2016 Video Reveals Hegseth: Military Must Refuse Unlawful Orders

In a striking 2016 video, Pete Hegseth, the then Fox News contributor, declared that the U.S. military should refuse unlawful orders from the Commander in Chief. His comments highlight a crucial aspect of military ethics, emphasizing that illegal commands should not be followed. Recently, Hegseth has criticized six Democratic lawmakers for encouraging military personnel to disobey orders they deem unlawful, labeling them the “Seditious Six.”

Refusal of Unlawful Orders: A Military Ethos

During a 2016 event hosted by the Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley, Hegseth addressed the responsibility of military personnel to reject illegal commands. He stated, “I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes,” underscoring the serious repercussions of unlawful orders. Hegseth argued that a code of conduct exists within the military that transcends individual commands.

Current Controversy Surrounding Military Strikes

This conversation comes amid scrutiny of U.S. military operations targeting drug vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific. Some lawmakers question whether these military actions comply with legal standards, raising debates around potential violations of the law.

Hegseth, however, remains steadfast in his defense of the recent strikes, which have been undertaken under the Trump administration. He voiced support for Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley, who ordered a controversial second strike on a drug boat in September. According to Hegseth, the orders being issued are lawful and reflect established military policies.

Political Backlash and Calls for Accountability

• Democrats, including Senator Mark Kelly and Representative Chrissy Houlahan, released a video cautioning military members against illegal orders.
• They emphasized the troops’ legal responsibility to uphold the Constitution and reject any unlawful commands.
• Hegseth responded with allegations that the Democrats’ message undermines military trust and creates hesitance within the chain of command.

The Pentagon has acknowledged that military personnel have clear procedures to address unlawful orders. Hegseth’s remarks from 2016 highlight the importance of adhering to the law, a principle reinforced by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This legal framework mandates adherence to lawful commands while obligating personnel to ignore those that are blatantly illegal.

Legal Implications of Military Actions

The ongoing conflict over the legality of military strikes has led to significant discourse among lawmakers. Critics question the justification for attacking vessels presumed to carry drug traffickers, suggesting that these actions might amount to extrajudicial killings. Legal experts warn that targeting individuals labeled as non-combatants contradicts international law.

As the situation evolves, the spotlight remains on Hegseth and the administration’s military strategy. The consequences of these actions highlight a broader discussion surrounding military ethics, legal adherence, and the responsibilities of service members during complex operations.