Should you disobey an Illegal order from the president concerning Geneva Convention/ROE/Ethics/Torture?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:23:16 -0500

I don't care about who you support, your political views, or whatever. For this question, I would like to simply have an informative, intelligent discussion on your opinions of Trumps statement made during the GOP debate regarding us obeying him in regards to torture, etc.

(the following is the whole GOP debate, starting at this question)
https://youtu.be/Uj8DNhxaWgw?t=2730

Republican Presidential Debate Fox News GOP Debate 3/3/16 Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Mar 4 at 2016 4:27 PM

PO3 Steven Sherrill — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:27:45 -0500

War Crimes are War Crimes. It doesn't matter who instigates it. Illegal orders are illegal orders. A moral obligation is held to disobey illegal orders.

Response by SPC Andrew Griffin made Mar 4 at 2016 4:28 PM

SPC Andrew Griffin — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:28:16 -0500

I would never follow any Illegal Order from any Leader! Especially if it goes against the Warriors Ethos and my Core Values!

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Mar 4 at 2016 4:35 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:35:25 -0500

This is a very dicey subject. While it's easy to claim with moral righteousness that one wouldn't obey and unlawful order, it's damn hard to recognize it. For example, it's easy to assert that one wouldn't torture a prisoner regardless of who issued the order. However, you can bet they won't use the word "torture". They may resort to a euphemism such as "enhanced interrogation". Woe be unto you if a judge/court martial doesn't agree with your interpretation of "enhanced interrogations" vs "torture".

To be fair, I don't think that's our most pressing problem. I'd worry more about the "stupid" orders than the unlawful ones. They're the ones who put missions at risk and get people killed for no good purpose.

Response by Maj John Bell made Mar 4 at 2016 4:49 PM

Maj John Bell — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:49:31 -0500

Donald Trump is the personification of hubris and arrogance. Any prisoner under my charge is owed my protection from mistreatment. How far would I go to protect them, to the death. What is mistreatment? I'll know it when I see it. I personally consider waterboarding mistreatment.
I would never turn them over to anyone who did not have the same core beliefs that I do. Why? Because it is right and because they will continue to fight if they can expect poor treatment on our part. The second point can cost American lives. I will take as many ISIS animals with me as I can, because I know what treatment I will get in their hands.

Response by PFC Alexander Oliveira made Mar 4 at 2016 4:55 PM

PFC Alexander Oliveira — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 16:55:54 -0500

thanks for the youtube video, I missed the debate last night and have an hour left at work. great time killer.

Response by SPC David S. made Mar 4 at 2016 5:59 PM

SPC David S. — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 17:59:53 -0500

A name everyone in uniform should know - Lt William Calley. Getting green lighted doesn't mean that you won't be held accountable for your actions. As well intentional killing of non-combatants will back fire and be used to undermine any military use of force.

Response by SrA Paul Pfeil made Mar 4 at 2016 6:08 PM

SrA Paul Pfeil — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 18:08:42 -0500

I watched the entire video. There is so much wrong with our country that needs fixing, we need to get rid of all career polititions, set term limits for all of them and do away with lobiests, they are what make politicians crooked. Presidents are buffered from day to day military operations, they do not micro manage, no president ever gave an airman, private, or seaman a direct order that was not obeyed short of loosing his head on the spot. CIA and private contractors handle the most crucial interigations, and do so off American soil for a reason. Regular military is left out. Do not confuse things, Trump is right orders are always followed one way or the other.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Mar 4 at 2016 7:41 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 19:41:30 -0500

Illegal is illegal depending on your rank, position, who's running cover for you, your "mission", and how valuable you are to them. So in short O3 and below, hang it up, you're going to prison. E9 on down, you'll be right next to them. WO......if you can find one who isn't laughing his ass off at the thought of this...he STILL won't get into trouble, but he might visit you and put some money on your books. Who was the last four star sent to Leavenworth? Who was the last JE, NCO, or JO sent to Leavenworth? Following an unlawful order will get you the same thing as disobeying an unlawful order depending on rank.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 4 at 2016 8:14 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 20:14:17 -0500

Before you declare it illegal or torture and thereby giving you the reasoning to not comply with an order I would highly suggest you have all of your ducks in order. P.S. what is torture and isn't will change depending on who is the CIC due to this reservation to the Geneva Conventions definition of torture. Depending on an administrations interpretation.

"The US Reservations for the UN Convention Against Torture: In order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality."

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Mar 4 at 2016 8:32 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 20:32:22 -0500

Yes as the military should be the keeper of the Nations values.

Response by SPC Timothy Repetto made Mar 4 at 2016 8:54 PM

SPC Timothy Repetto — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 20:54:39 -0500

If it is inhumane and just down right wrong. Then I'm disobeying. Why? Because he is a tyrant at that point. And we do not negotiate with terrorists or tyrants. Trump doesn't say much though in those debates. Trump Responses:

"We are going to be rich, So rich"
"We will have the strongest Military"
"We will build a wall"

I am not a "trump hater" , however, some tactics are just wrong in certain circumstances regarding the original question.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Mar 4 at 2016 9:14 PM

SFC Everett Oliver — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 21:14:21 -0500

I do not and never did consider water boarding, slaps, and sleep deprivation as torture. Extremely uncomfortable yes, torture no.
I would have a hard time firing on women and children in most cases and if they proved to be combatants it would bother me after the fact. But it would have to be one hell of an illegal order for me to refuse it. And I have once....

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 4 at 2016 9:56 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 21:56:06 -0500

YES, YES, YES, but I think you HAVE to separate out ROE from this discussion. ROE are different,IMHO. Restrictive rules of engagement MIGHT be Higher's CYA. You have to Bet your Bar, when it endangers troops. Judgement is required. Unfortunately Judgement for many comes from EXPERIENCE (case study of applicable case studies helps-unless higher disagrees with your correct or seemingly correct action). A lot of EXPERIENCE comes from making mistakes, unfortunately. When it bites you in the butt, it helps to have a big butt. Figure that out. What I mean is build your Higher's faith and trust in you.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Mar 4 at 2016 10:28 PM

Capt Tom Brown — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 22:28:54 -0500

Political opponents and people who do not like DT deliberately raise a number of 'hypotheticals' once again which, in themselves alone, tend to discredit the individual. He has to respond to allegations and accusations because they are being made. Pure political theater, but if it helps to weaken the candidate the accusations succeed. "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Torture under the Bush administration was approved by everyone and deemed quite legal by lawyers from the WH & the DOJ. The acts were carried out by CIA and their contractors with the help of MPs who 'set the conditions' for interrogation and who were all subsequently thrown under the bus by their superiors in the military and WH. If the word came down tomorrow to reconstitute Abu Grabbe and staff it with MPs, a person can only wonder if the military would fail to carry out the word if necessary for the national security.

