when do you say f*ck it?

[airmandan]

wow did not expect this to be this popular

And i should clarify a few things, i'm one of those single airman, and i have absolutly no problem doing my job and and willing to go the whole nine yards. i'm not saying at the first sign of trouble, i'm loading a humvee with gear and hauling ass. i'm just wondering what you guys thought on the subject. on these forums we all talk about bugging out or bugging in when SHTF. I, and a lot of other military personnel, don't have that option.

Do i have faith in my fellow SF members? most of them yes. but if everything around us is falling apart, chaos everywhere, no government, and no sign that one is ever going to come back, i have a strong feeling that those with family will want to be with them.

Me? i know i'll be one of the first one's to report in, and one of the last one's to leave.

[Kevin108]

OP: the question you raise isn't one others can answer for you. The answer lies solely in your heart.

Do you follow orders to your death?

Do you go home when you're more concerned about the safety of your family than the safety of government property?

Do you throw down arms and leave when they force you to murder your fellow countrymen who show up seeking assistance?

Your quandary is one I count on to keep our military from turning on the people it's supposed to protect simply because of "orders."

Be aware that should that time come, you would be told anything but the truth concerning the innocent people you were to attack.

[TacAir]

And conversely, in the public service you can quit, at any time. In the military, nope. If you fail to follow orders you can and maybe subject to UCMJ action. It's highly probable that in an extreme event if you were to abandon your post, you may be shot for it. Right there, on the spot.

Be very careful about fooling with the military. At least you will end up in jail. A cop or firefighter quits, well, then they quit. You don't quit the military.

I basically agree with you, but while you can technically 'quit' being a cop, paramedic or firefighter, your decision to 'quit' will likely have very real negative consequences for you depending on the circumstance.

If I'm providing emergency medical care and decide to retire on the spot and walk away from the person bleeding out on the sidewalk, I'll possibly go to jail for adandonment and am VERY likely get hit with so many lawsuits that once a day Ramen noodles will seem like a feast for the next 25 years. If I refuse a lawful order from a superior officer or simply decide I'm done dealing with an emergency and am going home, I could obviously lose my job, my pension, etc. Fire and police departments aren't exactly the Marine Corps, but chain of command and duty to act issues are taken pretty seriously by most of them, even if the consequences don't include getting executed by firing squad.

I don't know if any of the cops and firefighters who unassed NOLA post-Katrina got into any civil or criminal trouble, but would be surprised if at least as few didn't.

I'm with you, I take my job for the govt. very seriously and would not un-ass myself in a critical situation because I honor my oath and my duty. Now, let's say the building is destroyed? Well, that a whole different can of worms. I'd probably find my way to the nearest FD or PD and volunteer to assist. I could no longer perform my duty until a adjunct place were assembled.

We are singing the same song in different chorus's. We'd stay, there are different levels of staying and honoring, conversely different penalties depending on 'levels' of service.

On another point, if the .mil orders you to shoot people randomly, it is an unlawful order and can not be followed. Even if the order is given by a superior, you must have the moral compass not to obey that order. Even in a PAW.

"On another point, if the .mil orders you to shoot people randomly, it is an unlawful order and can not be followed. Even if the order is given by a superior, you must have the moral compass not to obey that order. Even in a PAW."

I wonder if you could expand on this a bit?

[DannusMaximus]

"On another point, if the .mil orders you to shoot people randomly, it is an unlawful order and can not be followed. Even if the order is given by a superior, you must have the moral compass not to obey that order. Even in a PAW."

I wonder if you could expand on this a bit?

Not an expert on such things, but this is basically how it was explained in boot camp.

Even something as heinous as warfare has 'rules', generally laid down by various treaties (such as the Geneva Convention) and traditions that your nation subscribes to. There are rules against summarily executing prisoners, for example, and rules against blatantly targeting civilians or obvious noncombatants. There is also the idea of proportional force, i.e., if a rogue nation shoots down one of your planes and kills one pilot you aren't really justified in plastering all their major cities with nuclear weapons, killing millions.

Anyway, since it's illegal to shoot noncombatants, if you were ordered to do so it would be incumbent upon you to refuse to follow that order. Numerous persons have used the "But I was ordered to [insert atrocity] and I was just following orders!" defense, and they almost invariably fail and are convicted of criminal behavior.

Probably simplistic, but that's the gist of it.

[Packin' Heat]

Seriously people? We're talking about an extinction level event. As one of maybe 5 people left in the world, you'll still be "standing your ground" and guarding the gate all in the name of duty? That's just silly.

