Is the excuse "I was only following orders" acceptable?

Question

I think people need to take responsibility for their actions. I have little sympathy for people in the military who commit war crimes against civilians, the should be held accountable.

Yeah, but if you can't think for yourself, are you even human.

I am thankful that there is anyone left, what with the americans in charge.

Even if I disagree with you, you have my respect, thanks for your opinion. If you come here and simply say "No" or "Acceptable to whom? You? No." then you are simple and retarded, get the f@ck outta here!

Answer 1

thats what the gremans said after the masacre.

Goes to show what following a leader gets you, even today.

Answer 2

Military personnel need to follow orders - it's that simple.
You can't go into a combat situation and have a large group of people thinking independently and doing whatever they want. Everyone has to be on the same page and know what each other are doing in order to accomplish the mission.
If illegal orders are being given then the people giving the orders need to be held accountable.
To answer your question - Yes, following orders is acceptable, because there is no other way.

Answer 3

This excuse is never acceptable. While people in the military must heed the orders of those above them, they have the right to refuse to follow an order if that order is unlawful. If someone one does not agree with an order they have three things they can do, follow blindly, ask for clarification, or refuse.

Now this is different in combat situations when there is no time to think, only act. At that point "I was only following orders" should sound more like "I was ordered by..." and the person who gave the order should have the honor to stnad up and admit it.

Answer 4

Actually, no.
I'm not sure about other countries, but in the US military, every Soldier, down to the lowest private, has the responsibility to follow all _lawful_ orders. This means that if they are given an order to do something illegal (according to the Laws of Land Warfare), they do not have to follow that order. Any Soldier can at any time refuse to follow an oder they believe to be unlawful. However, they must say as much to the individual giving the order. If it is found out later that a Soldier refused to obey a lawful order, he is liable to receive punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Answer 5

Yes, especially in a combat situation. Hey this stuff isn't like some movie, our young soldiers and leaders have 1/1000 of a second to make a decision between life and death. Most are between 23 to 26 years old leading fire teams and squads in a war against insurgents. Now, soldiers on their own, that go into a village and rape a 14 year old girl is a crime. I use to tell my men this:

When you aim your weapon and at the end is a threat, then eliminate the threat, and if during this exchange of fire a civilian walks in between, that is just war: If you aim your weapon and at the end of the barrel is a civilian, and you pull the trigger...your wrong plain and simple.

And by the way, I think the law of warfare and Geneva Convention should not apply to fighting terrorist....think about it!

Answer 6

It is mind boggling to read the comments on here from people who have claimed to serve in the armed forces, who claim it is morally correct to follow any order---it is not! The ucmj has allowances for disobeying unlawful orders, such as the killing of unarmed civilians. The so called vets on here who claim to have experience have never heard of the my lai massacre and the repercussions afterwards. It has happened again in recent years and the marine corps has cracked down on those that have violated the laws of war and humanity, though not as efectively as some of us wish. When you read history the famous statement 'i was only following orders' was the defense of eichman at his trial in israel in 1960, just before he was justifiably executed. It was also the excuse of lt calley. it was not a valid defense then, and it was not now. In combat many innocents are killed, but to deliberately follow the orders of an insane commander (like calley) is inexcusable. I don't care if the soldiers represent my country, or are under my command, any one that would commit acts of murder or atrocities should be dealt with severely

Answer 7

Based on the Nuremberg War Crimes trials after WW2, not, it is not an acceptable excuse. It is even codified in the Laws of War -- the responsibility to refuse to carry out an illegal order.

War criminals ARE tried for their crimes, and many are convicted. But this only applies to nations that obey the international laws of war.

What about crimes committed by those who do not? Actions like beheadings of prisoners? Car bombings of non-combatants? Using non-combatants as human shields which committing acts of war?

Where do those people fit into your pantheon of evil?

Answer 8

Soldiers are taught to obey all lawful orders. They are also taught to follow the UCMJ and code of conduct. It would be an extremely rare occurance for a soldier to receive an order that he was obligated not to follow because it was not lawful. My Lai in Vietnam comes to mind as one incident. In my military experience I was NEVER ordered to do anything which was open for debate. We know of the alleged war crimes committed in Iraq in the recent past, and no one was ordered to carry out these acts. These were criminal acts not the acts of soldiers in the line of duty. I have little sympathy for people NOT in the military who are so quick to condemn what they do not understand.

Answer 9

that you called it an excuse means you have thought about it quite a lot I see! Accountability is a mature thing to consider at all times.IF the Order is unclear then you owe it to both commissioned officers and peers to seek clarity to prevent injury or loss of life, always! If it raises a moral issue write that objection down and mail it to the chaplain's office but follow orders as if there were no objection. It can mean the difference between a courtmartial investigation on you or someone else!

Answer 10

Soldiers are trained to follow orders. However, soldiers are people just like you and I -- and I was a soldier once. I was told that I could disobey an order that my conscience said was an unlawful order. Knowing the difference between a lawful and unlawful order can be difficult, so it falls to your conscience.

It is possible that you could refuse an order, only to be court martialed and convicted. If that happens, ask yourself this question: Was it better to follow my conscience and not commit what I felt was a crime, or commit the crime and be walking a free man/woman? Only you can answer that question.

Answer 11

"Put these civilians into the gas chamber and lock the door."
I was just following orders. WRONG.

You're standing at a checkpoint and receive the following orders.
"There's a white Opal with carrying a possible VBIED in your vicinity. Engage when it comes into range."
Sure enough, that Opal comes into view and starts driving toward you. You signal, fire warning shots, then fire shots into the engine block, and the car doesn't stop. Next you unload everything you have into the passenger compartment. The car stops and you discover that it was full of civilians and the driver was drunk.

You followed a lawful order, which resulted in civilian casualties. "I was only following orders" is a perfectly acceptable reason.