Response by MSG Bob Metz made Mar 4 at 2016 10:52 PM

MSG Bob Metz — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 22:52:40 -0500

As a signer of the Geneva Convention there is no need for discussion. Non- combatants are not fair game. If I see a woman or child with a weapon actively participating in a firefight and I have a shot I'm taking it; as difficult as it will be to me morally. I will not attack or fire on women and children otherwise, even if ordered to do so. In Iraq there were times when women and children were combatants...the same was true in Viet Nam and WW II. But to order the military to treat any person as a combatant without knowing they are is in my opinion against the GV and qualify as a war crime, along the lines of Mai Lai. I would hope that someone in the chain would hesitate and then refuse; and if necessary do so openly.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Mar 4 at 2016 11:17 PM

Capt Tom Brown — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 23:17:46 -0500

How is a pvt supposed to know what's legal and what's not? The Sgt ordered him to do such & such, and he did as ordered.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Mar 5 at 2016 12:04 AM

LTC Paul Labrador — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 00:04:24 -0500

If you feel the order is illegal/immoral, you are not obligated to follow it.....but you are still likely going to face some consequences regardless....

Response by LTC David Brown made Mar 5 at 2016 7:01 AM

LTC David Brown — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 07:01:02 -0500

I would not obey one or issue one!

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Mar 5 at 2016 11:21 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 11:21:11 -0500

Trump backed off the illegal order thing. More hyperbole. There will always be someone that uses coercive techniques to protect our nation or the men/women they are responsible for. They do so knowing that they will be tried for any illegal activities, but it's easy for someone sitting in an office safe and protected to say how bad they are. Some of them were probably in the NY Trade Center when it went down due to our flawed intil policies.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2016 11:27 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 11:27:39 -0500

Of course you should disobey that order. You're required to disobey it. The idea that he could order us to commit war crimes and we'd follow him shows how disconnected the man's understanding of the military is from reality.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2016 11:11 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 23:11:23 -0500

IF the POTUS EVER gave an unlawful order that was contradictory to the Constitution of the United States, there is no way I would follow it. I swore the oath, and I FIRST swear to support and defend the Constitution (before all else). Everything else follows AFTERWARDS, and the Oath makes it very clear that I will defend against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2016 11:13 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:13:47 -0500

Nowhere in my oath does it say to obey all orders.....for a reason. They entrust in commissioned officers to weed out illegal orders well before it gets down to the enlisted Soldiers. So if illegal order no I would not follow, nor should anyone.

Response by 1SG Harold Piet made Mar 8 at 2016 5:35 AM

1SG Harold Piet — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:35:40 -0500

The President and his administration is wanting and currently bringing refugees into our country that I am sure will be filled with enemy to our way of life. It is just a matter of time until we face some of these same issues in our cities. If we live long enough we will make some of these decisions. I believe you must know where you stand and be willing to stand firm. There is a legal and moral code we must have. Where is yours? That is where you draw the line and be willing to face the consequences. My oath of office does not expire and my bible is my guide.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 7:02 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 07:02:04 -0500

I am not a Trump fan, but let's consider the possibilities:

1) Politicians lie. Trump is pointing that out by extravagant lying.
2) What constitutes torture? Hooking up your goodies to a car battery is probably torture. Is interrogation under a bare bulb, a la old cop shows? Sleep deprivation? Water boarding? "Torture" is one of those terms people want to toss around without having to define what it means. I think it's often a term used by panty-waste liberals to cripple our ability to gather information. Let's face it, interrogation is unpleasant. At what point does it become torture?
3) Let's say you are the Platoon Leader or Platoon Sergeant of a unit doing regular security patrols. Your platoon is ambushed and you have 2 dead and 2 wounded. You capture a bad guy. What is the limit of what you would do to him to prevent a re-occurrence? (And if you aren't willing to push the boundary between "unpleasant" and "torture", I hope I never have you for a leader.)

On the other hand, odds are you'll never have to answer those questions. You turn the dirt bag over to the MPs when you return from the mission, bury your buddies, and get ready for another day. Professionals have a better chance of gathering useful intelligence than you do, with what you can manage while returning from patrol. Like many purely political issues, it's irrelevant to the soldier at the sharp end.

Response by MAJ Joseph Parker made Mar 8 at 2016 7:09 AM

MAJ Joseph Parker — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 07:09:25 -0500

Cadet Rawlins: You've received a lot of good responses! Let's try to clear a bit of the smoke: First; orders come through the chain of command. Nobody should get an order from anybody except their immediate commander, especially during operations. Obeying orders from anybody else is a big mistake. Second; the morality and legality of an action or orders have pretty much been settled by time they get down to whatever level a soldier or officer is working, unless somebody in the chain of command is out of line (which happens). Third, good leaders and soldiers instinctively sense when orders are have some issues with legality, morality, and stupidity (the latter being a far more prevalent issue). There is room for feedback and input on orders in our system. Nobody wants you to obey blindly. Fourth; if anybody disobeys an order; there is a price to be paid. However, there are also provisions for a fair adjudication. Finally; these people running for POTUS are going to throw out a lot of rhetoric. Forget it! Once the POTUS is in office; a veritable cloud of advisors, aides, and lawyers settle in around the office and every decision gets staffed to death. The POTUS is all about character, decision-making ability, and the team around him/her. Vote as you will; but vote. Then get back to protecting the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Response by CPL Rod Shier made Mar 8 at 2016 7:16 AM

CPL Rod Shier — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 07:16:40 -0500

Why is America the only country that follows the Geneva Convention? Personally, I think it's a bunch of B.S. Only the troops that are on the front lines really know and see how the enemy should be dealt with. Not some arm chair referee or Monday morning quarter back.