There's a difference between ditching when it get hard/scary versus ditching when there is nothing left. We're talking about teotwawki, so to the OP, feel free to turn that base into a personal bunker. Or grab an APC and make a bee line to your house.

[Regular Guy]

"On another point, if the .mil orders you to shoot people randomly, it is an unlawful order and can not be followed. Even if the order is given by a superior, you must have the moral compass not to obey that order. Even in a PAW."

I wonder if you could expand on this a bit?

Not an expert on such things, but this is basically how it was explained in boot camp.

Even something as heinous as warfare has 'rules', generally laid down by various treaties (such as the Geneva Convention) and traditions that your nation subscribes to. There are rules against summarily executing prisoners, for example, and rules against blatantly targeting civilians or obvious noncombatants. There is also the idea of proportional force, i.e., if a rogue nation shoots down one of your planes and kills one pilot you aren't really justified in plastering all their major cities with nuclear weapons, killing millions.

Anyway, since it's illegal to shoot noncombatants, if you were ordered to do so it would be incumbent upon you to refuse to follow that order. Numerous persons have used the "But I was ordered to [insert atrocity] and I was just following orders!" defense, and they almost invariably fail and are convicted of criminal behavior.

Probably simplistic, but that's the gist of it.

I was going to write basically the same thing. Great minds...

But yes, if your Sargent, Captain, or General orders a US or probably NATO member to shoot some odd civilian, you can not follow that order because it's against the law. They can't order you to steal or any number of other crimes. And if you will be charged.

Case in point, true story: A Captain, 2 high ranking Sargents and an Airman go out drinking. They all get drunk. They have to be back at the base at a certain hour. The Captain and the Sargents tell the Airman to drive. He says he's too drunk to drive. The order him to and he obeys. On the long ride home they all pass out, even the Airman. The car rolls and 1 Sargent dies. The rest live but are in the hospital. After the investigation is complete the Airman is charged with DUI and vehicular manslaughter. He goes to jail. Since the officer and sargents were drunk their orders could not be obeyed since they were not on duty. Furthermore, they could not give the order to do something unlawful. So, the only person charged was the Airman. That's UCMJ law. You can not follow unlawful orders.

[EODLRD]

But yes, if your Sargent, Captain, or General orders a US or probably NATO member to shoot some odd civilian, you can not follow that order because it's against the law. They can't order you to steal or any number of other crimes. And if you will be charged.

I think you are being overly general in this situation. I think a better word to use than civilian would be a noncombatant. I can think of several circumstances where it would be OK to shoot a civilian and would be a lawful order.

Also, an order to "steal" ? Acquire? Would that be better?

"Johnson, go get that truck we passed 2 clicks back. We need to get these wounded out of here."

Would that not be theft, yet also a legal order?

My only point is that nothing is black and white in this world, including in the military.

[Regular Guy]

But yes, if your Sargent, Captain, or General orders a US or probably NATO member to shoot some odd civilian, you can not follow that order because it's against the law. They can't order you to steal or any number of other crimes. And if you will be charged.

I think you are being overly general in this situation. I think a better word to use than civilian would be a noncombatant. I can think of several circumstances where it would be OK to shoot a civilian and would be a lawful order.

Also, an order to "steal" ? Acquire? Would that be better?

"Johnson, go get that truck we passed 2 clicks back. We need to get these wounded out of here."

Would that not be theft, yet also a legal order?

My only point is that nothing is black and white in this world, including in the military.

Welp, if you don't want to go to jail, yeah don't shoot civilians. Even when told to. There are people in jail right now for it. It's the ROE and they are a specific guidelines for engagement. 99% of the time, your going to take what ever the civilians are doing and STFU. And unless you are in war, actual real deal bullets flying at your head, you'd better not acquire any trucks or anything else. And yes, the UCMJ is very black and white. Before we went anywhere we got legal briefings on ROE and what your going to do and how it's going to be done. If you grow a brain and deviate, they will charge you. I've seen it happen over dumb shit.

[eugene]

I would think in that last situation (acquiring a truck to transport wounded) a court would rule it justified as a person life is worth more than a vehicle, that's one of those grey ares, you would probably still go to trial.

Makes me wonder, is there someplace in the military books that says if your whole base is destroyed what you do. Or even worse than that, if you know your whole chain of command and government is gone are you relieved of duty?

[Regular Guy]

I would think in that last situation (acquiring a truck to transport wounded) a court would rule it justified as a person life is worth more than a vehicle, that's one of those grey ares, you would probably still go to trial.

