# How does the military make political decisions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 9, 2023, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255 "2023-06-09T16:46:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/1 "2023-06-09T16:46:46Z")
Specifically though not necessarily, what standards and information would the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs use to determine who won the Presidential election? To take the contrary of the Milley/Trump/Biden situation of 2020, if the Chairman of the JCs decided that the wrong person was declared the winner, and that the losing incumbent POTUS was actually the winner and was correctly ordering the military to take various actions (invading Iran, or confiscating voting machines, or whatever Milley forcefully decided against in actuality), what would he base his decision upon? “His gut instinct” seems wrong here, but other more objective sources of information would seem to contradict each other. The Speaker of the house says one thing, the courts say another, various governors are giving mutually contradictory advice, etc. How does the chairman of the JC make the call? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/2 "2023-06-09T16:56:21Z")
He does not. The command structure obeys the _ **lawful orders** _ of the sitting CinC whoever he is, whose term runs until 1200h on Jan 20 after the election, at which point the person in that post changes as determined by the political and judicial bodies, and _ **then** _ they begin obeying the new CinC’s lawful orders. Even if Trump had won it fair and square, they’d tell him Sorry, Sir, the military does not have the authority to, for example, seize voting machines. The question becomes how does the command structure decide what is a lawful order, which is a whole other can of worms. But mind you, it does not mean “wise” or “smart”, just _lawful_. ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/3 "2023-06-09T17:06:07Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > The question becomes how does the command structure decide what is a lawful order, which is a whole other can of worms. I think that’s the can of worms I’m trying to phrase correctly. How does he decide what’s a lawful order and what’s an unlawful order? Is that a judgment call on his part? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/4 "2023-06-09T17:07:34Z")
ETA: As you’ve reframed the question, he does not decide. Congress decides who is president, that person will be Commander in Chief, and the military will take orders from that person. Now assuming the process had come apart… …there is no answer here because the authority of the military derives from the unbroken line of commanders in chief as established by law. If that doesn’t happen then there is no one to order the military. We can only hope they continue to maintain standing orders and stay out of any political determination of how the country will survive, ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/5 "2023-06-09T17:13:26Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > There is no answer here because the authority of the military derives from the unbroken line of commanders in chief as established by law. You may have misunderstood my question, or I may have phrased it poorly. I don’t mean some situation where the identity of the CinC is unclear. I’m talking about the period between the election and the inauguration when the sitting CinC order the military to take some action, and the head of the Joint Chiefs has to decide if he’s been given a lawful order or not. Seems to me Mike Flynn in that position might make a radically different call from Mark Milley. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/6 "2023-06-09T17:17:23Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > if the Chairman of the JCs decided that the wrong person was declared the winner, Then he/she sucks it up. The right person is the one declared President by the VP on January 6th or if necessary the Speaker of the House after the House vote if no one got a majority of the electoral vote. Anything else is a military coup. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/7 "2023-06-09T17:20:57Z")
No differently than at any other point in the incumbency of that CinC. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/8 "2023-06-09T17:22:03Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > I don’t mean some situation where the identity of the CinC is unclear. I’m talking about the period between the election and the inauguration when the sitting CinC order the military to take some action OK that is completely different than " the Chairman of the JCs decided that the wrong person was declared the winner, and that the losing incumbent POTUS was actually the winner". It is very simple: the incumbent is CinC until noon on January 20th and any lawful order they give must be obeyed. More interesting is there can be a gap as the new President qua CinC cannot give lawful orders until they take their oath of office. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/9 "2023-06-09T17:26:12Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > I’m talking about the period between the election and the inauguration when the sitting CinC order the military to take some action, and the head of the Joint Chiefs has to decide if he’s been given a lawful order or not. It’s the same process used at any time. If the sitting president has ordered a general to do something they must rely on the law. The law would include acts of congress, the constitution, and the military code. Nothing political should matter. If you are talking about imposing martial law I believe that immediately creates a constitutional crisis outside of an active invasion and it’s up to the congress to use their powers to check and balance the executive branch. Outside of martial law the military is greatly limited by posse comitatus from engaging in acts like seizing voting machines. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/10 "2023-06-09T17:28:06Z")
