CPO Krusty
@m-lewis.bsky.social
️💙 Retired Navy Cryptologist. Lives in Maryland.
Lived in Hawaii for a time. Korea too.
Mini Berniedoodle dad, regular dad and Grandpa too.
Annoyed progressive American.
🚫 Crypto
🚫 DM
#veteran
#Maryland
#Baltimore
Lived in Hawaii for a time. Korea too.
Mini Berniedoodle dad, regular dad and Grandpa too.
Annoyed progressive American.
🚫 Crypto
🚫 DM
#veteran
#Maryland
#Baltimore
You fix the military by making sure the people giving orders understand the law — or are replaced if they don’t.
This isn’t treason.
This is civics.
And the people yelling the loudest are the ones most afraid you’ll learn it
This isn’t treason.
This is civics.
And the people yelling the loudest are the ones most afraid you’ll learn it
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
You fix the military by making sure the people giving orders understand the law — or are replaced if they don’t.
This isn’t treason.
This is civics.
And the people yelling the loudest are the ones most afraid you’ll learn it
This isn’t treason.
This is civics.
And the people yelling the loudest are the ones most afraid you’ll learn it
If Department of Defense is leaning into a “shoot first” posture that doesn’t follow maritime law, then they’re the ones issuing potentially illegal orders, not the people warning troops to follow the law.
7. Final point
You don’t fix the military by telling troops to obey illegal orders.
7. Final point
You don’t fix the military by telling troops to obey illegal orders.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
If Department of Defense is leaning into a “shoot first” posture that doesn’t follow maritime law, then they’re the ones issuing potentially illegal orders, not the people warning troops to follow the law.
7. Final point
You don’t fix the military by telling troops to obey illegal orders.
7. Final point
You don’t fix the military by telling troops to obey illegal orders.
• Congress controls war, not the president
• The U.S. military is loyal to the Constitution, not individuals
• The U.S. military is loyal to the Constitution, not individuals
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
• Congress controls war, not the president
• The U.S. military is loyal to the Constitution, not individuals
• The U.S. military is loyal to the Constitution, not individuals
Ordering troops:
“Shoot that boat even though we’re not in a war, it’s not a threat, and the law doesn’t allow it”
—that’s the thing the UCMJ is designed to prevent.
It’s not complicated:
• Lawful orders must be obeyed
• Unlawful orders must be refused
• Political fantasies do not override law
“Shoot that boat even though we’re not in a war, it’s not a threat, and the law doesn’t allow it”
—that’s the thing the UCMJ is designed to prevent.
It’s not complicated:
• Lawful orders must be obeyed
• Unlawful orders must be refused
• Political fantasies do not override law
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Ordering troops:
“Shoot that boat even though we’re not in a war, it’s not a threat, and the law doesn’t allow it”
—that’s the thing the UCMJ is designed to prevent.
It’s not complicated:
• Lawful orders must be obeyed
• Unlawful orders must be refused
• Political fantasies do not override law
“Shoot that boat even though we’re not in a war, it’s not a threat, and the law doesn’t allow it”
—that’s the thing the UCMJ is designed to prevent.
It’s not complicated:
• Lawful orders must be obeyed
• Unlawful orders must be refused
• Political fantasies do not override law
6. Why the political outrage is backwards
Telling troops:
“You must refuse illegal orders”
is not treason.
Telling troops:
“You must refuse illegal orders”
is not treason.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
6. Why the political outrage is backwards
Telling troops:
“You must refuse illegal orders”
is not treason.
Telling troops:
“You must refuse illegal orders”
is not treason.
And this is why the people screaming “treason!” at Mark Kelly don’t want to talk about details. Because once you understand what an illegal order actually is, you realize this isn’t abstract at all.
Some of these orders may already be crossing the line.
Some of these orders may already be crossing the line.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
And this is why the people screaming “treason!” at Mark Kelly don’t want to talk about details. Because once you understand what an illegal order actually is, you realize this isn’t abstract at all.
Some of these orders may already be crossing the line.
Some of these orders may already be crossing the line.
Which means:
If troops were ordered to destroy those boats without an imminent threat, that is a manifestly illegal order.
Exactly the kind of thing the UCMJ requires troops to refuse.
If troops were ordered to destroy those boats without an imminent threat, that is a manifestly illegal order.
Exactly the kind of thing the UCMJ requires troops to refuse.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Which means:
If troops were ordered to destroy those boats without an imminent threat, that is a manifestly illegal order.
Exactly the kind of thing the UCMJ requires troops to refuse.
If troops were ordered to destroy those boats without an imminent threat, that is a manifestly illegal order.
Exactly the kind of thing the UCMJ requires troops to refuse.
Even if they were, that doesn’t magically transform those boats into:
• Combatants
• Military targets
• Enemy vessels
• Armed threats
Drug smuggling is a CRIME.
It is not an act of war.
There is no legal theory under which drug suspicion authorizes sinking a vessel.
• Combatants
• Military targets
• Enemy vessels
• Armed threats
Drug smuggling is a CRIME.
It is not an act of war.
