There are rules of engagement. but then following orders is proven not to be an excuse to do the wrong thing.
however, this does apply to specific acts, not a war effort. (so soldiers are not charged for participating in an illegal war, but they would be charged if they [for example] executed enemy troops rather than taking prisoners or war, or if they were especially brutal to prisoners etc [and it doesn't matter if a senior officer told them to do it or not])
With regards killing innocent civilians etc, there has been footage coming out of Iraq of Soldiers shooting civilians, (men woman and children) indiscriminately, do we agree that the indiscriminate murder of civilians by an armed and trained soldier is a heinous crime.
I'm pretty sure that the soldiers who did this are not mentally retarded, (else they wouldn't have passed the various fitness tests to go to war), but often when these cases come up they are found to be in a mentally altered state.
anyway...
Do we advocate the execution of soldiers when they've done something wrong? (knowingly killing a civilian for example?)
(any ideas how many Iraq/Vietnam veterans we're going to need to line up against a wall and shoot?)
(I'm not specifically talking about Americans here, Britain has a horrible history too, as do most places...)
As I said, when you start saying, they did something bad, then you open the door to point the fingers at others, where it surely is only fair that you dole out the same punishments, (our legal system [both uk and us] works on a precedence system) it's a slippery slope
Oh ofc there is no defense of following orders if the orders directly contravened some basic moral principles such as being ordered to rape would never be defensible .just like if anybodies employer ordered them to do something illegal there should be no defence . if they do things everyone knows should be wrong then they should be punished . In some cases execution may be permissible in my view especially for senior officers who it can be shown have abused their position in command of soldiers or have misled their troops about certain intelligence etc .
But I gathered from your earlier statement that you where talking more about the decision to wage war with Iraq being judged illegal and if that was the case I dont think the soldiers should be held accountable for that decision - bar the more senior generals who would have been advising government policy at the time .
With regards to the killing of innocent civilians , no doubt there are some soldiers out there who have intentionally killed or tortured innocent civilians (the abu ghrahib prison case springs to mind)and there should be punishment for them . if the level of death they have caused is so prolific then execution shouldn't be ruled out
However when you are dealing with a massive insurgency like the coalition forces where/are dealing with in Iraq where one minute someone dressed like a civilian is carrying an AK47 so they are considered an enemy combatant but the next minute they have put it down so they are not you are of course going to get some collateral damage .The insurgents mix in with the general population and dress like them because they know it makes them harder to target . Much like some armed militias use child soldiers because whilst it would be legal to fire upon and kill a child soldier the militia know that professional soldiers often have objections to this . Its all about proving what the soldiers intent was at the time of the innocent civilian being killed which is difficult to prove .And in many cases it may look like they are firing into a crowd of general population but seconds earlier they could well have been receiving fire from that crowd of people
Looking back at these videos and examining certain instances of civilian death we have the extremely valuable benefit of hindsight . We weren't there at the time when bombs where going off left right and center and we where under fire with our ears ringing from the explosions and our lives on the line so its perfectly understandable why we may think differently with this benefit of hindsight but unless we can demonstrate that the soldier did something completely unconscionable considering the physical and mental stresses war places on them I dont think we should be examining those mistakes in quite so much detail . and whilst they passed fitness tests to gain entry to the army we all know ptsd is suffered by a great number of armed forces personnel .
So you are willing to carry out an act of murder to save your own family, you are no better than the criminal/terrorist.
I wouldn't think twice about murdering to save my family from death would you not do the same ?
I would argue I am not on the same level as the criminal or the terrorist because my intention is very different . I would not be planting the bomb to kill people because I did not agree with their religious background or because I did not like their race or their society or for some other political reasons . I would be planting the bomb in a desperate last bid so that my family where not brutally killed
Our legal systems both recognize the different levels of culpability hence why we have different offenses for causing death be it manslaughter or murder or various degrees of murder as in America .
If anyone where to blame for the bomb being planted in the scenario I have given it is the kidnapper who has asked me to plant the bomb . They are morally liable for the deaths of the people killed in the bomb .
After all I value the lives of my family members more than I value your or any other persons family end of story . If the same is not true for you I would question your moral compass . I would of cause be horrified by the death and destruction that I may cause but my family come first in my life
Think of it this way .If someone jumps in your car next to you tomorrow whilst your driving , places a gun to your head and says drive through that red light or run that person down over there . You would more than likely comply because you dont want to get your head blown off . Who is liable for you running the red light or running a pedestrian down ? . You would be acting under duress