Response by SPC Steven Depuy made Mar 8 at 2016 7:43 AM

SPC Steven Depuy — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 07:43:22 -0500

That stuff is for the spooks to do. I would never recommend anyone do something like that who is active army. Someone will use you for a scapegoat later.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 7:58 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 07:58:49 -0500

I asked the same question going through Officer Basic Course. The instructor said illegal orders should not be obeyed, but be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Response by A1C Melissa Jackson made Mar 8 at 2016 8:38 AM

A1C Melissa Jackson — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:38:42 -0500

No.
Absolutely not.
Every soldier, sailor, marine, and airman needs to have a basic understanding of war crimes and what constitutes one.

If I refused an order I realize there would likely be severe repercussions. However, I'd rather sit in prison than carry tirture, murder- etc around in my soul for an eternity.

There is right, and there is wrong- And that line gets stretched and pulled in times of armed conflict. However, there are some lines that MUST NOT be crossed.

Response by LCpl Carl Wright made Mar 8 at 2016 8:43 AM

LCpl Carl Wright — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:43:44 -0500

Short and simple. Yes you are required to disobey.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:04 AM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:04:02 -0500

Are we talking about unlawful orders or are we talking about a political moderator looking for ratings? I would be curious to see what the families of the Americans killed in Benghazi think about the issuance of unlawful orders. I did notice how Cruz refused to answer the question though.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:04 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:04:30 -0500

Absolutely.

Response by PO3 Michael Cardinale made Mar 8 at 2016 9:09 AM

PO3 Michael Cardinale — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:09:18 -0500

If anyone gives an order that is unlawful it is our duty not to follow it. That was the message given to me in boot camp back in 1991. I don't believe things have changed that much to where our current service men and women should now consider following an order that violates the law.

Response by MSgt J D McKee made Mar 8 at 2016 9:09 AM

MSgt J D McKee — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:09:39 -0500

So, nuke the shit out of two whole cities is just fine, burn Dresden intentionally, bomb wedding parties and funerals to get one guy is acceptable, BUT don't torture anyone to get information? I think the whole thing is hypocritical as hell and that war should either not be prosecuted at all, or with all the vigor and means available.

Response by SP6 Ron W. made Mar 8 at 2016 9:11 AM

SP6 Ron W. — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:11:23 -0500

Absolutely.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:11 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:11:30 -0500

I have been water-boarded. It is very uncomfortable, but not torture. Anything can be psychological torture if the person has a weak mind and constitution. The worst part is the anticipation of it.
First of all, you wouldn't be doing it. No need to have the moral battle with your angels and devils on your shoulder. That's for someone else to conduct. As for me, the information has to be gotten.

Response by Col Keith Maresca made Mar 8 at 2016 9:31 AM

Col Keith Maresca — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:31:51 -0500

You do NOT follow an illegal order. Make very certain the order is illegal because if you are wrong, the consequences are severe. Remember that during the Nazi War Crime trials, "I was just following orders" was determined to not be a viable defense.

Response by CW3 Stephen Mills made Mar 8 at 2016 9:46 AM

CW3 Stephen Mills — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:46:06 -0500

You should always refuse to obey an illegal order, but you better be darn sure its an illegal order. I have had some experience with this. While I never faced actual charges, although they tried, as the orders where in fact illegal, refusing an order from a superior officer is never career enhancing and there are other things they can do to punish you. You have to decide which is more important to you, your ethics or your career.

Response by MAJ Bill Darling made Mar 8 at 2016 9:53 AM

MAJ Bill Darling — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:53:35 -0500

What constitutes an illegal order is the real crux of the question. What was legal in 2003 was deemed not legal in 2010. Also, officers and soldiers still have room to make their own decisions within the context of general laws and orders, as it pertains to them and their people in that particular situation at that particular time. No law fits all situations. Then add in the fact that we, as humans, have been known to fail in our ethics from time to time. So while it is all well and good to state that one would disobey an illegal order, it is quite another to (1) recognize what is truly illegal (versus personally unethical or even merely uncomfortable) and (2) actually take a stance which may have huge implications for one's reputation, career, or even safety.

I take solace in that it's enough of a challenge to get people to comply with lawful and direct orders, never mind an illegal/unlawful one.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:55 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:55:20 -0500

You disobey ALL unlawful orders. End of story.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 10:03 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:03:06 -0500

I'm guessing at your level, and most people's level here, it won't apply. Guessing you are just an anti-Trump person. The past two Administration's walked a very blurred line in regards to torture. Any outrage or concerns there?

Response by MGySgt Douglas C. made Mar 8 at 2016 10:15 AM

MGySgt Douglas C. — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:15:55 -0500

The issue you will face is "Can you prove the order as issued was unlawful?" If you cannot prove it was unlawful then you will face dereliction of duty or disobedience of a lawful order charges.
Personally, I would take my chances at the court martial before I knowingly execute an order to torture, enhance interrogate, kill, maim or mutilate a non-combatant even with an order issued from higher command. But legally, would I have a leg to stand on, probably not. My conscience would be clear.
Semper Fi,
MGuns Cosby

Response by SSgt James Atkinson made Mar 8 at 2016 10:21 AM

SSgt James Atkinson — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:21:41 -0500

We must first turn our attention to the matter of the proposed torture prisoner being a U.S. citizen, and if they are a U.S. that torture in any form is strictly prohibited. The same issue applied to the prisoner beign on U.S. soil, or on soil control by the United States military, again these are automatically "No Torture Zones" and as the Constitution of the United States prohibits event "cruel" activities great care must be taken not to either torture or even to be cruel.

In regards to the Geneva Conventions (notice that this is plural), it is a series of treaties, some of which the United States has ratified as a treaty, and other the United States has rejected and has refused to accept.

Part of the oath we all took to "Protect and Defend the Constitution" or to "Obey the Constitution" does not permit a torture or even cruel treatment by a U.S. Citizen, or a U.S. Military person, nor a contractor, nor any of the intelligence agencies.

It is the law, and it must be obeyed.

There are actually vastly more successful way to obtain the information that one might use torture to obtain, and rather than being cruel to the prisoner(s) alternative, legally applied methods can be used to tease out truthful information, whereas, the use of torture or of cruel treatment strongly promotes the generation of false and untrustworthy information.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 10:22 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:22:33 -0500

This is a great question, Cadet. Donald Trump did clarify, the next day, that he would seek advice on the legality of his orders; which would happen above our pay grade. For example, the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice might prepare legal opinions for the Attorney General, who would then advise the President's course of action.

