"Oath Of Enlistment"

S

sneaky pete

New member
As I recall, after taking an Enlistment-re-enlistment oath many times (30 years dual service 6-USMC & 24 US Army) there is a phrase that goes sometning like---"I'll defend the Constitution against ALL enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC" Perhaps the exact wording is not correct but I think it's close. Well, my question is, if a Politician or public official attempt to usurp our rights under the 1st and 2nd ammendments does that make them an ENEMY ?? THANX--SNEAKY
 
I, (state your name), 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.
Click to expand...

It's the second part of the oath that causes problems if your officers don't feel the same way.

Interestingly enough, an officer doesn't take the same oath as an enlisted man. Their oath doesn't include the "obeying the orders" bit. To wit:

I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.
Click to expand...

So if you want to take over the government, make sure you are an officer.:D
 
I understand why they are different, but I just can't help but like the officer's oath better. Irrational faith in the common man, I suspect.

Which oath does a postman take? Hopefully the officer's one. Somehow, and army of postman (in shorts no less!) sworn to obey the president makes me giggle.
 
What I find interesting about the oath is that it assumes that supporting/defending the Constitution and bearing faith/allegiance to the same, and following the orders of the President/superior officers cannot possibly mutually exclusive.

If they are, what am I supposed to do?
 
Very perceptive observation, JuanCarlos. Since the Constitution is articulated first, does it take precedence?
 
In practice, you had best be able to articulate the clear conflict between an officer's (or President's) order and the constitution. Even then, you may not necessarily win because there are so many laws that stand on shaky constitutional grounds that lawyers can easily argue against you.

I suppose, however, if a president ordered the arrest and execution of any member of a governmental branch, the common soldier could figure out it was not valid. At least, we hope that is the case.
 
I believe the Postal oath is similar or the same as the officer's oath. I will get it at work and post it tommorrow. Was weird because I came to swear in expecting the 'through snow and hail...ect' turns out thats just a PR thing! I felt much more comfortable taking the real one anyway.
 
All federal employees take the oath. There is a slight difference between the military and civilian versions. The civilian version does not include the phrase "I will obey.....the orders of officers appointed over me."
 
? What takes presidence?

Sneaky here: Although the oaths enlisted and officers take are differnt as i suppose they should be, the beginnings of both begin basically the same. The arguments of " I was just following orders" was totally shot-down at the Nurnberg. BUT, the phrase "defend the Constiution against ALL enemies both foreign and domestic" in it's position of the oath has to take presidence. What can WE do about these DOMESTIC enemies? Legally, VOTE them out of office !!! THANX--SNEAKY P.S. ny spelling is weak!
 
Enlisted Oath

I have been retired from uncle's canoe club for some time. back then I was required to go to seminars on what constitutes a lawful order. the bottom line was if you think its an unlawful order and fail to obey it, you had better have firm legal grounds or your toast. In essesece the burden of proof wil be on you. So be darn sure ( darn is not the word they used). As a senior NCO I often questioned the orders of jr. officers, but I carefully phrased it as a request for clarification. Sometimes I had to be blunt and point out the order would not have the outcome they desired. I had one J.O that flat refused to listen. I started following his orders to the letter, as stated. Finally the C.O. approached me directly and ask me "what the H___ I was doing. I informed him I was just following orders. Ask why I didn't explain the folly to my officer. "Sir, he just won't listen to me.". C.O. replies "Oh, I see, OK". J.O and C.O. had a long talk. the J.O. was a slow learner. It took three trips to the C.O. for him to get the message. He turned out to be a much better officer after that third trip.


Had some time with a joint command. A navy butterbar took a dislike to a Marine Sgt Maj. He learned a very hard lesson about messing with a Marine Sgt Maj.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top