Poll: Should retired Gen Mike Flynn face a court martial for the act of sedition?

[HumblePie]

Damn…when the heck was it lengthened to eight years? Was six when I was in.

Has been 8 years for all branches for a long time anytime you "enlist" which includes re-enlisting. CTS allows for different durations of "active duty" for enlistment. I think you are confusing a 6 year active duty. Non retirees can be recalled back to active duty any time during the IRR or Reserve (being IRR or Reserve is different for each branch) but can't be recalled after. Retirees until recently could be recalled at any point but that has been effectively nixed with a recent mandate which limits it to 5 years after IRR status is over.

 

[fskimospy]

You can be retired AND on in-active reserves. Being subject to the USMCJ in that status as been adjudicated and shown to be something that can happen. Being retired and NOT being on the inactive reserves has NOT been adjudicated.

False. The appeals court said this:

Notwithstanding Barker and its implications regarding the tax status of retired pay, we are firmly convinced that those in a retired status remain “members” of the land and Naval forces who may face court-martial. As the appellant was in a retired status during the offenses and the proceedings, he was validly subject to court-martial.

There is no qualification or limitation requiring him to be in any reserve. It is clearly stated that being in a retired status is the sole requirement for being subject to the UCMJ.

Being subject to recall is something else ENTIRELY. If the person in question is retired, recalled, and commits a USMCJ offense they would be subject to the repercussions of such. That isn't being argued here. The argument is whether a person that is NOT on the inactive list while retired can be subject to the USMCJ. That has not ever been adjudicated. Most recent cases have pointed to this being a big NO. It is also EXPLICITLY stated in the Air Force and Army USMCJ versions as not having jurisdiction in those cases. I also said that there is 4 years of inactive reserves for the Army and Air Force.

Being subject to recall is something different, yes, however you appeared to think it was relevant as to if a retiree is subject to the UCMJ and it is not.

My statement was correct on durations. No idea what you were trying to state by adding more to my initial statement as if you were trying to score some point.

No, you said retirees serve four years of inactive reserves like everyone else. This is false. There is no inactive reserve requirement for retirees. There is in fact no inactive service requirement for anyone - if you serve eight years active you don’t have to do any time in the inactive reserves.

You are literally trying to strawman everything again.

No, I’m just correcting you. You said a bunch of wrong stuff about the law and the military because you don’t know anything about either.

 

[Meghan54]

I’m not sure, but when I signed up in 1999 enlistments were 4/4. It could be different now too, I don’t know.

Well, since my entry into the military was back in 1972, I’m really not surprised some things have changed.

What hasn’t changed is that retirees are NOT part of inactive reserves…they’re “just” retirees…subject to recall at the drop of a hat.

 

[HumblePie]

Fskimospy,

Again, retiree's serve as IRR or Reserves after acquiring retiree status for a certain period of time like every other military member leaving service. Every enlistment is for 8 years. Zero branches do 8 years of active duty service right now. It is somewhere between 2 and 6 years of active duty and the remainder is either IRR or Reserve. This goes for those retiring. The retirement starts the moment the current portion of the active status of their remainder enlistment is over. You are absolutely wrong if you think retirees of military don't go through a period of IRR. In many cases, depending upon the amount of leave they have left, many retirees go through ACTIVE DUTY retirement status, then IN ACTIVE RESERVED status after that. You are officially given retirement status the moment you finish your retirement outprocessing.

As I said, there has been ZERO cases period in our history of a military member committing a USMCJ offense while retired and not part of their IRR status. Nor has that ever been adjudicated upon. You bring up the recall point is in fact strawmanning the argument. It has no place. Nor does conscription or drafting in this fact pattern.

Here is the fact pattern. Flynn made remarks that some could construe as USMCJ offenses for the Army. He is retired and well past is in-active status as well as past the 5 year recall status mandate. By Army USMCJ he is completely severed explicitly from the military. They could re-evaluate the retirement benefits he receives but in no legal manner could the change his official status nor do anything as drastic as send him to military prison over this. Anything thinking that is bonkers including you for arguing stupidity.