That being said, Trump's statement that "they wouldn't disobey me, believe me. . . " is unnerving, as a Soldier. Sometimes toxic leaders will try to bully their subordinates into an illegal act, but the individual remains responsible (as occurred at Nuremberg and after Abu Ghraib). Your obligation is to follow all lawful orders, and to disobey unlawful orders. How do you distinguish? First, pay attention in your ROE and LOAC briefings. Second, if you believe an order is unlawful, seek clarification, and voice your concerns with the legality of the order. Finally, you may always take your concern higher in the chain of command, or discuss with your Judge Advocate, if possible. At the end of the day, you alone will need to justify your actions, whether you follow the order or refuse.

Response by SSG Ray Robison made Mar 8 at 2016 10:34 AM

SSG Ray Robison — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:34:15 -0500

This is basic command and control area made at the general level. There is a gray area that civilian news do not recognize. Soldiers are soldiers and does not matter what anyone says protected by Geneva Convention. (not always followed toward us). With that said what do you classify the Taliban. They darn sure are not that country's uniformed soldiers. Case in point Russia invades Afghanistan we are helping then called the muhajeden. Russians did some not so good of things. As soon as the Russians departed they changed there name to Taliban. Same hat, same clothes and same slippers. We take over and continue. Now they call themselves ISIS. They by no means are there country's soldiers but criminals and any method to find out any info game on.

Response by SPC Stephan Lindgren made Mar 8 at 2016 10:35 AM

SPC Stephan Lindgren — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:35:29 -0500

I don't know any huminters who would use torture even if it was allowed. That was without a doubt the dumbest thing Donald Trump has ever said. I don't know any soldier who would want to fight for a country who condones torture. Its easy to say or to think that torturing the SOBs who attacked us on 911 would be an easy thing to do. But unless you can stand up and say that you would be willing to torture innocent people then you might as well hang up the gloves. Because despite popular belief, we capture innocent or very low level people all the time. Personally as an interrogator I find it insulting, to insinuate that I would need to use torture to complete my mission. That would be like telling a bunch of Special Forces that they can't take that hill instead we are going to drop a big ass bomb on it. Not to mention it opens up the doors for future obeyers of the GC to do that to our soldiers and we wouldn't be able to say anything about it. Its a can of worms you don't want to open.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Mar 8 at 2016 10:42 AM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:42:49 -0500

CPT Private RallyPoint Member The simple answer is that you do not have to obey illegal orders and can actually be prosecuted for any illegal actions you take in following/implementing illegal orders (that you knew to be, or should have known to be, illegal).

The dilemma is determining if an order is illegal or not... Sometimes it is not clear-cut. Much of what is being bantered about in the press concerning Trump's "illegal orders" are simply opinions about the legality of certain actions and whether they are actually considered torture or not.

Response by MAJ Elvis Barksdale made Mar 8 at 2016 10:51 AM

MAJ Elvis Barksdale — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:51:48 -0500

It is the difference between them and us. We don't torture. Following an unlawful order will get you sent to jail. Look up Abu Ghraib. Notice the soldiers went to jail and the politicians did not.

Response by PO1 Dave Porter made Mar 8 at 2016 10:57 AM

PO1 Dave Porter — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:57:23 -0500

an Illegal Order is an Illegal Order, no matter who it comes from. You have a duty to this nation you swear to protect. Honor. Semper Paratus!

Response by SPC Josh Dalton made Mar 8 at 2016 11:15 AM

SPC Josh Dalton — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:15:45 -0500

That order should never make its way down to your level. Gen. So-and-so should be the one to refuse and it should stop there. If it does and you refuse, do you really think anyone is going to imprison you for refusing to torture someone? Doubtful.

Response by PO2 Steven Hardy made Mar 8 at 2016 11:16 AM

PO2 Steven Hardy — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:16:51 -0500

I would say that the U. S. Constitution and the UCMJ trump any international laws or treaties. Of course it would likely have to be a very overt violation for the average serviceman to recognize it as such. Many have said here that there are plenty of people higher up in the chain of command to prevent such violations from happening, but that is assuming far too much. History has proven time and again that most people will simply comply with the wishes of an authority figure. Having served in the USCG where relatively junior personnel are often trusted with greater responsibility, it becomes imperative that one understands the applicable laws, regulations, etc... Even then, the phrase "one legged man in an ass kicking contest" comes to mind.

Response by CDR Russell Harris made Mar 8 at 2016 11:23 AM

CDR Russell Harris — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:23:29 -0500

This is an excellent question that every career minded person must honestly answer. If you can't support your chain of command, especially the commander in chief, then you ought to look for a different career. Trust -- up and down the chain is imperative to a strong and powerful military force. Having said that, I place God as my supreme "commander-in-chief" and based on my value system know exactly how I will react in any given moral or ethical dilemma. If you do not believe that you will one day stand accountable for your personal actions, you have to then be bound by duty, honor, or other societal value that controls your actions. There are obvious rules of engagement, articles of convention, and codes of conduct that we follow in peace and war to help us maintain a civilized society. We have learned much from previous conflicts where there was a Malmedy or My Lai massacre type experience that clearly illustrates what can happen when rules are either not established or they are broken. As warriors we know that war is the most horrific human experience there is and so we train to minimize its happening. But should it occur, we must be prepared first to win, and second to do so with our honor and integrity in tact.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 11:26 AM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:26:55 -0500

Remember, what is legal isn't always ethical and what is ethical isn't always legal. The hard right vs. the easy wrong.

Response by Sgt Michael McLEAN made Mar 8 at 2016 11:59 AM

Sgt Michael McLEAN — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:59:33 -0500

Absolutely. An Illegal order is excately that. You should never follow an order like that.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 12:13 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 12:13:59 -0500

Do you want a response to your question or for the link?

To your question: What is an unlawful order and why would you be doing any violations to ROE's?
Are you planning on conducting Interrogations with terror suspects?
What is your definition of unethical behavior?
What does ethical mean to you?

What will you do when your CinC tells you to conduct yourself (in a certain way) while conducting Combat Missions or "In Support Of" Missions? Are you going to decline or refuse to perform the duties that have been set out for you (by your CinC)?

A certain thing we all recite has "... I will obey the orders of the President of the United States ..." inside of it. You have to dig deep into your soul and figure out where your values are and who you will listen to and side with. Conduct yourself with Integrity and Honor. If you do this and avoid being concerned with the Political Affiliation of those above you, you will be fine. If you are more concerned about politics you will need to leave the military.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Mar 8 at 2016 12:43 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 12:43:45 -0500

Not knowing your background and but recognizing that you are a future officer, I will ask that you look at recent history in Afghanistan, Cuba, and Iraq and you will see that members of the military were involved in tortured; as to why only they can answer "Why"!