Right. The correct course of action in the lame duck period is, as happened this last go-around, to respectfully remind the political branches that the military does not have the authority to interfere with the electoral/political process. Want to invade Eswatini for Christmas? Well that’s…unexpected…Sir, but we’ll draft a war plan and let you review it, Sir. Want us to overthrow the Pennsylvania election? Sorry, Sir, based on what law? ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/11 "2023-06-09T17:32:13Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > If the sitting president has ordered a general to do something they must rely on the law. Maybe, but, on the other hand, there are the times when, allegedly—or is is documented?—Nixon would get drunk and Kissinger basically told the JCs to run any orders along the lines of “Nuke xyz” by them, first. [https://www.theguardian.com/weekend/story/0,3605,362958,00.html](https://www.theguardian.com/weekend/story/0,3605,362958,00.html) ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/12 "2023-06-09T17:33:40Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > It’s the same process used at any time. What I’m trying (pretty ineptly, it seems) to ask is how the Chair of the Joint Chiefs decides what is and what isn’t a lawful order. That would seem to me to be a pretty subjective call. He isn’t a lawyer, he isn’t a judge, he isn’t a jury, and this is a pretty big decision It gets worse, of course, if it happens between the election and the inauguration of a different person when the sitting president and his newly-elected opponent differ on the question of who exactly has just been elected, or re-elected, but whenever it occurs, it seems a big legal question to leave up to a non-lawyer to decide. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/13 "2023-06-09T17:38:04Z")
OTOH a 4star officer doesn’t get there by not knowing what decisions can bite him in the ass. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/14 "2023-06-09T17:42:23Z")
Clarification: The US military chain of command does not proceed through the Joint Chiefs of Staff nor through any of Service-specific members. The chain of command proceeds from the President, theough the Secretary of Defense, and then to the operational commander of the combatant command or component being ordered. The JCS is an advisory group to the SecDef and the President, and is also responsible for the combatant commands being prepared in all ways to execute their orders, but they do not issue or transmit those orders. Per the Goldwater-Nichols act of 1986.) > **[Goldwater–Nichols Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater%E2%80%93Nichols_Act)** > > The Goldwater–Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of October 4, 1986 (Pub. L..mw-parser-output .sr-only{border:0;clip:rect(0,0,0,0);clip-path:polygon(0px 0px,0px 0px,0px 0px);height:1px;margin:-1px;overflow:hidden;padding:0;position:absolute;width:1px;white-space:nowrap}Tooltip Public Law (United States) 99–433; signed by President Ronald Reagan) made the most sweeping changes to the United States Department of Defense since the department was established in the National Security ... > [@](#): > > Section 162(b) of the act prescribes that "unless otherwise directed by the president, the chain of command to a unified or specified combatant command runs— > > - “from the president to the secretary of defense,” and > - “from the secretary of defense to the commander of the combatant command”. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/15 "2023-06-09T17:47:35Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > What I’m trying (pretty ineptly, it seems) to ask is how the Chair of the Joint Chiefs decides what is and what isn’t a lawful order. Presumably the congress approved of that person’s qualifications to hold that office which would include a strong knowledge of the constitution, military law, congressional acts and court rulings that apply to the military, as well as the ability to use other resources to make such a determination. That is why that person knows whether they are receiving and should carry out any lawful order at any time about any matter. ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/16 "2023-06-09T18:56:00Z")
