• Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Not even order it, he’d have to do it himself

    Anyone who’d hypothetically take the order has an obligation to refuse it, all he’s doing there is passing the prosecution that he wasn’t going to be in for anyways.

        • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Is that so? I thought one main staple of military ranks was that if the soldier rejects an order because of judicial concerns but the superior tells them to do it anyways the judicial blame is on that superior

          • voracitude@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Indeed this is not correct. Practically speaking, the soldier should keep refusing the order and will be relieved of duty and thrown in the brig. They will then have to hope that by the time the court martial date rolls around their name has been cleared and the officer who gave the order has been or will be court martialed in their place.

            Theoretically the officer should go through every underling and find nobody willing to execute illegal orders, but practically they’d only need to go through three or four at most before they had a volunteer.