There is no legal theory under which drug suspicion authorizes sinking a vessel.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Even if they were, that doesn’t magically transform those boats into:
• Combatants
• Military targets
• Enemy vessels
• Armed threats
Drug smuggling is a CRIME.
It is not an act of war.
There is no legal theory under which drug suspicion authorizes sinking a vessel.
• Combatants
• Military targets
• Enemy vessels
• Armed threats
Drug smuggling is a CRIME.
It is not an act of war.
There is no legal theory under which drug suspicion authorizes sinking a vessel.
5. Now let’s talk about the Venezuelan boats.
The government is now publicly admitting that U.S. forces have shot Venezuelan vessels out of the water, with the justification that they were “drug boats.”
The government is now publicly admitting that U.S. forces have shot Venezuelan vessels out of the water, with the justification that they were “drug boats.”
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
5. Now let’s talk about the Venezuelan boats.
The government is now publicly admitting that U.S. forces have shot Venezuelan vessels out of the water, with the justification that they were “drug boats.”
The government is now publicly admitting that U.S. forces have shot Venezuelan vessels out of the water, with the justification that they were “drug boats.”
Blowing up civilian vessels in international waters
Acting like the high seas are a free-fire zone
Using military force without congressional authorization
None of that becomes legal just because the administration spins it after the fact.
Acting like the high seas are a free-fire zone
Using military force without congressional authorization
None of that becomes legal just because the administration spins it after the fact.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Blowing up civilian vessels in international waters
Acting like the high seas are a free-fire zone
Using military force without congressional authorization
None of that becomes legal just because the administration spins it after the fact.
Acting like the high seas are a free-fire zone
Using military force without congressional authorization
None of that becomes legal just because the administration spins it after the fact.
What is NOT legal?
Here’s what is not allowed:
Shooting a boat because it “might” have drugs
Destroying a vessel because it fled
Using lethal force as a shortcut to interdiction
Treating smugglers as enemy combatants
Here’s what is not allowed:
Shooting a boat because it “might” have drugs
Destroying a vessel because it fled
Using lethal force as a shortcut to interdiction
Treating smugglers as enemy combatants
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
What is NOT legal?
Here’s what is not allowed:
Shooting a boat because it “might” have drugs
Destroying a vessel because it fled
Using lethal force as a shortcut to interdiction
Treating smugglers as enemy combatants
Here’s what is not allowed:
Shooting a boat because it “might” have drugs
Destroying a vessel because it fled
Using lethal force as a shortcut to interdiction
Treating smugglers as enemy combatants
• You must try to board
• You must escalate force only when absolutely necessary
• Lethal force is LAST resort and only if there is a threat to life
Drug smuggling suspicion does not make someone a combat target.
Ever.
• You must escalate force only when absolutely necessary
• Lethal force is LAST resort and only if there is a threat to life
Drug smuggling suspicion does not make someone a combat target.
Ever.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
• You must try to board
• You must escalate force only when absolutely necessary
• Lethal force is LAST resort and only if there is a threat to life
Drug smuggling suspicion does not make someone a combat target.
Ever.
• You must escalate force only when absolutely necessary
• Lethal force is LAST resort and only if there is a threat to life
Drug smuggling suspicion does not make someone a combat target.
Ever.
C. The vessel refuses lawful commands and poses a threat that cannot be handled by non-lethal means
Even in law-enforcement situations (like drug interdiction), the rules are strict:
• You must hail the vessel
• You must attempt non-lethal compliance measures
• You must try to board
Even in law-enforcement situations (like drug interdiction), the rules are strict:
• You must hail the vessel
• You must attempt non-lethal compliance measures
• You must try to board
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
C. The vessel refuses lawful commands and poses a threat that cannot be handled by non-lethal means
Even in law-enforcement situations (like drug interdiction), the rules are strict:
• You must hail the vessel
• You must attempt non-lethal compliance measures
• You must try to board
Even in law-enforcement situations (like drug interdiction), the rules are strict:
• You must hail the vessel
• You must attempt non-lethal compliance measures
• You must try to board
B. The vessel is a lawful military target in an armed conflict
This only applies if:
• The U.S. is in a declared or authorized war
• The vessel is an enemy warship or armed combatant
We are NOT in an armed conflict with Venezuela.
This only applies if:
• The U.S. is in a declared or authorized war
• The vessel is an enemy warship or armed combatant
We are NOT in an armed conflict with Venezuela.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
B. The vessel is a lawful military target in an armed conflict
This only applies if:
• The U.S. is in a declared or authorized war
• The vessel is an enemy warship or armed combatant
We are NOT in an armed conflict with Venezuela.
This only applies if:
• The U.S. is in a declared or authorized war
• The vessel is an enemy warship or armed combatant
We are NOT in an armed conflict with Venezuela.
