Following illegal orders...sometimes it's complicated.

[surfered]

I was drafted shortly after the My Lai Massacre.

During basic training, in a group setting, we were asked who thought Lt Calley should have been court martialed for his role. Mine was one of the few hands that went up, but I was late to the game, older, and college educated.



The deaths of fellow soldiers, hate, fear, and adrenaline in “the heat of battle” obviously affect one’s judgment, but these extra judicial murders are pre-meditated push button actions without those impairments.

It’s obvious, especially for those giving the orders from their safe and secure air conditioned offices, that these actions are illegal.

[Happy Hoosier]

1. Of course, but the alternative is horrifying

The use of deadly military force is an horrific final option. It's brutal. It's irreversible. There must be some constraint on it, and it is a burdern that must be carried by everyone under arms. Traditionally, enlisted folks are not usually held directly responsible for the execution of illegal orders. Enlisted people have fewer opportunities to object, especially when engaged in combat. Officers, however, have a duty to ensure that they are complying with the law of war and the U.S. Consitution. There are certainly gray areas. But we cannot and MUST not turn our military forces into unquestioning killing machines who dare not examine the legality of their actions.