And did you learn this in school then, or actually on duty? If you have any military service at all I’m sure you know that the school answer seldom bears much resemblance to the practiced answer. And I’m certain you also know that asking your commander “by whose order” would be a one-way ticket to a crummy rating. Yes, this is the thing to do if he’s asking you to shove people in the ovens, no, not if he’s telling you when to finish your pre-combat inspections. Perhaps we’re thinking of different degrees of severity here.
No animus. During my time in the military (Army for the first 6 1/2 years, then Navy for the remainer), that particular sequence of events you listed was never mentioned and it certainly wouldn’t an advisable course of action. For one thing, it’d be unworkable in the middle of a firefight. We received quite a lot of training on recognizing when a superior was issuing an order so we couldn’t use the “But he didn’t say it’s an order” excuse.
I’m aware that quite a lot of the training I received from the beginning all the way to the end of my military career was predicated on lessons learned from the “late unpleasantness.”
I’m also not very fond of Heinlein’s portrayal of his version of ideal military figures. There’s some warped thinking going on there. At least in Space Cadet, he tried to have a couple of the characters discussing the issue of questionable orders. The story’s resolution of that part of the plot was, I feel, a cop-out on the author’s part.
I am an Executive Officer, and am pulling what I would call a “double duty”–I work as an Exec for a Colonel and a Brigadier General (both Air Force). I hate my job, mostly due to the batshit insane secretary we have, but beyond that, I have learned one thing: the degree of character will correspond with the degree of the order. A weak leader will issue a weak, vague order. A strong leader will issue a strong, specific order.
That being said, a weak leader will be confused, and based on experience and some of those case studies they give ya, the confused leader will not know what to say, how to say it, or whom to say it to. As in a previous example, a confused leader may say to an inexperienced sergeant, “Take care of those prisoners!” meaning to haul them to the collection point. Because he doesn’t know/understand his chain of command, doesn’t realize how his order will be recieved by who he is speaking with, he runs the risk of inculcating confusion to the sergeant he is giving an order.
A strong leader would have said, “Master Sergeant, find an Airman or two to escort those prisoners back to the collection point!”. He has (or ought to have) strength of character to know his subordinates, and would know how to phrase it to that particular individual–he knows that MSgt will understand his intent, and will recieve ‘the jist’ of things by the way he phrases it and by whom he is asking.
I’ve done this myself. Not for nefarious reasons, but there were times that we had a few extra supplies that we could have turned in at a cost in time and labor, but were better suited in using to further another project. “Sergeant Gray, find a use for that Romex and those receptacles.” Four trailers on the flightline were later wired ahead of time. . .
Anyway, I firmly believe it is completely up to the leadership to understand the orders they are giving, and know how to phrase those orders to ensure there is absolutely no confusion on part of the subordinates.
On the other hand, it is completely up to the subordinate (be them Privates to Corporals, or Lieutenant Generals to Generals) to inquire and clarify the instructions in a tactful, professional manner. Granted, there will be times that ‘genteel politeness’ is kind of out the window by virtue of incoming fire, but there are still professional, discreet ways to question an order and clarify it’s meaning.
Then, there are professional, discreet ways to either refuse to obey an order, or suggest an alternative. Last week, I steered my General into a course of action because I thought of the impact of the way he wanted to do something. I politely mentioned ‘a possibility’.
Tripler
It’s all about tact and being a politician.
The last thing I want here is a general boil-up over an arcane point.
The school answer or the school solution – the answer to a problem regarded as correct by some authoritative part of the military establishment. There is for instance a school solution to how to lay an artillery piece, how to take a tank across a running stream, how to maneuver a rifle platoon across a ridge line and, as in this case, how to respond to a questionable order. The school solution is the approved method of dealing with a problem. It’s not necessarily the only correct method but it is generally correct and provides a place to start.
By who’s order – not used when the order comes straight out of the company commander’s mouth to your ear, obviously. Works when brought by some runner you don’t know or over a radio network from God knows where.
One of my jobs on active duty was to try to teach the finer points of military jurisprudence to junior officers and NCO. A repeated question in those sessions was how to react to an order of questionable wisdom or legality. The Litany was a procedure, an SOP, to find out if the order was legitimate, and what you were expected to do and to have the order modified or recinded in a calm, rational and structured way. The litany supposes that both sides know the drill – that it is a effort to clarify not to challange to authority.
Example: Balaclava in the Russian Crimea in October 1854. The army commander wants part of his cavalry to prevent the enemy from carrying off some captured cannons. He sends a written message by a staff officer who thinks the cavalry commander is an idiot and a coward (and he may have been half right). The written message says that the cavalry will advance and prevent the enemy from carrying away the cannons. What the army commander does not realize is that what he can see from the hill top, the enemy preparing to carry off the captured cannons, the cavalry commander cannot see. The cavalry commander reads the message and says, in an exasperated fashion, what cannons? What enemy? The messenger, who is also somewhat of a hot head, gestures at an enemy battery supported by cavalry some mile down a valley, and says “There is your enemy. There are your guns.” The result is the Charge of the Light Brigade. Had the litany, or something like it, been followed there is every chance that the cavalry commander would have figured out what he was expected to do. Instead he attacked down the valley (Half a league, half a league, half a league onward) and destroyed about half the army’s cavalry force.
Thank you for the explanation of the history of the Charge of the Light Brigade. I had been told in high school by a (probably pinko anti-American 
) teacher that the order was from an incompetent commander, and was as an example of the stupidity of the military. Of course, this was less than 5 years after the fall of Saigon, and not just a few people thought the military was stupid.
