Freedom of expression in the military, is it really freedom when it has limits? Many people might not take into consideration what one gives up when they join the military. It's not just one's freedom, it's also the freedom to speak one's mind. Now I do understand that a certain amount of secrecy is needed in order to not let the enemy know about certain plans of action the armed forces are working on, but having an opinion about your boss or your job should not be limited when you are in the armed forces. When a member of the armed forces chooses to talk about their personal feelings regarding a particular branch of service they are conflicting with the military's hierarchical nature and the military's increasingly antiquated desire to command and control its personnel (Guardiano, 2010, NewsRealBlog). As part of the military one still has rights, once one becomes a service member one does not give up his or her First Amendment right. It merely means that a military member must put into effect his free speech rights in his own time and in his capacity as a private citizen. The argument that I'm trying to make is that the armed forces members should have more of a right than anyone else, when it comes to freedom of speech because they are fighting for this country, and what is this country giving to them? Nothing but limitations and violation of their legal rights.
             Now I do agree with certain limitations of armed forces freedom of expression. The only limitation I agree with is one that limits a service member from talking about private military operations. The reason I agree with this limitation is because when one puts classified military information out there for everyone to see it puts the country and its citizens in danger. One of the main reasons we have armed forces is to fight for the United States' people. If we go flaunting our country's plan of attack it puts the United States a...