Could someone who has served or something please enlighten me?Just scratching my head wondering what about that process is keeping people from actually doing it. Beyond just saying “No,” is there grievance paperwork? A petition? Witness statements? Is it as simple as having the balls to tell your CO no to their face and being open to consequences?

It seems like at very least there’s a culture of “the people above me probably know better” and/or “don’t be the squeaky wheel” but it doesn’t seem to me that that should be enough for the level of inaction we seem to be seeing here. What gives?

  • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    68·
    1 day ago

    You get orders to do a thing (“Blow up that orphanage soldier!”)

    You ask for clarification (“That looks like a civilian target, do you mean the outpost next to it?”)

    Get claification that confirms unlawful order (“No the orphanage full of kids, level it before the enemy uses it for cover.”)

    You are OBLIGATED BY YOUR DUTY TO INTERNATIONAL LAWS OF WAR to reject the order (“Negative, I cannot do that”) and to report others who obey unlawful orders, outside of your chain of command if neccesary (“Fine, I’ll get someone else to destroy it. You’re finished.”)

    Then you’ll likely be pulled from your unit, and face court matial where the situation will be investigated like most other court cases. (“There was an outpost nearby but the orphanage was not a legal target”)

    That’s how it’s supposed to work, but like most things we don’t live in a perfect world and things get messy when careers, commands, politics and reputations are on the line. (“The officer made a big mistake in the heat of combat, but we can’t have this make world news. Maybe we can just move him to a different unit and classify this whole ordeal…”)