Makes me wonder, is there someplace in the military books that says if your whole base is destroyed what you do. Or even worse than that, if you know your whole chain of command and government is gone are you relieved of duty?

True yet fucking stupid real life case: There was a bike left for years on a bike rack outside the barracks. This kid takes the bike. This fuckhead who owns the bike see him with this bike. Gets pissed and presses charges. The trial takes 6 months and he get a dishonorable discharge for 'stealing' this rusted left for dead bike.

Yeah, take some shit that doesn't belong to you in today's military. Go ahead.

As far as the base being destroyed, they clearly said do not relieve your post until ordered or your relief shows up. If the command/govt. is gone and then you will follow the orders of the highest ranking person there. Full stop. You start to make up rules in war you may end up getting shot for it. While it's very rare these days, it is lawful if you attempt to desert in war time. These days they take your pay and throw you in jail. I've seen that too. Dood took off awol with a Uhaul truck. Jail.

[Herkemer]

Seriously people? We're talking about an extinction level event. As one of maybe 5 people left in the world, you'll still be "standing your ground" and guarding the gate all in the name of duty? That's just silly.

There's a difference between ditching when it get hard/scary versus ditching when there is nothing left. We're talking about teotwawki, so to the OP, feel free to turn that base into a personal bunker. Or grab an APC and make a bee line to your house.

I don't think the OP was talking about an "extinction level event", at least at the time it is happening. If is is an extinction level event with only 5 people left in the world, it's a moot point anyway. It sounded like he was describing shit going south fast, but there is something there, at that moment.

He wanted to know when to say when. It's his call, as other posters pointed out. He swore an oath.

I served in two branches of the military in combat arms jobs and units, and my take on it is the most basic thing you should have learned, Don't be a Buddy Fucker.

If you can answer NO, to the question, "Are you a Buddy Fucker?"
Then you're probably good to go.

[airmandan]

I agree with you 100% herkemer. I hate buddy fuckers, and unfortunately we have a lot it them at this base.

So what kind of situations would you say warrant the Everyman for himself factor?

[nathat]

it makes me sad to see a serviceman who doesn't have pride in his duty.

[Regular Guy]

I agree with you 100% herkemer. I hate buddy fuckers, and unfortunately we have a lot it them at this base.

So what kind of situations would you say warrant the Everyman for himself factor?

I can't see one. IF the .gov is gone and the command is destroyed you are still responsible for defending America, the constitution and remaining at your post. If your the absolute last man standing and have no way of communicating with the command structure you should still man your post. Bases have a lot of food and other assests so staying put would be the best idea. the Air Force is very touchy about losing a base and they would prolly want to find out what happened.
And lets say this is an extinction level event. People will gravitate to some authority, that authority may be you. So it would be your resonsibility as a member of the US Military to organize them for mutual protection, clothes distibution, food/water/ etc. Sorry, that's what expected.
Walking away is never a good idea, IMO. If your personally dead set on leaving, I'd find out what the last day on my contract was and leave then. The only way I'd leave is if the base is no longer habitable by chemicals, fall out or lack of food. However, I'd look for the shelter in place areas, which on AF bases are numerous.

[eugene]

I would think in that last situation (acquiring a truck to transport wounded) a court would rule it justified as a person life is worth more than a vehicle, that's one of those grey ares, you would probably still go to trial.

Makes me wonder, is there someplace in the military books that says if your whole base is destroyed what you do. Or even worse than that, if you know your whole chain of command and government is gone are you relieved of duty?

[YouTube][/YouTube]
True yet fucking stupid real life case: There was a bike left for years on a bike rack outside the barracks. This kid takes the bike. This fuckhead who owns the bike see him with this bike. Gets pissed and presses charges. The trial takes 6 months and he get a dishonorable discharge for 'stealing' this rusted left for dead bike.

Yeah, take some shit that doesn't belong to you in today's military. Go ahead.

As far as the base being destroyed, they clearly said do not relieve your post until ordered or your relief shows up. If the command/govt. is gone and then you will follow the orders of the highest ranking person there. Full stop. You start to make up rules in war you may end up getting shot for it. While it's very rare these days, it is lawful if you attempt to desert in war time. These days they take your pay and throw you in jail. I've seen that too. Dood took off awol with a Uhaul truck. Jail.

Little bit different situation, when the bike was taken was nit in a battle with lives at stak. If you want to claim abandoned property there is a proper way to do it, you notify the proper authorities and file the paperwork then when they give the ok you take it.

[DannusMaximus]

So what kind of situations would you say warrant the Everyman for himself factor?

