When one enlists in the military, one signs certain rights away. You essentially sign yourself up for indentured service to the country for a period of time, and during that time, certain constitutional rights no longer apply to you. These rules are listed in the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
One of those rights you voluntarily give up is the right to free speech. Article 88 of the UCMJ states the following:
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
The reason why I point this out is because recently, we’ve see many neo-con pundits pointing out that the Generals in the army are testifying to Congress about the situation in Iraq, and making positive statements about President Bush’s policies. But military officers are required to support the policies of their civilian leaders, and take very severe legal risks if they do speak out against the policies of Congress or the President.
This is the same reason why polls of American soldiers in Iraq are next to meaningless. Of course soldiers are going to say they support the mission to any media person who asks. That’s their job to do so. It’s like asking a football player whether they think they’re going to win on Sunday. Who is going to say no?
However, there is one place that we can find out what the members of the military really think about policy, and that’s by looking to see which candidates to whom they’re sending their campaign contributions. And Congressman Paul is winning that contest.
