MILITARY LAW AND US!

There is a separate set of "laws" for those in the military. They seem to have come from the words of the the USA's Constitution for our Congress to regulate, etc., the military.

In the days of our Constitution's writing, it seems to have been very common for a separate set of "common law" like "laws and practices for the military. Such things as "keel hauling" (way worse to my way of thinking than the "waterboarding" apparently practiced today in the US military) and "forced enlistment against ones will" (whose implementors were called press gangs), by the Navy arms and one of our heavy complaints against British rule of the 13 Colonies called out explicitly in our Declaration o Independence, all were Naval accepted common "military discipline measures".

Flogging was also an accepted punishment means. I may be wrong; but the last "common users of flogging" as military punishment and/or disciplinary measures was the French Foreign Legion. In many countries, death for cowardice is allowed by their forms of "military law". Spain, who otherwise has banned the death penalty from its legal system still allows death as a punishment for certain "military crimes".

Treason and several forms of spying and aiding and abbetting an enemy were and still are in some countries punishable by death in many single country and treaty allowed punishments.

The US has cowardice in the face of the enemy as punishable by death. In modern times, this was enacted only one time on one soldier in WW-II.

Present US "military law" is supposedly encoded and enforced via portions of the Congressionally mandated United States Codes. It is called the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and seems sometimes to be separate from and sometimes to include the Manual for Courts Martial. But is it uniform? And is it followed appropriately?

My logic of the evidence says no. A general officer, or the Naval equivalent Admiral, is allowed to resign from the service, for which many an enlisted man's equivalent punishment was often and informal "sent to walk point in enemy country" (ie death and wounding/maiming probability greatly raised, or by any of several means sent to do "hard time" in Long Binh Jail (yes it was known as "LBJ") during my war. And how does one make sense of Article 15 processes as "lawful due process in all this"?

And is it uniformly adhered to? Evidence seems not. General Officers and even President Eisenhower, i.e. his warming against the "military industrial complex, have a record of "airing ills" at the 11-th hour of their service or later, rather than bring formal charges as they are "supposed to". And lastly, the evidence seems to indicate that a collective military "wrong" seems to be punished only by a very low ranking persons.

Is the UCMJ uniform? Is it just? Can it not be brought more in line with "non military law"? How do we get secret trials here? Is is not time to review and reform military law as written and as practiced? Many of my sources overwhelmingly say YES!