Jump to content
A Note on Topic Titles – Be Clear & Descriptive!

Trump Calls Refusal to Execute Illegal Orders Treason

robosmith
 Share

Recommended Posts

robosmith Grand Master

robosmith

Posted
Posted

 

3 hours ago —President Donald Trump has accused Democratic lawmakers who filmed a message to U.S. service members urging them to not to follow illegal orders of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR punishable by DEATH!”
 
  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Legato
Legato

So Mr. Rumplestretchston which orders are "illegal"?

User
User

The US military is not bound by “international law” nor is the President or anyone else in America, unless the US has agreed to do so formally thus making it US law.    

Nationalist
Nationalist

So the Libbies have decided to challenge the president's powers as Commander in Chief. They really have no sense of morality or patriotism. What they have is pure hatred. They hate the POTUS so i

Posted Images

robosmith Grand Master

robosmith

Posted
  • Author
Posted
44 minutes ago, Legato said:

So Mr. Rumplestretchston which orders are "illegal"?

Many of Trump's orders are ILLEGAL.

Quote
Based on recent events and expert consensus, blowing up private boats in international waters is illegal under international law, except in very specific and rare circumstances. This principle has been highlighted in recent international and domestic criticism of a 2025 U.S. military campaign that targeted alleged drug-smuggling vessels. 
 
General international law
The foundational principle of freedom of the high seas dictates that no state may unlawfully interfere with the navigation of ships flagged by another state. International law recognizes only limited exceptions to this rule, which include: 
  • Self-defense: Military forces can use lethal force against a vessel in self-defense if there is an imminent threat of violence against their own personnel or vessel. However, the force used must be both reasonable and necessary.
  • Piracy: Any state can act to suppress piracy committed for private ends on the high seas, though the use of force must still be proportional.
  • "Hot pursuit": A vessel can be pursued and seized on the high seas if the chase began while the vessel was still within the territorial or internal waters of the pursuing state.
  • Specific, pre-agreed operations: Actions taken as part of a multinational operation authorized by a specific treaty or the UN Security Council. 
 
2025 US military strikes
In 2025, U.S. military strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in international waters drew extensive condemnation as illegal: 
  • Extrajudicial killings: Legal specialists and human rights groups criticized the strikes, arguing that military forces cannot deliberately target and kill civilians, including suspected criminals, who do not pose an imminent threat.
  • Arbitrary deprivation of life: The New York City Bar Association stated that the attacks violate Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of life.
  • Exceeding authority: The actions went beyond the traditional law enforcement approach, where the Coast Guard would interdict and arrest smugglers for prosecution.
  • Violation of UN Charter: United Nations officials described the bombing campaign as a breach of the UN Charter because the strikes were not an act of self-defense.
  • Illegal under the law of the sea: A professor of international law noted that the use of aggressive, lethal force was likely "unlawful under the law of the sea".
  • No evidence of threat: Critics have pointed out that the Trump administration offered little evidence that the boats posed an actual threat that would justify a lethal attack

 

  • Like 1
John Stone Veteran

John Stone

Posted
Posted

The United States military is arguably the finest fighting force the modern World has ever seen. That being said, it is not invincible by any means  - only a complete fool would believe that. 

Okay, that said, what makes it so strong - is it just equipment and numbers?

I'd argue that it is also a belief in the Constitution and the even firmer belief that  SCOTUS is all powerful in interpreting it. 

It is said that ANY military is not a democracy - a vote isn't taken when the whistle blows and you saddle up and climb out of the trench. 

Today with technology, that is not 100 percent true. 

Tell me, what is going to happen to the U.S. military when, shall I say, mini mutinies develop - SOLDIERS challenging authority? OMG.

This scenario could develop very easily....... it would be the most foolish mistake to think otherwise.

 

 

Deluge Grand Master

Deluge

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, robosmith said:

 

3 hours ago —President Donald Trump has accused Democratic lawmakers who filmed a message to U.S. service members urging them to not to follow illegal orders of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR punishable by DEATH!”
 

robowoke embraces treason. 

10 hours ago, robosmith said:

image.thumb.png.77eb532e8b98e0899164f541bf1a0ed3.png

robowoke is sick of patriotism and wants the borders wide open by sundown. 

gatomontes99 Grand Master

gatomontes99

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, robosmith said:

 

3 hours ago —President Donald Trump has accused Democratic lawmakers who filmed a message to U.S. service members urging them to not to follow illegal orders of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR punishable by DEATH!”
 