So bear with me here: say Trump gets elected in 2024 and nominates Mike Flynn (or some general of sufficient rank who holds political views akin to Mike Flynn’s) to be Chair of the Joint Chiefs, and some GOP-headed Senate approves his choice, he can decide what is and what isn’t a lawful order on his own? 75% of the public can say “WTF are we invading Iran/Iraq/Ukraine for?” but the Joint Chiefs will mobilize forces if the POTUS orders him to, and the Chief of the Joint Chiefs decides his order is a lawful one? I guess I’m trying to figure if we’ve just been pretty lucky in the past, or if there’s some sort of structure in place that prevents a POTUS from giving crazy orders and his handpicked general (and Cabinet members) from carrying them out. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/17 "2023-06-09T19:06:14Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > but the Joint Chiefs will mobilize forces if the POTUS orders him to, and the Chief of the Joint Chiefs decides his order is a lawful one? Of course. The President is the Commander in Chief and de facto (or actually, but certainly de facto) has [plenary power](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenary_power) to order military action. Ipso facto an order to invade Iran by the President is legal by definition, as long as he abides by the limitations set forth by the [War Powers Resolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution). And the latter has never had much teeth as that article notes - he just has to mumble imminent threat and have Congress roll over. U.S. Presidents have very broad legal powers as C-in-C, which is why you better vote the right guy in. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/18 "2023-06-09T19:23:01Z")
The Pentagon contains a whole raft of military lawyers who specialize in these sorts of issues. There are already written outlines of what of legit and what is not. With a rather wide lane in the middle for what is TDB based on the facts of the instant. Said another way, the definition of “unlawful” is kinda fuzzy and depends on vast amounts of law and policy as interpreted by military lawyers, military courts, and commanders. If anybody outside the military has a problem with the military’s judgment of (un)lawfulness, they’ll need to push back politically and/or through the civilian Federal court system. Or through public protest. Any President can give an unconscionably unlawful order at any time. It would not get very far past his desk and into the Pentagon without being turned around. Less obviously unlawful orders get some degree of expert scrutiny then either get turned around or start getting implemented. I’ll suggest that if at the high levels of the military there was much doubt or dissenting opinion, as a bureaucratic matter the problematic orders would be slow-rolled while the problem is examined under a microscope. If indeed we found ourselves post-election with a widespread disagreement in the public, in Congress, and in the parties about who won the election, the USA is now in a countdown to political Armageddon. Nobody knows what will happen. SCOTUS will end up calling the election, or at least ruling in (or out) of bounds some of the maneuvering the other participants are trying. Which may have the effect of deciding the election. All of which has a hard deadline of High Noon on Jan 6th. If the public ain’t having it, they’ll be the ones to protest, blockade, etc. At least based on all precedents and any semblance of military professionalism, the military will keep its head down, its troops parked, and await a political settlement to a political problem. Anything else is a military coup, pure and simple. Perhaps with the intent of installing one or the other conventional candidate as POTUS by unconventional means, but that’s still a coup. The one thing the US military is dead set against culturally is deploying military force within the US to counter US populace. Could it happen? Sure. The political system can fail completely. Some general might decide he’s in charge. Should it happen? Heck no. Do the civilian government honchos at all 3 branches understand how friggin’ dangerous this would be? Some of 'em. Fewer all the time it seems. ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/19 "2023-06-09T19:57:43Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > you better vote the right guy in. I’m trying my best. Maybe I ought to open a new thread in IMHO or P&E at this point, since I’ve gotten the factual answers I sought about the process (though if anyone has further contributions along those lines, feel free). I’m trying to imagine various scenarios where the decision for the military to act or not to act on a POTUS’s orders would be a very close decision. In such a scenario, it’s best for me to imagine the opposite political motives–in other words, a scenario where I’d feel aligned politically with a POTUS after a contested and still not definitely decided election and he felt some drastic manuever were called for. But in this scenario the head of Joint Chiefs would suspect that the orders had a political element to them, and failed to act on those orders. But that’s not a factual question, so I’ll take it elsewhere, ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2023, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255/20 "2023-06-09T21:03:10Z")
One thing I have always felt that might relate to the question here is that when an obviously large but not a majority of the population is deeply concerned about something it would require a smaller percentage of congress or the senate to demand an investigation. I think something like this might offer a bit more stability. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-the-military-make-political-decisions/985255.md?page=2)