 

[HumblePie]

Well, since my entry into the military was back in 1972, I’m really not surprised some things have changed.

What hasn’t changed is that retirees are NOT part of inactive reserves…they’re “just” retirees…subject to recall at the drop of a hat.

Wrong. Acquiring retiree status doesn't change your enlistment obligations. Again, as far as recall go. Recall is up to 5 years after enlistment obligations are over or the age of 60 which ever comes first. Recall again is a strawman in this discussion because the military can not recall anyone for punishment purposes ever. They either have jurisdiction because the person committed an offense during the enlistment period or they don't.

 

[sactoking]

TIL that when military retirees bad mouthed Trump they needed to be careful lest they lose their retirement for conduct but when military retirees call for a military coup it's cool because they're not subject to discipline as retirees.

 

[HumblePie]

TIL that when military retirees bad mouthed Trump they needed to be careful lest they lose their retirement for conduct but when military retirees call for a military coup it's cool because they're not subject to discipline as retirees.

Losing benefits is something else entirely than being subject to military prison time. If they want to re-evaluate Flynn's benefit status in light of his words then that is the military's prerogative. You'll find no issues with that from me.

 

[fskimospy]

Fskimospy,

Again, retiree's serve as IRR or Reserves after acquiring retiree status for a certain period of time like every other military member leaving service. Every enlistment is for 8 years. Zero branches do 8 years of active duty service right now. It is somewhere between 2 and 6 years of active duty and the remainder is either IRR or Reserve.

Wrong again. When you enlist there is a required minimum length of service for your initial enlistment, which is currently eight years.

10 U.S. Code § 651 - Members: required service

www.law.cornell.edu

Standard enlistment contracts require four of these years to be active, but you can extend your active time to cover all eight. (For example I was active for about 7 of my 8 years) This relates to the IRR because your transfer to the IRR is done to fulfill the minimum service requirement set forth in the US code and if you’ve done that on active service then there is no IRR requirement. Zero.

I don’t know why you are yet again trying to tell me how things are in the military when I spent seven years in it and literally have experienced this topic. I know about it because I did it!

This goes for those retiring. The retirement starts the moment the current portion of the active status of their remainder enlistment is over. You are absolutely wrong if you think retirees of military don't go through a period of IRR. In many cases, depending upon the amount of leave they have left, many retirees go through ACTIVE DUTY retirement status, then IN ACTIVE RESERVED status after that. You are officially given retirement status the moment you finish your retirement outprocessing.

I am absolutely correct that there is no IRR requirement for retirees. In fact there is no IRR requirement for anyone, retired or not, who has done at least 8 active years. Zero.

As I said, there has been ZERO cases period in our history of a military member committing a USMCJ offense while retired and not part of their IRR status. Nor has that ever been adjudicated upon. You bring up the recall point is in fact strawmanning the argument. It has no place. Nor does conscription or drafting in this fact pattern.

Here is the fact pattern. Flynn made remarks that some could construe as USMCJ offenses for the Army. He is retired and well past is in-active status as well as past the 5 year recall status mandate. By Army USMCJ he is completely severed explicitly from the military. They could re-evaluate the retirement benefits he receives but in no legal manner could the change his official status nor do anything as drastic as send him to military prison over this. Anything thinking that is bonkers including you for arguing stupidity.

This is false, as stated by the court of appeals, explicitly. I quoted it to you.
1) retirees are subject to the UCMJ by virtue of being a retiree.
2) Flynn is a retiree.
3) therefore, Flynn is subject to the UCMJ.

This is current binding legal precedent and there’s no escaping it.

 

[fskimospy]

Wrong. Acquiring retiree status doesn't change your enlistment obligations. Again, as far as recall go. Recall is up to 5 years after enlistment obligations are over or the age of 60 which ever comes first. Recall again is a strawman in this discussion because the military can not recall anyone for punishment purposes ever. They either have jurisdiction because the person committed an offense during the enlistment period or they don't.

Wrong again. Retirees are subject to recall for life in accordance with DOD instruction 1352.01 section 3.3 (2).

 

[fskimospy]

Well, since my entry into the military was back in 1972, I’m really not surprised some things have changed.