The whole point of their video was virtue signaling with the hope of causing insubordination. That insubordination would cause these young liberals to lose their career, benefits and maybe their freedom. The POTUS has not issued illegal orders and will not issue illegal orders. Nor will any of the officers. What this lwnjs did was put our service members in danger of severe legal  consequences. 

I explored why what these lwnjs did was not sedition. It may be treason. 

Quote

Us Code 18, Chapter 115:

2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=%2Fprelim%40title18%2Fpart1%2Fchapter115&edition=prelim

It would probably be a stretch to say that the broad statement was treason, which is probably why they would not name a single thing Trump ever ordered that was illegal. Had they, as an example, named the Narco speed boats they could be charged with treason because they were aiding the Narco Terrorists in their drug trafficking. 

Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it? 

 

 

User Grand Master

User

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, robosmith said:

Many of Trump's orders are ILLEGAL.

The US military is not bound by “international law” nor is the President or anyone else in America, unless the US has agreed to do so formally thus making it US law.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

 

 

John Stone Veteran

John Stone

Posted
Posted

Okay, I'm going to cross the Rubicon - Godwin's  law?

The SS in particular had an excuse for executing those in concentration camps, " I was following orders"?

For many that was their epitaph - not their saving grace. 

 

gatomontes99 Grand Master

gatomontes99

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, John Stone said:

Okay, I'm going to cross the Rubicon - Godwin's  law?

The SS in particular had an excuse for executing those in concentration camps, " I was following orders"?

For many that was their epitaph - not their saving grace. 

 

But they lost the war. So their laws and orders did not matter. Had they won the war, then it matters. No one, in our military, will ever face consequences for following orders. 

Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it? 

 

 

User Grand Master

User

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

But they lost the war. So their laws and orders did not matter. Had they won the war, then it matters. No one, in our military, will ever face consequences for following orders. 

I would add, the German military was in fact bound by norms and laws to treat people in concentration camps a certain way. 
 

German soldiers couldn’t defend their actions with, I was only following orders.

 

 

 

 

Legato Grand Master

Legato

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Trump's IGNORANT CLAIMS do NOT make his ORDERS "SPECIAL" under the LAW

That's the GMO answer, try the non GMO it's enlightening.

Deluge Grand Master

Deluge

Posted
Posted

This thread is dog shit.

If the commander-in-chief sees a threat to this country then he is obligated to remove the threat.

I trust Trump's ability to identify a threat. I wouldn't have voted for him if I didn't. 

User Grand Master

User

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Trump's IGNORANT CLAIMS do NOT make his ORDERS "SPECIAL" under the LAW

Dude, stop being a cowardly liar.

The US is not bound by international law unless we officially and formally signed onto it.

 

 

John Stone Veteran

John Stone

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

But they lost the war. So their laws and orders did not matter. Had they won the war, then it matters. No one, in our military, will ever face consequences for following orders. 

............ perhaps, that's if ur on the winning side ........ or put another way, the winning side in an election. 

User Grand Master

User

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, herbie said:

Like murdering people in International waters?
That would be legal would it?

See how smug you total dupes are if any troops ever pull a Kent State repeat.

No one is being “murdered”

But please do come back when you want to make an honest point

 

 

herbie Grand Master

herbie

Posted
Posted

Please read a dictionary someday, if you even can. Artificial Imbecility could provide more intelligent responses.
Take your milk and cookies and go play with your Playdough, some of the adults are trying to talk,

  • Like 1
Nationalist Grand Master

Nationalist

Posted
Posted

Oh? Which laws are being broken @herbie? It appears the SCOTUS is siding with Trump. Go ahead "adult"...quote "international law" which...is not applicable in the US.

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

robosmith Grand Master

robosmith

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Oh? Which laws are being broken @herbie? It appears the SCOTUS is siding with Trump. Go ahead "adult"...quote "international law" which...is not applicable in the US.

The Geneva Conventions are TREATIES which are BINDING on EVERY NATION that agreed to them. Duh

Even Canada.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,018
    • Most Online
      2,945
    Dealsshutter
    Newest Member
    Dealsshutter
    Joined

  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...