Response by SGT Craig Northacker made Mar 8 at 2016 12:47 PM

SGT Craig Northacker — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 12:47:51 -0500

There is some wonderful wisdom here. Another piece is whether or not the order is in the form of an executive order, if it is subject to interpretation at various levels, and if any of those interpretations give rise to questionable legality. The practical issue is that if you disobey an order you can be held accountable. In the old days a violation of the UCMJ was a violation of the USMC. Period. Any mitigating circumstances could be raised at your hearing. Our current political climate (apolitical from my standpoint), is there are too many issues out in the world that make following your moral compass a difficult task. I lost stripes because I followed mine defending young soldiers from aberrant Article 15 contests by company commanders. I was told to stop but refused - as I would then be violating my fiduciary responsibilities to the Constitution and to my men. So, I disobeyed an illegal order that was backed by the Brigade Commander, who in turn violated his fiduciary responsibilities. But I was the least of his worries, so I paid for it. It is all very personal. Article 15's do not encompass the gravity of Geneva Convention issues, however, they will provide some guidance as to the system and your inherent risks. And, just because there are laws out there, not all are enforced the same - and will usually be to your detriment if you are the whistleblower or the violator of those "illegal" orders. On the other hand, combat needs may by that someone needs to be aggressively addressed to prevent unnecessary friendly casualties.

Response by SGT Dave Tracy made Mar 8 at 2016 1:03 PM

SGT Dave Tracy — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 13:03:40 -0500

"Immoral orders need not be followed", that's enough for me.

FYI: "Immoral" does not = "I'm butt-hurt"

Response by LCpl Kenneth Heath made Mar 8 at 2016 1:24 PM

LCpl Kenneth Heath — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 13:24:07 -0500

No. It is MY personal duty as an American Citizen, American Serviceman, A Veteran and a Marine to perform to a prescribed code of ethics and to refuse any order from any source that I know to be illegal.

Response by LTC John Wilson made Mar 8 at 2016 1:34 PM

LTC John Wilson — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 13:34:59 -0500

The Fourth Nuremberg Principle states "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".

That said, under Rule 140, the US Military has established that "Some obligations under the law of armed conflict are reciprocal in that they are binding on the parties only so long as both sides continue to comply with them. A major violation by one side will release the other side from all further duty to abide by that obligation. The concept of reciprocity is not applicable to humanitarian rules that protect the victims of armed conflict, that is, those persons protected by the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The decision to consider the United States released from a particular obligation following a major violation by the enemy will be made by the president." (Source: The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-12.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Dept. of the Navy, Office of the CNO and HQ, USMC ad DHS, USCG, Jul 2007. p. 19. as quoted by the IHRC at https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cou_us_rule140)

There are several methods for enforcing the Laws of War; the "last resort" method will remain the engagement of reciprocity to deal with recalcitrant adversaries who continue to place themselves above these laws. Under our system of government, it is difficult for the NCA to issue such an order outside of the Geneva and Hague Conventions without the advice and consent of the Legislative and Judicial branches -- or The People for that matter.

At the end of the day, the Laws of War are merely a gentlemen's agreement between civilized nation-states to inject a degree of morality and decorum to an otherwise barbaric endeavor. Islamic Terrorists are illegal combatants that regard their Sharia Law superior to the Laws of War. They have repeatedly committed crimes against humanity and waged a cruel war of aggression against all humanity as their "holy" scriptures have dictated (See: Quran 2:191, 3:28, 3:85, 4:89 (with Bukari 52:260, 59:643 & Muslim 1:33), 5:33 (with Bukari 3:106) 8:12, 8:60, 8:65, 8:69, 9:5, 9:123, 18:26 (with Muslim 19:4294 & Bukhari 53:392), 29:68, 47:4, 48:20, and ibn Ishaq 992). Can it then be said that an order from the NCA pursuant to reciprocity as a method of enforcing the Laws of War is therefore unlawful or immoral?

Customary IHL

Response by SSG Ken Gilder made Mar 8 at 2016 1:40 PM

SSG Ken Gilder — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 13:40:23 -0500

An illegal order is illegal, period. However, if you do disobey it, you better have your ducks in a row, and be able to prove that it was illegal. Otherwise you could easily become the "guest of (dis)honor at a court martial.

Response by Sgt Edward Allen made Mar 8 at 2016 2:55 PM

Sgt Edward Allen — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 14:55:56 -0500

Absolutely not! They key here is "unlawful". You are bound the the UCMJ to follow all legal orders. You are NOT authorized to follow unlawful orders. When you are a civilian, you are not held to the same standards as you are in uniform. As an example, you can curse out your supervisor, possibly at risk of losing your job, but to do so in the military means that you may lose liberty, freedom or monies for a short period of time. Possibly, depending on the case, you could even lose rank or be removed from active duty.

Following an unlawful order may remove those freedoms all together. At that time, you may be tried and convicted for following an order. This is regardless of who gave you the order. In fact, you are duty bound to refuse such an order, be it from the POTUS, CG, CO or even a platoon leader.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 3:32 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:32:57 -0500

Painfully obvious, though he denies it and thinks we will follow, duh. Interrogation is not in my MOS description, capture, detain, and turn over to proper authorities is my job, only after meeting and removing any threats that meet ROE criteria, with mandatory PID, only then do we capture, detain, and hand off. What happens then has a rule book, and we owe it to our reputation to conduct ourselves according to the laws of war, even though the insurgency has no national recognition, and does not fall under the UN definition of enemy combatant. We are required to operate and uphold the highest codes of conduct, regardless of the tactics, techniques, and protocols utilized by the members of Daesh. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia beheads hundreds annually, why do we allow that? In conclusion, Trump is full of shit. If that hurts anybody feelings, I'm sorry you are butt hurt, maybe god will see fit to remove your pog ass from the voting booth before you do something truly stupid.

Response by LTC Roderic Hewlett made Mar 8 at 2016 3:55 PM

LTC Roderic Hewlett — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:55:21 -0500

Hmmm...this is a complicated matter. Was mass bombing by allied forces in Germany during WWI or dropping the "bomb" on Japan an illegal order/war crime? Tons of family members died. Mass bombing of Hanoi during Vietnam War troublesome? Was Sherman's march to the sea illegal/war crime? Does targeting a hardened fighter with a drone strike that kills his family justified or an illegal order? Some issues are so obvious - some are not. I would caution against white and black thinking in this very gray area.

