Following Orders and Genocide

[Madredia]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

[Frisbeeteria]

:palm:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57dCpo1PPZY

[Pandeeria]

While I don't think you should ever just follow orders directly like a mindless drone, if military commands and objectives breach your moral values, maybe you shouldn't have joined the military or joined a different branch. But I would say unless it is truly wrong, ignore your morals and just carry out the objective but if innocent people will be hurt or killed in the name of "democracy" or "security" or your nation, then don't do it.

[The Parkus Empire]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

No. If you're going to do that, then just be a hitman.

[Benuty]

Well thats an unnecessarily huge post destroying image right there.

[Napkiraly]

I believe the military already has this covered. IIRC, if your superior asks you to perform an action that violates the laws of war you are obligated to refuse them and report the superior.

[Hushabagain]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

how about being responsible and knowing what you're signing up for so that you don't have those moral conflicts once you actually start doing your job? Also, this has nothing to do with genocide or the causes of it...

[Benuty]

I believe the military already has this covered. IIRC, if your superior asks you to perform an action that violates the laws of war you are obligated to refuse them and report the superior.

Unless said soldier is a willing blind tool ( you might need a jack-hammer to get the seeds of individual thought back into them).

[The Parkus Empire]

I believe the military already has this covered. IIRC, if your superior asks you to perform an action that violates the laws of war you are obligated to refuse them and report the superior.

"Illegal Order". Following it opens you up to prosecution.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

Well this was a short summary of what was going on and quite slanted considering the magnitude of the arguments being given.

In short, it depends. Your morality certainly does not play a part in a lawful order (if you are told to kill the enemy you have to do it if you are in the front lines, regardless of how much you value human life). If it is an unlawful order, like killing civilians, no, you probably shouldn't as it is against conventions of war.

In a way, being a soldier strips you of your choice of morals up to a point.

[Aethrys]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/military ... orders.htm

[Wisconsin9]

Pretty sure we tossed that out at Nuremberg.

[Benuty]

Pretty sure we tossed that out at Nuremberg.

Yeah those lessons at Nuremberg sure tought those people in the camps at Cambodia to disobey their superiors. Of-course lets not forget about all the others I don't have time to mention because the list is horrendously long.

[Hushabagain]

Pretty sure we tossed that out at Nuremberg.

thank you, sir or quite possibly madam or maybe both or neither (I don't know. it's the internet)

[Wisconsin9]

Pretty sure we tossed that out at Nuremberg.

Yeah those lessons at Nuremberg sure tought those people in the camps at Cambodia to disobey their superiors.

I'm just saying that as a legal defense, it's an utterly shit one.

[Madredia]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

how about being responsible and knowing what you're signing up for so that you don't have those moral conflicts once you actually start doing your job? Also, this has nothing to do with genocide or the causes of it...

There is such a thing in some nations as forced conscription. In addition, many people are disillusioned after joining the military, and realising what they are really being asked to do. Propaganda is a powerful tool.

[Benuty]

Yeah those lessons at Nuremberg sure tought those people in the camps at Cambodia to disobey their superiors.

I'm just saying that as a legal defense, it's an utterly shit one.

I Probably should have taken this from a judicial perspective :/ now that I realize what you mean.

[Napkiraly]

I believe the military already has this covered. IIRC, if your superior asks you to perform an action that violates the laws of war you are obligated to refuse them and report the superior.

"Illegal Order". Following it opens you up to prosecution.

Well, OP you got a military man and others confirming it for ye. If your superior asks you to perform an illegal act, it'd be best if you didn't carry it out.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

how about being responsible and knowing what you're signing up for so that you don't have those moral conflicts once you actually start doing your job? Also, this has nothing to do with genocide or the causes of it...

There is such a thing in some nations as forced conscription. In addition, many people are disillusioned after joining the military, and realising what they are really being asked to do. Propaganda is a powerful tool.

Then again, not a powerful enough tool to strip you out of your reasoning capacity.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Pretty sure we tossed that out at Nuremberg.

Yeah those lessons at Nuremberg sure tought those people in the camps at Cambodia to disobey their superiors. Of-course lets not forget about all the others I don't have time to mention because the list is horrendously long.

This is why most of those operations are either covert or top secret operations

[Madredia]

The purpose of this thread is very simple. To discuss whether as a soldier, you should follow the commands and instructions of your commanding officers, regardless of your moral objections to them. Does your conviction about moral righteousness matter at all in war, or should you execute orders with extreme prejudice without regard for your moral convictions. What do you think?

Well this was a short summary of what was going on and quite slanted considering the magnitude of the arguments being given.

In short, it depends. Your morality certainly does not play a part in a lawful order (if you are told to kill the enemy you have to do it if you are in the front lines, regardless of how much you value human life). If it is an unlawful order, like killing civilians, no, you probably shouldn't as it is against conventions of war.

In a way, being a soldier strips you of your choice of morals up to a point.

If you are issued a lawful order. Thats difficult in a country where you can't tell where military ends and law begins.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well this was a short summary of what was going on and quite slanted considering the magnitude of the arguments being given.

In short, it depends. Your morality certainly does not play a part in a lawful order (if you are told to kill the enemy you have to do it if you are in the front lines, regardless of how much you value human life). If it is an unlawful order, like killing civilians, no, you probably shouldn't as it is against conventions of war.

In a way, being a soldier strips you of your choice of morals up to a point.

If you are issued a lawful order. Thats difficult in a country where you can't tell where military ends and law begins.

If national law is in conflict with international conventions of law, always follow international conventions.

[Madredia]

There is such a thing in some nations as forced conscription. In addition, many people are disillusioned after joining the military, and realising what they are really being asked to do. Propaganda is a powerful tool.

Then again, not a powerful enough tool to strip you out of your reasoning capacity.

You'd be surprised how many people don't know what their militaries really do. They can only reason off what they can see, and from what they can see, the military looks just.

[Madredia]

If you are issued a lawful order. Thats difficult in a country where you can't tell where military ends and law begins.

If national law is in conflict with international conventions of law, always follow international conventions.

What if your country has not signed the international treaty?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

If national law is in conflict with international conventions of law, always follow international conventions.

What if your country has not signed the international treaty?

International Treaties are not the same as Conventions of War

Conventions of War are like the Nuremberg Code and the Geneva Conventions, no country can violate those and get away with them.

International Treaties on the other hand are like NATO, in which only a group of countries are involved, and their laws are not universal, but only applying to the signatories of the treaty.