Under U.S. and international maritime law, you can only use lethal force against a vessel if:
A. The vessel poses an imminent threat
Examples:
• It is firing on U.S. forces
• It is attempting to ram
• It is demonstrating clear hostile intent
A. The vessel poses an imminent threat
Examples:
• It is firing on U.S. forces
• It is attempting to ram
• It is demonstrating clear hostile intent
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Under U.S. and international maritime law, you can only use lethal force against a vessel if:
A. The vessel poses an imminent threat
Examples:
• It is firing on U.S. forces
• It is attempting to ram
• It is demonstrating clear hostile intent
A. The vessel poses an imminent threat
Examples:
• It is firing on U.S. forces
• It is attempting to ram
• It is demonstrating clear hostile intent
These standards don’t disappear because a president gets angry, or because social media influencers yell about “toughness.” The law doesn’t care about vibes.
3. When is it LEGAL to fire on vessels?
This is where it becomes obvious why people are suddenly uncomfortable.
3. When is it LEGAL to fire on vessels?
This is where it becomes obvious why people are suddenly uncomfortable.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
These standards don’t disappear because a president gets angry, or because social media influencers yell about “toughness.” The law doesn’t care about vibes.
3. When is it LEGAL to fire on vessels?
This is where it becomes obvious why people are suddenly uncomfortable.
3. When is it LEGAL to fire on vessels?
This is where it becomes obvious why people are suddenly uncomfortable.
• Treat noncombatants as enemy combatants
• Use military power as law enforcement without legal authorization
• Engage in disproportionate or unnecessary force
• Commit acts prohibited by treaty or U.S. statute
• Use military power as law enforcement without legal authorization
• Engage in disproportionate or unnecessary force
• Commit acts prohibited by treaty or U.S. statute
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
• Treat noncombatants as enemy combatants
• Use military power as law enforcement without legal authorization
• Engage in disproportionate or unnecessary force
• Commit acts prohibited by treaty or U.S. statute
• Use military power as law enforcement without legal authorization
• Engage in disproportionate or unnecessary force
• Commit acts prohibited by treaty or U.S. statute
2. What makes an order illegal? (The real definition)
An order is illegal when it requires a service member to:
• Use lethal force where lethal force is not legally justified
• Harm civilians or noncombatants
• Break domestic criminal law
• Violate the Law of Armed Conflict
An order is illegal when it requires a service member to:
• Use lethal force where lethal force is not legally justified
• Harm civilians or noncombatants
• Break domestic criminal law
• Violate the Law of Armed Conflict
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
2. What makes an order illegal? (The real definition)
An order is illegal when it requires a service member to:
• Use lethal force where lethal force is not legally justified
• Harm civilians or noncombatants
• Break domestic criminal law
• Violate the Law of Armed Conflict
An order is illegal when it requires a service member to:
• Use lethal force where lethal force is not legally justified
• Harm civilians or noncombatants
• Break domestic criminal law
• Violate the Law of Armed Conflict
“Just following orders” is not a defense. That principle comes straight from post-WWII law and is baked into every modern military on Earth. The idea is simple:
The U.S. military follows the Constitution and the law — not the whims of a politician.
So what’s an illegal order?
Let’s be specific.
The U.S. military follows the Constitution and the law — not the whims of a politician.
So what’s an illegal order?
Let’s be specific.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
“Just following orders” is not a defense. That principle comes straight from post-WWII law and is baked into every modern military on Earth. The idea is simple:
The U.S. military follows the Constitution and the law — not the whims of a politician.
So what’s an illegal order?
Let’s be specific.
The U.S. military follows the Constitution and the law — not the whims of a politician.
So what’s an illegal order?
Let’s be specific.
Under Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the UCMJ, troops must follow lawful orders. But the military’s own doctrine is even clearer:
Troops must refuse “manifestly unlawful orders.”If they follow an illegal order, THEY can be prosecuted.
Troops must refuse “manifestly unlawful orders.”If they follow an illegal order, THEY can be prosecuted.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Under Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the UCMJ, troops must follow lawful orders. But the military’s own doctrine is even clearer:
Troops must refuse “manifestly unlawful orders.”If they follow an illegal order, THEY can be prosecuted.
Troops must refuse “manifestly unlawful orders.”If they follow an illegal order, THEY can be prosecuted.
And since so many folks are pretending they suddenly don’t understand what an “illegal order” is, let’s do the work they refuse to do and walk people through it.
1. What the UCMJ actually says about unlawful orders
1. What the UCMJ actually says about unlawful orders
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
And since so many folks are pretending they suddenly don’t understand what an “illegal order” is, let’s do the work they refuse to do and walk people through it.
1. What the UCMJ actually says about unlawful orders
1. What the UCMJ actually says about unlawful orders
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. service members must obey lawful orders — and must refuse unlawful ones.
That isn’t “treason.”
That isn’t “defiance.”
That isn’t “undermining the chain of command.”
That is literally the LAW.
It’s the cornerstone of military professionalism.
That isn’t “treason.”
That isn’t “defiance.”
That isn’t “undermining the chain of command.”
That is literally the LAW.
It’s the cornerstone of military professionalism.
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. service members must obey lawful orders — and must refuse unlawful ones.
That isn’t “treason.”
That isn’t “defiance.”
That isn’t “undermining the chain of command.”
That is literally the LAW.
It’s the cornerstone of military professionalism.
That isn’t “treason.”
That isn’t “defiance.”
That isn’t “undermining the chain of command.”
That is literally the LAW.
It’s the cornerstone of military professionalism.