1237
Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
1237 points (99.5% liked)
News
36018 readers
1920 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Their orders are illegal, thus disobeying them is not insubordination or illegal.
Not just not subordination following them is specifically illegal and historically "I was following orders" has NEVER been justification or gotten anyone off their charges. You follow illegal orders YOU are a criminal as much as your commanding officer.
Unfortunately for the most part with only a few exceptions "I was following orders" has in fact, always worked to get people off scott free for war crimes except in cases where they were committed by a nation that lost the war.
These orders will be made legal as judges have no more basis in us of a
If that were true, why do they keep getting their asses handed to them in court, and why do they keep complying with those rulings?
That’s not how military orders work.
It is 100% how military orders work. Members have an obligation to not carry out unlawful orders. I've yet to hear of any NATO aligned force where this isn't drilled into people's heads from the get-go.
Granted, given the state of the law in the U.S. these days...we'll have to see how things go down.
Except the army's own government website explicitly says otherwise
https://www.army.mil/article/47175/breaking_ranks_dissent_and_the_military_professional
Odd that this page is still online...
Fascists are not the brightest
Tell me you never served in the military without telling me you never served in the military.
I think we are talking past eachother here. We can talk a lot about what an illegal order is; how there is training to disobey one, but that is talking about how things ought to be not how they actually are. For example, we all have agreed to not speed and taken training on it as well, yet it happens all too often. It is not unreasonable to believe that a soldier will follow an illegal order because they want to or there is enough coercion.
I would argue that the deployment orders for the 2003 Iraq war were illegal, but the people who refused to follow them are the ones who got in trouble.
True, but this is abandoning their duty. Now, will there be immediate consequences for following an illegal order in the current (and coming) situation? We'll have to see. Shit's weird right now. But it remains the duty of servicepeople to refuse illegal orders, and the consequences are more severe if one is ultimately found to have carried out an unlawful order. This ain't a speeding ticket - this is military prison, rank stripping, dishonourable discharge, etc.
Don't get me wrong, it takes sand and a strong certainty to refuse unlawful orders, but it's also not optional. It's a requirement, one servicepeople are aware of and is generally taken seriously.
Doesn't totally negate your point - there's a good chance we're going to see some awful shit from cowards in the ranks 'just following orders'. We can only hope they are dealt with appropriately in that case.
How do they work?
Is it possible to refuse to follow an order because you believe it is illegal?
Yes.
They can be court martialed either way. Literally an entire movie about it and a phrase that gets used everyday. Cache 22
Sure and once the military court sees the order was illegal you’re not going to be held responsible
I hope military court works more fairly than civilian court.
Pretty much the opposite. Civilian courts generally offer more constitutional protections. Military courts can say something was contrary to "good order and discipline" aka my favorite article of the UCMJ - Article 134 - and lol, you're fucked.
There's a book called Catch 22. Looks like the made a movie of it. The book is the funniest thing I've ever read. Made me think about how crazy fighting is. Sort of like a funny Slaughterhouse-Five.
Neither mentioned illegal orders as far as I remember. Was the movie quite different?
We read very different books. I thought the first half was hilarious, but it lulled me into a comfort of the absurdity and the banality that set up an absolutely devastating second half.
I think it's one of the greatest books I've ever read, but I don't think it was a comedy.
Catch 22 isn’t about illegal orders. The contradiction is more about your own sanity/safety.
Surely it's a Catch 22, not a hidden supply of 22s stashed away somewhere?
No thats actually cache 21, duh!
Basically yeah, you can refuse, but that's the more absolute form. What you should do if you suspect the legality of an order is to ask it in writing, register that you don't want to follow, but will comply.
Then afterwards you'll be less responsible. Depends on what it's about, you can't just register a complaint about killing kids and then do it anyway, but like for milder illegal orders.