It's different because masks and vaccines to prevent Covid have become political. But they author is trying to remain nonpolitical, the way military people are supposed to behave in a democracy, and I think this is why he's waffling a bit.
Yes, a soldier is supposed to push back against an illegal order (say, to slaughter a bunch of civilians). But wearing a mask doesn't meet that standard. Neither does accepting a vaccine when the soldier already accepted many far more risky vaccines (like for anthrax) against much more unlikely risks (no one is attacking American troops or their allies with anthrax, but Covid is actively attacking).
Yes, a soldier is supposed to push back against an illegal order (say, to slaughter a bunch of civilians). But wearing a mask doesn't meet that standard. Neither does accepting a vaccine when the soldier already accepted many far more risky vaccines (like for anthrax) against much more unlikely risks (no one is attacking American troops or their allies with anthrax, but Covid is actively attacking).