Response by SSG Jesse Cheadle made Mar 8 at 2016 3:58 PM

SSG Jesse Cheadle — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:58:22 -0500

Hell no and I would skull drag his ass to prison with me.

I know a guy who was a medic. He was told to shut up an Iraqi civillian by butt stroking him in the head or shooting him, which ever was easier for him. This civillian was shot multiple times and while being evacuated moaned in pain as the FLA hit every possible hole and curb on the road. He sat there with a tear rolling down his face as the Sergeant yelled to shut him up. My friend said all he could do was put his finger to his mouth and signal the Iraqi to quiten down. He eventually made a bite stick for him.

Because he made the right decesion he is at peace with himself and is proud to tell that story in group.

At NO time should any Service Member violate the code of conduct to appease the political asses.

Response by PFC Leonard Malanche made Mar 8 at 2016 4:07 PM

PFC Leonard Malanche — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:07:06 -0500

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).Even the President cannot go against the Constitution.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 4:16 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:16:28 -0500

Here's the problem: Unless you have made a detailed study of the Geneva Conventions, the case law pertaining to a particular act and the intricacies of the UCMJ, how do you know that the order that you have been given is unlawful? We're asking an awful lot of young Soldiers if we expect them to know and interpret more than the ROE that they are given for a particular OP.

Response by PO3 Bill Clayton made Mar 8 at 2016 4:18 PM

PO3 Bill Clayton — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:18:16 -0500

If the order is illegal and will cause pain, suffering or death, I would feel convicted by not only the Geneva Convention, but by my own conscious to decline such an order. We are Americans and we are above the immorality and savagery of our enemies.
During Fleet Marine training at Camp Pendelton, my patrol was "captured" and we were all ordered to fire on the other trainees (FMF Corpsmen) who were given the objective of taking our position. (I am not a pacifist) I refused. The Trainers and a lot of others did not like my decision, as they were caught up in the moment and wanted to play war. I was never called out on this, but my grade for the operation was not great.
PS. I did go against the Geneva Convention though by not wearing my Caduceus or my PO3 rank when with the Marines in Vietnam.

Response by LTC Peter Hartman made Mar 8 at 2016 5:06 PM

LTC Peter Hartman — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 17:06:06 -0500

Some orders are clearly illegal. Some may be questionable. Remember that the oaths taken by enlisted and officers are different. There are reasons for that.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 5:47 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 17:47:45 -0500

The easy answer is "No" unlawful is unlawful. When it comes time to face a dilemma I guarantee that it won’t be as clear as Yes/No; otherwise it would not be a dilemma.

Political grandstanding aside you will have the Law of Land Warfare, UCMJ, and ROE. Hopefully you will have good leaders that work through vignettes of possible situation you might face and that will help guide and direct your actions. Preparing your mind against possible eventualities is the best course of action to ensure that split second decision that will have to be made will be a good one.

Read about CPT Maynulet from 1st AD and you will understand dilemma.

Response by Cpl John Mathews made Mar 8 at 2016 6:01 PM

Cpl John Mathews — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 18:01:48 -0500

I believe it would be a violation of International Humanitarian Law, including the Geneva Conventions, and would violate regulations to engage in torture or the purposeful killing of non-combattants. I was taught in boot camp that you can question an order that you believe is illegal, but it has to be done through the chain of command. Following orders was not an acceptable defence at the Nuremberg and Tokyo war crimes trials.

Response by SGT Mary G. made Mar 8 at 2016 6:10 PM

SGT Mary G. — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 18:10:03 -0500

Yes - do not obey anyone's illegal order. What is there to discuss?
Obviously it isn't a legal order if it illegal.
Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries associated with Geneva Conventions through the years
(everything has been ratified some with reservations)
http://bit.ly/1TIJWkc

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 7:08 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 19:08:21 -0500

The short answer is NO! No Service Member should carryout illegal orders. Further, if they aren't sure and suspect an order may be unethical or immoral military tradition would have them question the legality and intent of that order and determine whether or not they can and ought to carryout that order in the absence of further guidance understanding the consequences of obeying an illegal, unethical or immoral order and failing to obey an order which cannot be deemed to be illegal, unethical or immoral.

An interesting twist to this issue is the difference in the enlisted and officer Oaths of Office. While enlisted Service Members pledge obedience to both POTUS and the Constitution, the Officers' Oath omits POTUS and instead only includes the phrase 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic...'. This difference is intended to be a safeguard against any future tyrannical dictatorial Commanders-in-Chief.

Response by PO1 Todd B. made Mar 8 at 2016 8:22 PM

PO1 Todd B. — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:22:02 -0500

I always get a kick out of civilians when they say that the militaries job is to defend the president and government and is required to follow ANY order given period. And then when I tell them 1) the job is NOT to defend the government, in fact no where in our oath does it state anything of the sort. 2) our job IS to support and defend the Constitution, and 3) we are required to follow all orders as long as they are not illegal, unconstitutional or immoral.

And of course those same people have no clue what posse comitatus is.. and those that do then try to say 'yea but in martial law the president can suspend it.' Umm.. NO he cannot. The government has written and put in place a number of EXECUTIVE orders that state he can do that. In direct contravention of the U.S. Constitution. People seem to think that Executive Orders can override any other law or order. WRONG. It is this being led by the nose sheep syndrome that gives those orders any kind of actual power. Constitutionally, they hold NO power of law.

Which is why if I were still active duty and martial law were enacted and the president and government tried to make me do something against the citizens of this country using force, I would leave. I would walk away from my post and take the side of the people. Oh I would fight. But it would be standing along side my family, neighbors, towns and the Constitution.

Response by Cpl James Waycasie made Mar 8 at 2016 8:22 PM

Cpl James Waycasie — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:22:46 -0500

Depends really. What wouldn't you do if it came down to protecting your wife or your child? That's different right? Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. If your enemy has no moral code and kills regardless without human compassion and no rules do you beat that enemy by kid gloving them? If you knew a man may have information on where a bomb is located and there is a good chance your family will die from that bomb will you do whatever it takes or not? What if the President orders torture that saves your family? Would you complain? I doubt it. Would you follow that illegal order? If it would save your loved ones lives? Sure you would and don't say you wouldn't. But it would be ok to save your family, just not anybody else? Get a real gut check here before you answer the asked question.

