<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for Another view of the &quot;Mutinous Platoon&quot;.</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2010</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 16:06:07 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2012</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>Another view of the &quot;Mutinous Platoon&quot;.</title>
            <description>This was in the comments to the post below, but I thought it presents a view of the issue that should see a broader light of day. From SangerM: Just for the conversation: Once, while in the field on a REFORGER, I refused a lawful order given me (several times, clearly) by my PSG. I was a SGT on the 6-list, he was a SSG. The details don&apos;t matter, really, but this may be instructive for those who have never done so, or felt they had to. 1) I did NOT do so lightly. 2) I told my subordinates they...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:49:34 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2004-10-17</title>
            <description>
                Yes, you are correct.  The real point being, none of us have enough info to come down definitively one way or another - but the discussion will serve to inform non-military readers of more aspects to the story than the MSM is giving.  The whole point of the blogosphere!
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html#comment-7650</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html#comment-7650</guid>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:54:20 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Mike L on 2004-10-17</title>
            <description>
                All well and good.  However, the question is LAWFUL order not LOGICAL order.  Any of us who spent more than one tour in any service were given, and expected to follow, stupid orders.  We were not given the luxury to decide which ones to let pass.  Now, many times our responses required creativity, but the expectation is that we respond.  As far as the mission in Iraq, I wasn&apos;t there and cannot determine the circumstances.  That&apos;s why there will be an Article 32 investigation.  As for my response to the personal anecdote, in my 44 months of command, I had a couple soldiers probably very much like the young E-5 telling his story - guys worth saving, but who needed to know the rules.  That&apos;s what the summarized Article 15 was good for - it didn&apos;t go anywhere or hurt anybody&apos;s career - but it sure got their attention.  &quot;Charlie Mike&quot;, ML
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html#comment-7647</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2004/10/another_view_of_the_mutinous_platoon.html#comment-7647</guid>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:30:50 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>