I can't see one. IF the .gov is gone and the command is destroyed you are still responsible for defending America, the constitution and remaining at your post. If your the absolute last man standing and have no way of communicating with the command structure you should still man your post. Bases have a lot of food and other assests so staying put would be the best idea. the Air Force is very touchy about losing a base and they would prolly want to find out what happened.

One of the things that I took away from my .mil days was a cool concept called the "commander's intent", and I think that's what Regular Guy is describing. Here's a good description of what that means, taken from this PDF http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/shattuck.pdf:

The commander's intent describes the desired endstate. It is a concise statement of the purpose of the operation and must be understood two levels
below the level of the issuing commander. It must clearly state the purpose of the mission. It is the single unifying focus for all subordinate elements.
It is not a summary of the concept of the operation. Its purpose is to focus subordinates on what has to be accomplished in order to achieve success, even
when the plan and concept no longer apply, and to discipline their efforts toward that end.

That's the definition, and in practice it works like this: You're a boot private, with no authority whatsoever. Your team leader/squad leader tells you "Hey Pvt. Schmuckatelli, we're supposed to keep the enemy from crossing this river. Here's your fighting hole, this is your sector to cover." Now, the farther you get up the chain of command, the more complicated that gets as far as units involved, where people are positioned, what support you'll have, logisitical considerations, all the way up to whether or not Congress has given the authority to take that action. On the ground level, though, that Private knows that, no matter what the hell else happens or how complicted things get, or how many people in his leadership chain get wacked, or how badly the plan falls apart, in the absence of a different order his job is to keep the enemy from crossing that river. Makes it simple, right?

SO, it doesn't really matter what else happens, in theory, you still have a job to do unless you're told to do otherwise. If you're put on post that morning, unless you're told something else to do by a member of your COC, your job is to follow your General Orders and walk that post. Everybody else in your unit dead, all your officers killed or gone, zombies have inherited the earth? Your orders are still to walk that post. Since nobody is likely to walk up to you and say "Hey, I just got a telegram and it looks like the United States Government and Constitution no longer exist, so you can take off now!", I agree with RG that, unless you are told otherwise, your mission would remain.

Now, in practice, I don't know if I would spend the rest of my days slowly walking post over the burnt out shell of a base, clothes in tatters and beard down to my knees, rifle slowly rusting completely away. But, if you choose to unass your post, and haven't been told by your COC that's okay, you would be WRONG to leave. It would be understandable, perhaps, but you would still be wrong.

[raptor]

Walking away is never a good idea, IMO. If your personally dead set on leaving, I'd find out what the last day on my contract was and leave then.

But, if you choose to unass your post, and haven't been told by your COC that's okay, you would be WRONG to leave. It would be understandable, perhaps, but you would still be wrong.

Interesting thread. These positions are similar but I would say RG's comment is my thought on the matter. Once the contract term was up, IMO you have no moral obligation to stay. You have fullfilled your obligation. Thus unless (due say to the SHTF event) all enlistment contracts become "for the duration" terms like in WW-2 IMO if you walked away after the expiration of your contract you would not be wrong morally. Now the UCMJ may likely think otherwise and obviously if people are counting on you to do your duty and stay then other considerations come into play.

Just my $.02.

[TacAir]

Walking away is never a good idea, IMO. If your personally dead set on leaving, I'd find out what the last day on my contract was and leave then.

But, if you choose to unass your post, and haven't been told by your COC that's okay, you would be WRONG to leave. It would be understandable, perhaps, but you would still be wrong.

Interesting thread. These positions are similar but I would say RG's comment is my thought on the matter. Once the contract term was up, IMO you have no moral obligation to stay. You have fullfilled your obligation. Thus unless (due say to the SHTF event) all enlistment contracts become "for the duration" terms like in WW-2 IMO if you walked away after the expiration of your contract you would not be wrong morally. Now the UCMJ may likely think otherwise and obviously if people are counting on you to do your duty and stay then other considerations come into play.

Just my $.02.

In the First Strike story this issue was raised, and handled like this:
****
They were soon back to the truck, their collective minds spinning with all of the what could be, worrying over the future. Back at the hospital, they found the carnage was considerable. The glass in all their vehicles was gone, blown out, as were all the windows in the hospital building. The sound of generators hammering away was proof that the power was out. Damage inside had to be considerable; they could see where parts of the roof had failed. Worst of all was the Osprey. One wing had been smashed, but at least wasn't leaking fuel.

Bill took it all in silently. Turning back to the group, they could tell he had come to some decision.