Did you (or any of the others) see The Thin Red Line and the exchange between the colonel and the captain on the order to take a hill under heavy Japanese fighting? I presume it would be a career suicide to question the superior as the captain did, but what are your options?
When come back, bring pie?
What in the world are you talking about?
How much of this thread is unique to the military?
Most of the posts could be apply to any job. There is always a boss and a lower level employee, who has to do what his boss says or take the consequences.
(obviously a civilian boss doesn’t order his employee into life-threatening situations. But on the other hand, a civilian boss(say, an owner of a small business) can often fire an employee at will, and there is less recourse for the employee than for a soldier who argues with his commander.
I guess **muldoonthief ** is referring to the bit in Space Cadet where Heinlein discusses orders.
As I remember it - I haven’t got the book to hand - a brand new cadet is unhappy at a senior cadet telling him to eat pie with a fork. His friend advises that he can ask for the order to be put in writing. Cadet #1 does so and receives a written order not only to eat his pie with a fork but to report to the Commendant’s office after the meal. The Commandant not only chews him out but explains the nature of military orders.
IIRC the explanation has some of the same points as the litany Spavined Gelding posted but not much. The point was more about the responsibility of the officer giving the order to his superiors, not to the person receiving them. I’ll try and look it up when I get a chance - long time since I read it!
The scene you’re talking about in Space Cadet. Tex keeps on picking up his pie and eating it with his hands. The oldster cadet in charge of his group tells him to eat it with a fork. Tex tells all this to his friend Matt who suggests that Tex should ask for written orders. Tex does so, gets a written & thumbprinted order to eat his pie with a fork, as well as a written order to report to an officer and explain all the circumstances. He gets chewed out and is told the “request written orders” is really only to be used in cases of grave doubt, and as a new cadet, he is expected and required to obey any lawful order from any officer or oldster cadet. And he has to write “I will eat my pie with a fork” 2000 times.
I admit it was a lame joke, but it was somewhat relevant.
Yes, but there is a very big difference in the consequences! In civilian life if you don’t like the order and the boss won’t change it you can walk out or be fired - either way you can go and get another job. In the military if you refuse a lawful order you are breaking the law and can be tried and, in some cases, imprisoned.
muldoonthief - Snap 
Glad my memory matches yours except, as you say, it was to an Officer rather than the Commandant. The interview with the Commandant comes later in the book.
Yes.
UCMJ, subchapter X, section 892-92 (Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation).
Subchapter VIII deals with sentencing.
Possible in both peacetime, and war.
Example 1, War: Brigade commander orders a sub unit to remain behind as a “rear guard”. This rear guard will attempt to delay an (greater in sized) opposing force, so that the rest of the Brigade can retreat from the area. This may not automatically lead to death if the enemy is known to accept surrenders, however, extreme dismemberment and death is not beyond the realm of possiblity here.
Example 2, Peace:
Extremely nasty fire breaks out on board shipin the ship’s magazine (where they store ordnance). If the fire is not extinguished, the ship may explode and/or sink with great loss of life. The C.O. orders a crewmember to enter an engulfed compartment, and open a critical valve necessary to flood the compartment and put out the fire. This action may involve the crewman burning up or drowning, depending on his success in carrying out the order.
(A variant on that peacetime tale involving an engineering space filled with Halon fire suppressent was told to me upon checking aboard my first sea-going command.)
Both a examples are Lawful Orders.
The Lt., Major, Commander, and/or Admiral, are supposed to have been trained or their duties and ranks. The Seaman, Airman, Private is not trained for those roles.
If the platoon commander sacrifises himself, there may not be a replacement who can then pick up that role.
The platoon commander has the experience and the info (hopefully) to successfully carry out the missions assigned to him and his platoon. The Privates in his command don’t.
It’s been covered pretty darn well already. I did 5 years on active duty as an officer, and I’m a company commander (Captain) in the National Guard right now.
Very, very rarely have I ever had to say, or be told, “That’s an order.” The closest thing is probably ‘umm…no, I’m serious, do X.’ That happens if you’re joking with someone, and then issue a real order, or if your order seems very odd, which can happen on occasions when you have to react to something new and unexpected, and you don’t have time to explain the situation…you’ll issue a few orders, then take aside senior leadership to catch them up to speed while the movement is already going on…then they can filter it down to the soldiers.
I’ve had plenty of ‘I disagree with that plan, sir’ types of discussions with my superiors, but they’re done in a very respectful manner. Every once in a while a subordinate will get a bit overzealous and cross the line in their objections…usually a quick, ‘watch it’ is all that’s needed to have them (or me) step right back in line.
The vast majority of soldiers, NCOs and officers know the boundaries and respect the rank, even if they despise the person over them…and most will treat orders as they need to be treated, illegal orders excepted. In a well oiled unit, there is very little, if any, direct disobeying an order…the butt chewing sessions are usually because of derelict duty, laziness, or the like…not out and out insubordination…that’s very, very rare. In my time in the military, I’ve only had one person directly disobey an order from me…he was a brand new first sergeant (though this was a headquarters company, and he was a brand new E-7, not an E-8.) I was the acting commander, and he had had a very, very bad day (outside of my knowledge…so I didn’t see the build up.) He totally went off on some soldiers unnecessarily, and then went off on me, and I told him to come over away from the soldiers so I could figure out what the heck was going on with him, and he essentially told me to screw myself and walked off. He was relieved of duty by the BC. It was odd, because he was a good guy…just had a really bad day, and lost his head over nothing. He wouldn’t have been relieved, except that he did it in front of the entire company, so there wasn’t much choice. If it had happened in private (which was what I was trying to do), I probably would have counseled him, and that would have been the end of it.
Anyway, there you go…more useless ramblings!