What hasn’t changed is that retirees are NOT part of inactive reserves…they’re “just” retirees…subject to recall at the drop of a hat.

Exactly. They can choose to join various reserves if they want but there’s no requirement to do so. Anyone that spends at least 8 years active doesn’t need to spend a single second in the IRR if they don’t want to.

HumblePie is just doing his usual thing where he claims to know more about the law than a US court of appeals and claims to know more about the military than people who actually served. I remember one time he tried to tell me how people who stand the watch in port in the Navy aren’t armed. This was surprising to me as I have probably spent about 500+ hours of my life standing armed watches in port and he has spent zero.

 

[HumblePie]

Wrong again. Retirees are subject to recall for life in accordance with DOD instruction 1352.01 section 3.3 (2).

Wrong.

Can You Be Recalled to Active Military Duty After Getting Out?

Can you be recalled to active military duty after your term of enlistment has ended? In some cases, depending on the term of service, it is possible.

www.thebalancecareers.com

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/135201_dodi_2016.pdf

Category I. Non-disability retired military members under 60 years old and who have been retired 5 years or fewer years.
Category II. Non-disability retired military members under 60 years old and who have been retired more than 5 years.
Category III. Retired military members, including those retired for disability or any retired member over 60 years old.

These are the categories defined in the document. Only Cat 1 and 2 can be recalled.

 

[fskimospy]

Wrong.

Can You Be Recalled to Active Military Duty After Getting Out?

Can you be recalled to active military duty after your term of enlistment has ended? In some cases, depending on the term of service, it is possible.

www.thebalancecareers.com

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/135201_dodi_2016.pdf

Lol - FROM YOUR OWN LINK:

Retirees (those who spend at least 20 years in the military and draw retired pay) can be recalled to active duty for life.

Hahaha, you giant idiot - at least read your links before owning yourself.

 

[HumblePie]

I don’t know why you are yet again trying to tell me how things are in the military when I spent seven years in it and literally have experienced this topic. I know about it because I did it!

Great because I've done it and every single member of my family has done it and retired from every branch for the past 4 generations. That doesn't mean you know what you are talking about here.

You also need to read the document I just read. Navy and Marines have an IRR status of 30 years for retirees. Period. If you enlist for 20 years, get early retirement, then you have another 10 years of IRR as either a marine or seaman. Your statement of no IRR for retiree's is COMPLETELY WRONG. It is also called Fleet and Land reserves to them.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/135201_dodi_2016.pdf

Except for regular enlisted Service members of the Navy and the Marine Corps with 20 or more, but less than 30, years of active military service who are transferred to the Fleet (Navy) Reserve or the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve upon retirement. They remain in the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve until they have completed a combined total of 30 years of active and retired or retainer service.

 

[HumblePie]

Lol - FROM YOUR OWN LINK:


Hahaha, you giant idiot - at least read your links before owning yourself.

That was the case at one point, you didn't continue to read did you?

 

[woolfe9998]

This is what happens when people start out making an assertion which is really the way they want things to be, then tries to reverse engineer the logical process by going back to find justification for the position they took which originally had no basis other than their feels.

They end up making asses of themselves.

Repeatedly.

 

[fskimospy]

That was the case at one point, you didn't continue to read did you?

I sure did. It’s pretty clear you didn’t though.

Nice job owning yourself, dummy.

 

[fskimospy]

Great because I've done it and every single member of my family has done it and retired from every branch for the past 4 generations. That doesn't mean you know what you are talking about here.

You also need to read the document I just read. Navy and Marines have an IRR status of 30 years for retirees. Period. If you enlist for 20 years, get early retirement, then you have another 10 years of IRR as either a marine or seaman. Your statement of no IRR for retiree's is COMPLETELY WRONG. It is also called Fleet and Land reserves to them.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/135201_dodi_2016.pdf

The retired reserve and the IRR are not the same thing.

You’re claiming you’ve served? In what branch and when?

 

[HumblePie]

This is what happens when people start out making an assertion which is really the way they want things to be, then tries to reverse engineer the logical process by going back to find justification for the position they took which originally had no basis other than their feels.