Response by PO1 Ronald Schmiegelt made Mar 8 at 2016 9:07 PM

PO1 Ronald Schmiegelt — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 21:07:50 -0500

Our military has already obeyed illegal orders given by the current POTUS. They have provided arms and supplies to our stateless enemies in the middle east. Everybody from the flag officers to the pilots and crews of the aircraft dropping the stuff are complicit in this. Everything that was done in this endeavor meets the Constitutional definition of Treason, in providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

That being said, I do not advocate going on a witch hunt to find and prosecute the crews who did this. However, flag officers should have the wherewithal to see these missions for what they are and cancel them. That is not being done at any level of command. More flag officers and commanding officers have been relieved under this president than any in history. Yet, nobody seems to be questioning this.

Before we go about questioning possible illegal orders of a potential POTUS, we should look at what is being done currently. Are Officers and NCO's being promoted on merit? Or are they being promoted on being politically correct? Will they cover-up activities of a lawless administration?

Response by SGT Leon Riege made Mar 8 at 2016 9:23 PM

SGT Leon Riege — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 21:23:07 -0500

wow ! i never would have expected to see this question here or is it a question?

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Mar 8 at 2016 11:19 PM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 23:19:53 -0500

You are obliged to follow/carry out ALL LAWFUL orders by those appointed over you. Likewise, you have a duty to NOT follow/carry out ANY UNLAWFUL order, regardless of who the issuing party may be.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Mar 8 at 2016 11:36 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 23:36:48 -0500

Sp4 Byron Skinner. In all do respect to property and political correctness when you are in a fire fight the laws of war go out the door. The purpose of the bayonet in modern warfare is to dispatch the enemy as you advance, shooting the wounded is a waste of ammunition. The "Unofficial rules of engagement" and there is only one rule you kill them they were the enemy if they are wounded they are suspects. You never leave a wounded enemy behind as you are advancing in a fire fight. Once its over, you can play follow the laws of war all you want. The guys who understand this have a better chance of going home alive. The chances in Vietnam of an 11B of getting killed or wounded with a wound that will prohibit him from returning to duty was 4 in 10. A typical 50 man platoon would have 10-15 men killed and 20-30 seriously wounded over the course of twelve months or a typical rotation. Most of the Army's names on the wall has MOS 11B.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Mar 8 at 2016 11:56 PM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 23:56:36 -0500

I don't follow illegal orders. Enough said.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2016 12:02 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:02:14 -0500

Refer to the law of war and the uniform code of military justice in regards to following orders that are immoral, illegal or unethical. As a commissioned officer, your oath is to defend the Constitution.

Response by MCPO Kurt Stauff made Mar 9 at 2016 3:47 AM

MCPO Kurt Stauff — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 03:47:27 -0500

Illegal orders--orders that are not lawful under any applicable rules, regulations, US Codes, et al--should be disobeyed. However, you should be well-versed as to the difference between lawful and unlawful orders if you take a stand--this applies to both officer and enlisted, even though the oath of office is a bit different for each. Also, you should prepare for the consequences of disobeying such orders and be prepared for a court martial if you do so. You should definitely know what you're doing before you disobey a direct order from a senior.

Response by SSG Ray Elliott made Mar 9 at 2016 6:58 AM

SSG Ray Elliott — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 06:58:46 -0500

If you know an order to be illegal, you should refuse. Many Nazi war criminals have been convicted after saying they were following orders.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2016 7:04 AM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:04:30 -0500

If you actually read the Geneva Conventions and what rules each one lays out you find the following:

The Geneva Conventions apply in wars between two or more sovereign states. Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention states that the status of a detainee may be determined by a "competent tribunal". Until such time, he must be treated as a prisoner of war. After a "competent tribunal" has determined that an individual detainee is an unlawful combatant, the "detaining power" may choose to accord the detained unlawful combatant the rights and privileges of a prisoner of war as described in the Third Geneva Convention, but is not required to do so.

In short, no nation is required to extend GC protections to unlawful combatants. Terrorists, ISIS, Taliban, etc. are all unlawful combatants.

There is only one way to deal with a person or group of people who are willing to do the most vile and evil deeds to win. That is to do things more evil and vile until their will to continue is broken.

Response by SFC Patrick Weisskopf made Mar 9 at 2016 7:08 AM

SFC Patrick Weisskopf — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:08:16 -0500

I can't see what others are saying but my two cents is this, it wasn't illegal before Obama came along and I'm talking about torture. There are so many types of it that people only really heard of water boarding. Fine, it produced a ton of information saving countless lives. If Trump is elected and he says it is no longer illegal, do what you must. Disobeying an order is never cool even of you disagree with the order. If your making an anti trump statement then get ready capt kiddo, (cadet) because everything is pointing his way so far.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Mar 9 at 2016 7:44 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:44:32 -0500

I would point out that when you swear an oath at the beginning of your service, you do not swear to the Geneva Conventions or to International law. You swear to obey the orders of the President and those appointed over you, and to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. I am by no means advocating for torture, etc. here, just pointing out a fact.

Response by SSgt Rusty Warner made Mar 9 at 2016 8:31 AM

SSgt Rusty Warner — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 08:31:26 -0500

As I see it, this candidate is not asserting that he plans to issue "illegal orders". This candidate plans to revise the law so that it is no longer illegal to use enhanced interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding. If that ever happens then it will not be a question of following an "illegal order", but rather a question of following a lawful order that may or may not go against your personal feelings on the subject. Cpt Jack Durish above brought up an excellent point in this conversation about whether or not a court will see your refusal as lawful or not. While it is important to not place yourself in the position of committing a crime, it is also important to not place yourself in the position of refusing to follow a lawful order.

Response by GySgt Ascencion Gomez, D.S.L. made Mar 9 at 2016 10:18 AM

GySgt Ascencion Gomez, D.S.L. — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 10:18:54 -0500

Since there's a difference between direct and lawful orders and who can give those orders. Since orders from the president can be direct orders. I believe the question is, "Would you execute orders from the president if you believe those orders to be immoral?"

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2016 11:24 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:24:15 -0500

Well, I guess that I would just have to say NO!!!!!

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2016 1:02 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:02:51 -0500

You are going to get so much LOAC and ROE training that you will need Resiliency Training to get through it all.

