Sure. Maybe. I don't know if bombing drug runners is legal. It's certainly doesn't seem like it would be, but I suspect that's why Trump mislabeled them as terrorists.
Hey man, you should replace that "AI Summary" part with "I'm a retard and depended on a retarded computer program that's likely more retardeder than me to fill out this post because I am seriously a retard. Would be 200% moar believable.AI Summary:
The U.S. military code of conduct and the legal framework governing unlawful orders ultimately trace back to statutes created by the U.S. Congress and are enforced through a congressionally-authorized judicial system.
Core statutory foundation
- U.S. service members are legally governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which is an act of Congress.
- Congress has constitutional authority over the armed forces via:
- Article I of the U.S. Constitution
- and war/execution powers interfacing with Article II of the U.S. Constitution
Who enforces unlawful order violations?
Unlawful orders are litigated and punished in the military justice system through:
- Courts‑martial, which exist because Congress legislated them.
- Appeals flow into the civilian judiciary through the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), also congressionally created.
The “illegal orders” principle inside statute
The duty to refuse illegal orders is codified in multiple parts of the UCMJ, most notably:
- Article 92 — obeying orders is required only if the order is lawful
- Article 90 — implicitly excludes unlawful orders
- Article 88 — limits conduct, not conscience to obey crimes
So the law protects obedience to command, but only within the boundaries of lawful orders, and the obligation to refuse unlawful orders is a statutory and legal concept, not just tradition.
It certainly is. Piracy on the high seas is sufficient reason to destroy their ship. Smuggling on the high seas is sufficient reason to destroy their ship. Attacking US ships is sufficient reason to destroy their ship.
It is legal.
Some people actually believe AI is God...infallible!
He doesn't know anything about it. It's demonstrated in his posts. He gets it from Google and Chatbots. He also continuously tries to deny and discard the Constitution of the United States.
Fallacy fallacy. Inversion fallacy.You argue with yourself, bub. You are the bomb.
I'm tellin' ya, I've seen better eggshell bots on MIRC before the ...okay..around 2001.
Get off magat media Terry as the Epstein Files have NOT been released by the DoJ yet. They selectively release some which are usually the same ones that were already out in public. They just seem to give mostly those same ones over and over.
The issue is not what they said, so you can drop it.
The military inferred the direction to assume that Trump's orders were illegal, and to disobey them.
Hence the intended inference.
We knew you cannot think for yourself.
The crux of Trump's argument is his labeling them as "Narco Terrorists" as the US government has given prior POTUS broad latitude to kill other terrorists in the name of broad assertion of what could be called proactive self defense.
Nonsense......the R's made no effort to defend Santos.
Didja now? I don't think you did, bihh.
Didja now? I don't think you did, bihh.
You better get smarter and go get you some AI thinkin', dipshit.
It'd be better than what you got organically, but that's just because you're an extreme dumbass.
AI of your garbage is going to be worse garbage, Garbage!
