By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In response to President Trump’s order to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago to quell protests, Illinois National Guard Captain Dylan Blaha and Staff Sgt. Demi Palecek have stated they will defy the order. They believe the deployment is unjust, particularly given the focus on immigration enforcement and the impact on the community. Both cite concerns about the legality of the order and the potential for it to target innocent civilians. Refusal to comply could result in court-martial, imprisonment, or a felony-level discharge.
Read the original article here
These U.S. National Guard members say they’ll defy orders to deploy in Chicago, and it’s a pretty heavy topic, sparking a lot of questions about duty, legality, and what it truly means to serve. You know, it’s not every day you hear about soldiers potentially refusing orders, especially when it involves their own communities.
The heart of it seems to be Capt. Blaha, who has come right out and said it – he won’t be deploying against his neighbors. It’s a bold stance, especially given that he’s also running for Congress. You can’t help but admire the courage it takes to speak up, especially when facing potential repercussions. We’re talking about Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which covers the refusal to obey orders. It seems like the situation has definitely got a lot of people thinking about what they would do in a similar situation.
The discussion quickly turns to the implications of such a decision. There are worries about whether the military as a whole will stand its ground, and the idea of officers following illegal orders. It’s a big deal. Refusing could mean a court-martial, dishonorable discharge, and losing a career. It is understandable why many may follow orders. But there’s also the question of what happens when those orders clash with the oath they swore to uphold, protecting the Constitution. Some are leaving the military due to this.
The debate also brings up the thorny issue of what constitutes an “illegal order.” Who decides? The Supreme Court? Given the current political climate, some are worried about the court’s potential biases. And who would back up a soldier who refuses an order they deem unconstitutional? That’s a huge consideration, because you’re essentially putting your career and reputation on the line. It’s a tough spot to be in. The removal of legal oversight from this administration makes it look like there’s not one.
But it’s not just about the legalities; it’s also about the broader context. There’s a strong sentiment that this deployment is less about fighting crime and more about a political show of force. Many point out that Chicago isn’t even in the top 20 cities for homicides, questioning the real motive behind it. The use of the National Guard isn’t really intended for crime-fighting and isn’t really going to help anything.
The question of why this is happening sparks opinions. There’s a feeling that this is the administration using the military to intimidate local governments that disagree with them. It raises concerns about authoritarianism and the erosion of democratic principles. If the goal were really to address crime, some argue, then the troops would be sent to cities with much higher crime rates.
And then there’s the language used around this. The phrases “good on them” and “good for them” come up. It’s interesting to consider the nuances of those phrases, which might seem similar at first glance. It means that their actions are laudable, meaning they did the right thing.
The piece comes back to the military’s role. If you are ordered to do something illegal, you’re not supposed to obey. The discussion also brings up historical events, like Tiananmen Square and Kent State, as cautionary tales of what can happen when orders are followed blindly. The idea of soldiers having to make split-second decisions about whether to open fire on unarmed protestors is chilling, a reminder of the power and responsibility that comes with military service.
The big question remains: what will happen if these Guard members refuse to deploy? It’s a complex situation with no easy answers, but it’s a conversation we need to be having.