Amazon.com Widgets

Michael New, objecting to wearing the United Nations uniform: Was Michael New, a US soldier, justified in refusing to wear the United Nations uniform?

Michael New, objecting to wearing the United Nations uniform: Was Michael New, a US soldier, justified in refusing to wear the United Nations uniform?
  • Good order and discipline is the bedrock of any effective military.

    Placing US military personnel under the control of a foreign office is not in keeping with this principal. The foreign officer is not bound by the UCMJ, MCM, Oath of allegence, or any other rule or regulation that the US military personnel must follow. Additionally, participation in UN operations, should it be allowed, must be on a volintary basis only, (the service member must volunteer for for that type of duty) and only do so under a US military officer command.

  • It Looks Like Michael New Was correct

    First off, I don't agree that men and women who volunteer to serve in the United State military should ever be ordered to don the uniform of another nation's military or the don the uniform of the UN. I personally, agree with Mr. New's stand. The law is clear. Congress must consent to American soldiers being placed under the Command of the UN and President Clinton did not get the consent. Mr. New was right.

  • Must Follow Orders

    Although I agree with his right to dissent to the United States' involvement in United Nations peace keeping missions, he has a duty to obey lawful orders. If his commanding officer ordered him to wear the U.N. uniform, and if there was nothing illegal or unconstitutional about that order, he should have worn it without protest.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.