Final answer:
The removal of fire symbols by a commander would be dependent on specific tactical considerations, the situation at hand, and potentially the principles of the First Amendment. These symbols are utilized for communication within military operations and could be removed to maintain effectiveness or unit cohesion.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question seems to involve the strategic use of signal-fires and other forms of communication such as flags and banners in military contexts, as referenced by an excerpt which appears to be from a text on ancient warfare tactics. The appropriate time for a commander to authorize the removal of such symbols in a modern military context might depend on a variety of circumstances, ranging from tactical considerations to the principles of the First Amendment which protects symbolic speech, such as flag burning, within certain limits.
The Higher officers' actions excerpt references instances of independent action by subordinates leading to potential ruin, suggesting a scenario where strict protocols around communication and symbols may be temporarily altered to maintain unit cohesion and effectiveness. The LibreTexts™ excerpt highlights First Amendment protections of symbolic speech, including flag burning, which might contextually intersect with military regulations during protests or civil disobedience.
It is important to note that the removal of fire symbols in the context of military operations or training exercises would be a decision made based on the situation's specifics, the need for secrecy, potential deception tactics, or to prevent the symbols from being used disadvantageously against the unit.