Response by COL Dan Fuhr made Mar 9 at 2016 1:44 PM

COL Dan Fuhr — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:44:47 -0500

It is illegal to obey an illegal order. As other's have mentioned. determining what is illegal could be a challenge. This is further complicated by the fact that one must presume an order is legal until you have an indication to the contrary.

That being said, any time you decline to follow an order including an unlawful one, someone in authority will certainly object. One would have to be prepared to face disciplinary action regardless. At the most senior levels, it would probably come down to "do this, or your career is over." This is a tougher situation as there is no real mechanism to defend yourself as in a court martial. We just have to hope that the SecDef, Combatant Commander all the way down to the Corporal have the character to say no to the boss when he or she loses sight of what is lawful.

Response by GySgt Ascencion Gomez, D.S.L. made Mar 9 at 2016 3:11 PM

GySgt Ascencion Gomez, D.S.L. — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:11:31 -0500

Unless things have changed in the 20 years since I retired. I understood there were two types of orders direct and lawful. Officers i.e. to include the president could issue direct and lawful orders while enlisted could only issue lawful orders. So a direct order that you may feel is illegal would have to be decided by more senior officers than the one issuing the orders (that would be a tough sell if the direct order came from the president). However, it seems the real question should be, "Would you follow an order you believe to be immoral?" As a side note, Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland refused to follow an order he felt was immoral i.e. to allow a petatphile to continue to rape a boy. He took action against orders and was discharged. I assume he got a general discharge under Honorable conditions, none the less, he refused to follow orders.

Response by PO1 Todd B. made Mar 9 at 2016 5:07 PM

PO1 Todd B. — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:07:16 -0500

Reading a of the comments makes me wonder how many of you would follow an executive order that tries to nullify a Constitutional right?

I can tell you this, I would NOT follow an executive order. In fact I do not consider executive orders legal because by legal definition they are NOT law.

If the president ordered you by executive order to do something you KNOW is illegal or unconstitutional, regardless of what some officer might tell you, what would you do? I would refuse. Flat out. And depending on the circumstances and situation at that time, I would either go awol or take some other measure that fit the situation.

Response by SGT Terry Ryan made Mar 9 at 2016 10:49 PM

SGT Terry Ryan — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 22:49:08 -0500

Hard to say. All I know for sure is that there is no limit on what I'd be willing to do to protect my brothers and sisters in arms. Their lives are more important to me than every last man,woman and child of the enemy.
But like I said hard question to answer. It's one thing to say it here and another thing entirely, in the moment.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2016 12:38 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:38:42 -0500

This is where character and moral courage takes place. Standing up to not follow an illegal order says something about you as a soldier and a person. Differentiates the 'Yes-men' from the real leaders.

Response by PO2 Christopher Foss made Mar 10 at 2016 8:48 AM

PO2 Christopher Foss — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 08:48:48 -0500

To me, the more troublesome problem is that Mr Trump is trying to become President because he will have to take an oath that I have also taken. “Defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” I am fairly certain that Mr Trump's stated positions would make him an "enemy domestic" if they were acted out.

Illegal orders are a symptom, not the disease. What do you do when presented with an ongoing problem which places your leadership in conflict with your oath?

Response by PO1 Don Mac Intyre made Mar 10 at 2016 12:46 PM

PO1 Don Mac Intyre — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 12:46:47 -0500

DiD you swear an oath to a president or the Constitution?

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 11 at 2016 12:20 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:20:54 -0500

I believe we have a duty to follow all rules and regulations and hence cannot follow orders that are contrary to those legal orders. CPT Private RallyPoint Member

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2016 10:19 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 11 Mar 2016 22:19:19 -0500

Definitely; if an order is illegal, it is the responsibility of every officer, from GEN to LT, to disobey that order. The unfortunate truth is that the definition of what is "illegal" is readily blurred and it is easy for a Soldier to wake up and realize he is doing things he never though he was capable of doing. We all want to believe we would do the right thing when we are given an illegal or immoral order, however, history tells a different story. Consider Nazi war criminals, many of them "normal" people, and the depths of depravity they fell to. Also, read about the Milgram Experiment; when told to do so by an "authority" test subjects would repeatedly shock a victim because they were told to do so by someone in charge. I would like to believe that all of us would recognize and disobey an illegal order but I know that would not be the case; we are all human and many of us would end up executing illegal orders rather than risk the consequences of questioning and disobeying them.

Response by SPC Harold Bustamante made Mar 12 at 2016 12:12 AM

SPC Harold Bustamante — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 00:12:17 -0500

yes!.. we are still americans that have sworn to the constitution and bill of rights and upheld to the standards of humanitarian rights and geneva convention. It was taught in my time to never follow blindy like the nazi soldiers of world war 2.. use your brains and consciousness. Humility, compassion and humane treatment wins the hearts and minds for long term effects.

Response by CPL Brian Clouser made Mar 12 at 2016 2:39 PM

CPL Brian Clouser — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:39:45 -0500

You are support to obey all lawful orders. If the POTUS( no matter what party he belong to) or anyone else give you an order that go against the Constitution or any laws of the United State, The you have the right and the duty to disobey it and report it if all possible. BUT if you make sure you have all your ducks in a row, because the powers that be is going to come down hard on you

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Mar 12 at 2016 3:24 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 15:24:32 -0500

Nuremberg Trials kind of answered that. The defense of the Nazis in that Trial "We were only following Orders". That doesn't cut it. If you commit War Crimes, You're a War Criminal whether or not you were ordered too does not come into play. You are bound to disobey Illegal Orders.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2016 3:38 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:38:34 -0400

I am sworn to defend all orders of the officers appointed over me. That being said, I am NOT required to follow orders that are illegal, immoral or unethical. And if I am ordered to do something that falls into those categories, then there will be a quick but to the point return of "With all due respect, Sir, that is an order that I cannot follow." And if POTUS is telling me to violate the Geneva Convention and the ROE, then he will be given the same response. I will not torture innocent people to glean information that may or may not be relevant. However, if I have to water-board some jihadist to determine where and how they are striking my Brothers, and subsequently prevent it from happening again, then so be it.

Response by Capt David Bays made Apr 11 at 2018 12:24 PM

Capt David Bays — Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:24:40 -0400

You can put the question mark after the word "order." It does not matter what the illegal order is about. You do not get to pick and choose which illegal orders to follow and which not to follow.