First question. Are cadets part of the military or part of the people/civilians? When you get your reserve status after graduating from basic ROTC, same question, are you part of the people/civilians or the military? Most describe ROTC and the reserve force as a 'citizen army/armed forces' which is confusing on whether ROTC graduates are civilians or military.

Second question. Are there any military regulations which state that being part of the military revokes some of your rights, such as freedom of speech and expression? I'm asking this because after watching the movie Jarhead, their sergeant said that they couldn't complain about stuff because they waived some of their rights when they signed their military contract.

Thanks in advance. :aberet:

Soldiers are citizens first, and therefore enjoy the all the basic rights and privileges that everyone does, (e.g., protection of property rights, right to a trial if charged; right/duty to vote [which is also a form of self-expression], etc.)

Citizen soldiers are subject to the Articles of War (AW) when they are called to duty and/or acting in an official capacity. For example, a reservist undergoing AADT is subject to the AW . . . including the infamous AW105. Outside that sphere, they are ordinary blokes like the rest of society. The whole value of the Citizen Soldier concept comes from the fact that citizen soldiers are ordinary people, who share the experiences and values of the common man.

Reservists should always be mindful of their statements, particularly when they hold prominent positions in the reserve forces, but are free to express themselves when they are acting as private citizens. Things are different when they are "in uniform".

If reservists, or even career military men, speak their minds while on duty . . . the following quote comes to mind:

"The only justification for revolution is success"

Thanks again adroth! Is there a link where I could read up on these Articles of War and the AW105?

:ssalute:

I read a few excerpts when I was a cadet. I don't have access at this point.

AW 105 pertain to punitive powers given to commanders for disciplining troops under their command. Coincidentally, the AW number matches the calibre of a common FA howitzer. So troopers who are sanctioned are sometimes jokingly referred to as "na 105 ng CO".

Oh. Hehe. Are the articles of war standard among different nations or are they unique to our armed forces?

I'm by no means an expert on military law. [My batch was exposed to all this martial legal stuff because our commandant, during my 2nd Class year, worked at 6th ID JAGO for a while.]

But I believe the US equivalent is the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Have you watched Robert Redford's "The Castle" by any chance? The UCMJ figures quite prominently in that movie.

I Googled the AW a bit, and I believe the UCMJ was once called the "Articles of War" (I could be wrong though, this was a very hasty search). I wouldn't be surprised if our AW was based on the old US AW and we just updated ours on our own when the US recognized Philippine independence.

There are also web articles about the Royal Navy's Articles of War. Given that the US is a former British colony, it would be plausible to say that the US system is derived from the British one. After all, so many American martial traditions do come from the British (the USMC follows the Royal Marine mold in some areas; ROTC was loosely patterned after the British Officer Training Corps (OTC) of WW I, etc.)

Yes, I have seen the castle. Thanks adroth.

sir ian sir,

re AW issue, try to make a research about MILITARY JUSTICE. You will learn something about AW. Am not expert of MilJustce too but I think this would help you a lot. :agree:

Adroth,

Since you have an in-depth knowledge about ROTC, COCC, CAT matters, etc, maybe you can shed some light about this bugging situation that occurred to me and my fellow corp officers way back in 1986 during the height of the EDSA revolution.

If you remember that time, the country was on the brink of a civil war, and I remember very well that either on a friday or saturday, me and a some corp officers were on training and we were approached by our corp commandant and informed us to "stand by" just in case a full-blown civil war erupts. In the event that a civil war did erupt would officers in training in either the ROTC or CAT(for our case), be called for duty? If yes, would they be deployed in the front lines? Me and other fellow CAT officers had our 20th anniversary reunion a few months ago and discussed this issue over and over with no conclusive results. Our school at that time was very near EDSA (say about 2 to 3 kilometers away).

Also most of us officers were against the Marcos administration and would not hesitate to join the rebels.

Your thoughts sir.

IMHO, If your unit have chosen to fight with the rebels side (RAM) then CAD Orders are not needed. You would have fought the government troops as guerillas had the EDSA 1 became a full blown civil war.

However, enlistment orders or Call to Military Training Orders (Draftees) should have been issued to your unit in order for you to join the government troops at that time.

Front line assignments would have been at the disposal of troop officers.


For ADROTH:

May I Inquire why cant we access the timawa forum? http://timawa.net/forum/index.php?board=3.0

Happy new year!

VTY,

1LT 0-141XX3 (MAC) PA[I]