"OK folks. Time to make the hard call. It's over. I am officially putting you all on indefinite leave. Go where you wish. If you can ever make it to any established or reconstituted National Command Authority, please report for duty. The weapons are yours, as is anything we can salvage out of the aircraft."
****

The two officers head back to the base, the enlisted, well, they go their own way - initially. But, in the end, all answer back to properly recognized NCA.

It is, in the end, a personal choice for every GI to make - or not.

[DannusMaximus]

I kind of glanced over the 'end or contract' portion of RG's post. I tend to agree that you could use the 'my contract was up' date argument. I would think that the response would be "Didn't you get the word? DOD stop-lossed everybody when the zombie outbreak began!", but at least it would give you a solid reason to leave.

Then again, if you haven't recieved your official discharge paperwork, are you discharged? I bet that buried somewhere in the tiny print of an elistment contract is an exlusionary clause that says if you don't have the right forms, you're screwed. My DD-214 is one of the documents I keep WELL protected.

Also, aren't officers who don't retire but serve to the end of their active contract simply put into reserve, or are they formally discharged like enlisted personnel? For some reason I have in my head that there isn't really a discharge given for officers, and that you're subject to a recall for a very, very long time, but I could be wrong on that.

[TacAir]

I kind of glanced over the 'end or contract' portion of RG's post. I tend to agree that you could use the 'my contract was up' date argument. I would think that the response would be "Didn't you get the word? DOD stop-lossed everybody when the zombie outbreak began!", but at least it would give you a solid reason to leave.

Then again, if you haven't recieved your official discharge paperwork, are you discharged? I bet that buried somewhere in the tiny print of an elistment contract is an exlusionary clause that says if you don't have the right forms, you're screwed. My DD-214 is one of the documents I keep WELL protected.

Also, aren't officers who don't retire but serve to the end of their active contract simply put into reserve, or are they formally discharged like enlisted personnel? For some reason I have in my head that there isn't really a discharge given for officers, and that you're subject to a recall for a very, very long time, but I could be wrong on that.

Everything you wanted to know about recall to active duty

http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r601_10.pdf



Members of the Retired Reserve may volunteer to be recalled to Active Duty in support of Contingency Operations. The Retiree Recall process takes approximately 120 days, however the process may be faster if the Retiree is a by-name request. To be eligible for recall, Retirees must fill a validated position, meet all medical standards (fit-for-duty), and have a security clearance. Retirees are grouped in three categories:

Category I: Non-disability Soldiers retired less than 5 years and under the age of 60.
Category II: Non-disability Soldiers retired more than 5 years and under the age of 60.
Category III: All retirees that do not fit in Category I or II.
(source - http://www.armyg1.army.mil/MilitaryPers ... Recall.asp)

Short version, IF you are under 60 AND retired, the military can recall you to active duty.

General Officers never retire, they are just inactive.

You do have to be 'fit for duty'....

[raptor]

I tend to agree that you could use the 'my contract was up' date argument. I would think that the response would be "Didn't you get the word? DOD stop-lossed everybody when the zombie outbreak began!", but at least it would give you a solid reason to leave.

I think it would give you a moral reason to leave. Legal not so sure but certainly I would say morally you did what you agreed to do.

As far as recalls go, I know my father (a WW-2 vet) was recalled to duty during the Korean War. He mustered out in 1946 (no reserve, no nothing). A few years later out of the blue he got a letter ordering "Lt. Raptors Dad" to report for duty. They were short of combat experienced officers for some reason and he was one of the lucky bunnies recalled. He was pissed but went expecting to go to a training center. Instead he went to a logistics operation in Alabama to supervise an aspect of that operation in which he had zero experience and background.

[Kevin108]

The mindset of some of the people in this makes me glad I never joined the military. I'm also impressed at the ability of the military to make a man so thoroughly drink the Kool-Aid.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[raptor]

The mindset of some of the people in this makes me glad I never joined the military. I'm also impressed at the ability of the military to make a man so thoroughly drink the Kool-Aid.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

If you do not like it... simply do not read it.

[airmandan]

i'm surprised by the number of people here that are convinced that'd i'm just going to walk away from here. they obviously missed my second post.

And i should clarify a few things, i'm one of those single airman, and i have absolutly no problem doing my job and and willing to go the whole nine yards. i'm not saying at the first sign of trouble, i'm loading a humvee with gear and hauling ass. i'm just wondering what you guys thought on the subject. on these forums we all talk about bugging out or bugging in when SHTF. I, and a lot of other military personnel, don't have that option.

Me? i know i'll be one of the first one's to report in, and one of the last one's to leave.