Re: i want this in the open.
Posted: Sat May 16, 2009 11:44 am
Taure wrote:For a contemporary re-statement of the applicability of this:Ehren Watada refused to go to Iraq on account of his belief that the Iraq war was a crime against peace (waging a war of aggression for territorial aggrandizement), which he believed could make him liable for prosecution under the command responsibility doctrine. In this case, the judge ruled that soldiers, in general, are not responsible for determining whether the order to go to war itself is a lawful order - but is only responsible for those orders resulting in a specific application of military force, such as an order to shoot civilians, or to treat POWs inconsistently with the Geneva Conventions. This is consistent with the Nuremberg Defense, as only the civilian and military principals of the Axis were charged with Crimes against peace, while subordinate military officials were not so charged.
Did you know that in the UCMJ it says that Soldiers can not obey a unlawful and right after that it says that We must obey all orders. It also says in the Oath we take that We will obey all orders of my leaders and the Officers apointed over me. He used that as a way not to get deployed, I have heard of many people try to not get deployed because they are scared to go and leave their families. People who sign up just for the college money....well they took a oath and sign the dotted line... to defend their country.