilty. The reason being human activities are very much dependant on what he or she was subjected to at that instance.