>>4536489 pb

>>4536240 pb

>SecOfDef is in EVERY service man and woman's chain of command, BEFORE the President

Very nicely articulated rebuttal Anon! Thanks!

None of us know the truth of the situation, nor the future, so it would be short-sided of me to think that my opinion is spot-on, but I definitely want anons to consider its possibilities as we move forward, especially those that wouldn't understand how egregious of a sin the military considers INSUBORDINATION, let alone SEDITION… black eyes laid on the military tend to have lasting adverse impact on public perception (loss of confidence, appreciation, budgets) for decades.

• SECDEF is in all chain of commands

• Military must obey all [lawful] orders from their chain of command

• SECDEF is UNDER President in Chain of Command (vs Before)

• If POTUS gives order, underlings (incl SECDEF) must obey

• If chain of command below POTUS tries to override POTUS then NOT LEGAL order and Troops must NOT obey the unlawful order

• POTUS fired SECDEF (for cause) to remove from chain of command

But, the real issue here is the Public disagreement with POTUS on decision already made is … willful disrespect … INSUBORDINATION

[I'm not a lawfag, and not saying SECDEF is under UCMJ, but SECDEF job is to uphold these standards and laws…not to subvert them]

All military can give their expert opinion / advice to superiors before a decision has been made on that issue, but after a [lawful] decision is made, all military members of the unit must accept and support that decision. [unity of purpose, unity of command]

To publicly question a decision after the fact (in front of subordinates and/or the public) is tantamount to Insubordination… it erodes confidence in the unit's mission, the chain of command, and adversely impacts the combat capabilities of the Organization.