They end up making asses of themselves.

Repeatedly.

That is what you and eski have been doing. I have stated there has been no cases of a retiree committing a possible USMCJ offense outside IRR status even as a retiree every being court martial in our history. The few examples were retiree's from the Marines were given a court martial for offenses under IRR status still. You are the one trying to shoe horn something without a legal precedent here. The other issue that no one else has addressed is that both the Army and Air Force explicitly state in their USMCJ versions that retiree's CANNOT be given a court martial as a retiree. Flynn is ex Army. Defacto, nothing anyone here says will change that fact pattern. You, eski, and everyone else here is trying to argue a fact pattern that doesnt' exist. This is why this thread is going no where.

 

[fskimospy]

This is what happens when people start out making an assertion which is really the way they want things to be, then tries to reverse engineer the logical process by going back to find justification for the position they took which originally had no basis other than their feels.

They end up making asses of themselves.

Repeatedly.

I would like it if he would address the unambiguous statements of the court of appeals that directly contradict his opinion.

Congratulations though, you won the bet that he would invent some new legal standard instead of admitting he made a mistake. You win 10 fskimospybucks, redeemable at all participating locations.

 

[Moonbeam]

I would bring in a boat load of citizens of Myanmar and let them decide what to do with him.

 

[HumblePie]

I would like it if he would address the unambiguous statements of the court of appeals that directly contradict his opinion.

Congratulations though, you won the bet that he would invent some new legal standard instead of admitting he made a mistake. You win 10 fskimospybucks, redeemable at all participating locations.

Both Dinger and Larabee were for those cases were MARINES!!!! They were retired marines in IRR status. The MILITARY court of appeals said it had jurisdiction still. It never went to a civilian court. It said it has jurisdiction for offenses caused while in IRR status. That isn't the issue here. The issue is that Flynn is ARMY. Just stop it.

 

[HumblePie]

I sure did. It’s pretty clear you didn’t though.

Nice job owning yourself, dummy.

You missed that whole category section and how it applies then even as I quoted it for you.

 

[HumblePie]

Exactly. They can choose to join various reserves if they want but there’s no requirement to do so. Anyone that spends at least 8 years active doesn’t need to spend a single second in the IRR if they don’t want to.

HumblePie is just doing his usual thing where he claims to know more about the law than a US court of appeals and claims to know more about the military than people who actually served. I remember one time he tried to tell me how people who stand the watch in port in the Navy aren’t armed. This was surprising to me as I have probably spent about 500+ hours of my life standing armed watches in port and he has spent zero.

MSO (Military Service Obligation) for all branches is 8 years. Minimum of 2 years being active. That is per enlistment. Most branches after your active duty term is served can invite you to redo your MSO. Which removes the remaining current IRR and replaces it with a new 8 year obligation. Every enlistment is a new MSO.

 

[fskimospy]

Both Dinger and Larabee were for those cases were MARINES!!!! They were retired marines in IRR status. The MILITARY court of appeals said it had jurisdiction still. It never went to a civilian court. It said it has jurisdiction for offenses caused while in IRR status. That isn't the issue here. The issue is that Flynn is ARMY. Just stop it.

No, the courts of appeals said it had jurisdiction for all retirees. I have quoted this to you repeatedly. There is no ambiguity.

 

[fskimospy]

MSO (Military Service Obligation) for all branches is 8 years. Minimum of 2 years being active. That is per enlistment. Most branches after your active duty term is served can invite you to redo your MSO. Which removes the remaining current IRR and replaces it with a new 8 year obligation. Every enlistment is a new MSO.

No. The US code is clear that each PERSON who enlists will serve for a minimum of eight years, it is not eight years per enlistment.

Here is the relevant quote:

Each person who becomes a member of an armed force, other than a person deferred under the next to the last sentence of section 6(d)(1) of the Military Selective Service Act(50 U.S.C. 3806(d)(1)) [1]shall serve in the armed forces for a total initial period of not less than six years nor more than eight years.

Notice how it says each person and ‘total initial period’. It is not reset with each enlistment and you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Again, when did you serve and in what branch?