Jason wrote: ↑Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:44 pm
(@) Chenda
Ex-high ranking military such as Powell and Mattis are expressing their issues with Trump, including but not limited the calling for military deployment against the protestors. It was a breaking point for some as it offends the basic idea of the military to protect the country from external threats not its own citizens. Cotton's OP-Ed in The NY Times got the heir apparent to the top job axed. We know that Trump views all government agencies as existing to do his bidding. The fact that he has staffed the high ranking military ranks with like-minded people is kind of scary if things got out of hand. How it would play out is beyond my pay grade. Someone with military experience might have a better idea.
Well technically the President is responsible for commissioning and promoting every officer in the United States Military (see
here). The reality is the President usually doesn't provide a say in officers other than those seeking appointments at the Chief of Staff level, who then still need to be confirmed by the Senate. I would not say the President has "staffed" the high ranking military ranks with like-minded people because career military officers are apolitical. However, I will say he has eroded a lot of civil-military trust by staffing so many former/retired high ranking military officers in senior civilian posts.
I read Mattis' article in the Atlantic and I wasn't super impressed. I was hoping he would use it to educate the public about the nature of civil-military relations and instead it just comes off as another smear against Trump (even though I agree with Mattis' view). In my opinion, former military officers wading into domestic politics paradoxically erodes the very apolitical nature of the military that many of them are arguing for. This is because the masses mistakenly interpret a retired officer's opinion as reflective of the entire military.
In regards to the basic idea of the military, let's take a look at the wording of the Oath of Reenlistment:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Note that the idea of the military is not only to protect it's citizens from external threats (although that is implied). It is to support and defend the Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. Also note that the military is bound by law to obey lawful orders given by the President.
Keep in mind that our democracy is mostly based on norms, not strict policies. In other words, the President has a lot of leeway to do pretty much whatever he wants if he doesn't care about preserving norms (see
here). Lets talk about using the military to suppress protests. Well according to the Insurrection Act, the President has the ability to do that:
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
Again and again, what you'll realize is the President has enormous power as Commander in Chief. I think the Executive Branch's power within the Federal Government has been increasing in the last 20 or so years. There is an assumption built into all of the foundational laws of the United States that the President will act in the best interest of the country and the Constitution. If he doesn't, in theory impeachment exists to check his power, however as we saw a few months ago, impeachment might not even be a viable check.
I provide all of the above as background information. I'm not going to attempt to speculate how some sort of civil war would play out because there are just too many unknowns. However, I will say that folks in the military run the gamut on the political spectrum and are by no means mindless killing machines. But I will also say, the military's allegiance is to the Constitution and the Presidential Office, not to any specific person. Again, this makes it tricky to predict what would happen in some sort of mutiny/civil war scenario.