re the refusing to obey an illegal order, this is a given in the UK Armed Forces, and I'm sure in the USA ones as well, for all ranks from private to Field Marshal. By definition it has to be your decision, thus you immediately go out on a limb, report the order up your CoC, and await developments.

They will come down fast about your head, and given past precedent in the UK, it will be you that is in the poo and not the superior who issued you the order. Tough! You have done your duty and must now take the consequences. When the order is a life and death one, whether it be about subverting airworthiness regulations or pouring down "limited" TLAMs on another country without Security Council authorisation, you will at least be able to live with yourself in your suddenly leisure filled retirement. Many others at the receiving end of the "limited" action won't.

"pouring down "limited" TLAMs on another country
without Security Council authorisation"

Is that illegal ?

What about what Clinton did in trying to kill Osama with TLAMS ?

It raises some interesting questions.


What about Firing 3 Torpedos at the Belgrano ?
(I haven't read the legalistic BS behind this so don't jump on me)

Was that "in our time"?

Sorry; couldn't resist it. :ok:

500N, my point is that it is your decision as to whether the order you receive is legal or illegal and that almost certainly it will be deemed subsequently legal anyway.

As to the Belgrano, given that British territory had been invaded by Argentina it would seem that a de facto state of war existed, though of course no such declaration had been made. Given that its mere presence (and of its escorts) constituted a direct threat to our Forces, never mind Exclusion Zones or Headings, if I had received the order I would have obeyed it. Again, it's a personal decision, it's never easy, which is how it should be. It's called doing your duty, and it's what you're paid for.

Yes, I would have obeyed it as well.

Re the Belgrano, I was only referring to no state of war being declared,
I have read both sides and both agree it was OK.


One of the reasons I am not sure the ICC is good for all because
you can be hauled up at a later date !

And what happens when Obama jettisons international law? Russia, China and Iran then do likewise...

Iran closes the straits of Hormuz, china issues an ultimatum to Taiwan, Russia deploys an air defence regiment to Damascus and shoves Three armoured divisions towards the Polish border and goes to defcon one. the Black Sea fleet closes the Turkish shore. The Russian supply routes out of Afghanistan are closed and the Taliban get supplied Russian MANPADS.

Are any of you aware from Wikileaks that Americas air superiority is contingent on an absence of MANPADS in terrorist hands? are you aware that any chunk of MANPADS is worth $3000 in cash, no questions asked, at any American establishment around the world?

As for Russian gas supplies to Western Europe, are you aware that the same hip pocket crap about economics deterring war was hauled out before both WWI AND WWII?

"The Russians, Germans French etc. will never go to war because it doesn't make economic sense, their economies are entangled, blah blah" guess what?


There is a great deal China and Russia can do, or as you should know if any of you are commissioned, your charges can make more trouble for you, than you can for them. God help America if they go through with this.

Sunfish

Re "are you aware that any chunk of MANPADS is worth $3000 in cash, no questions asked,
at any American establishment around the world?"


Are you saying that you can BUY a Manpad from any US establishment
OR (as I think you are saying) the US will pay $3000 if you deliver to them
a Manpad or part there of ?

Via the Wikileaks cables, America has a long standing program to buy up any MANPADS, "surplus to requirements" or time expired, made by anyone, anywhere, to ensure they are kept out of the black market. the figure from memory was $3000 per unit, and bought from anyone, government or individual, no questions asked, just to keep them out of terrorist hands.

To put that another way, everyone knows how ubiquitous the RPG 7 system is. Ever wondered why the same assholes doNt have (much ) access to MANPADS?

To put that yet another way, what happens to RPT aviation if say, ten MANPADS were loose in jihadis hands in Britain?

What happens if Russia and China decide to do a little "rebel supporting" of their own? How do you think Britain would react if a Russian was seen wining and dining members of the real IRA or whatever it's called?

It is a good idea of the US.

Aviation would be stuffed.

We have a few 66mm Rocket Launchers on the loose in Aus
that were knocked off by some soldier a few years ago.
I think they have only found 1 or 2 and it shytes the daylights
out of the Gov't that they are still out there.

IF Russia and China do as you say - and I don't think they would,
the West is in serious trouble.

A bit like when Libya sent a heap of Semtex / C4 and Weapons to the IRA.

One should never assume that political leaders are blessed with gifts of common sense. Indeed, almost all seem to be blinded by ego, some twisted form of idealogy and/or self promotion to achieve wealth and status, to the extent that they are unable to resolve moral dilemas that a debating group of intelligent 18 year-olds would make a good stab at.
On another issue, Service personel should be in no doubt about the position they hold in the eye of the "Law". The "Law" is a total ass! You are expected to have total knowledge of LOAC, the Geneva Convention and all laws. It also helps if you are fighting on the winning side and are never captured by your enemy.

OAP

Smear tactics. Very noble.

It is part of their job to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of LOAC, most of which is based on common sense (e.g. Don't abuse POWs).

Onceapilot

We, at least in the Aust Army had quite a few lesson in Geneva,
ROE etc and I know that before the last 10 years of war it was
well covered abut what was what.

Even in the Reserves we had Red and Yellow ROE cards
and we we kicked hard if we moved away from the wording
etc.

Chugs:

It is worth noting that all superiors have a duty not to issue an order to their subordinates that they know to be illegal. I believe the it may also be true in the British military that they must not issue an order they know will not be obeyed but I stand to be corrected on that.

Wise words. We didn't need much imagination had we miraculously survived a nuclear strike, landed in some uncontaminated area, and been asked what our mission had been.

I don't think the bug four would have got you very far. As for sheltering behind the Geneva Convention . . .

I actually think that prisoners in Iraq during GW1 were outstandingly lucky.

:D

Worth reposting.

AA

"It is worth noting that all superiors have a duty not to issue an order to their subordinates that they know to be illegal. I believe the it may also be true in the British military that they must not issue an order they know will not be obeyed but I stand to be corrected on that."

Not just the UK, Australia as well. Your post reminded me from my training
about the issue of illegal orders to my troops.

The Japanese conducted a limited Air Strike only.....no Boots on the Ground attack a while back at a place called Pearl Harbor as I recall.

I spent the evening watching the Senate Committee hearing that led to the 10/7 Vote. I also watched the Committee debate amendments to the Senate Resolution.

Rand Paul and some others made very good arguments.....Menedez quite plainly is manipulating the process to favor Obama. He tabled an Amendment that would have forced a debate on exactly what powers a President has re initiating Military Attacks and if it is possible to engage in War like activities without Declaring War on the Nation being attacked.

The Democrats very much do not want to go there.....as that would effectively kill this proposed venture by Obama.




https://sphotos-a-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/h...68212877_n.jpg

"As President Obama argues in favour of a punitive strike on Syria, the issue of the moment in Washington is whether America's credibility and reputation are imperiled. Neil Macdonald says that to talk seriously about American credibility, especially in the Middle East, requires both a disassociation from history and an utter absence of irony.":D:D:D

Obama's indecision on Syria strains U.S. credibility: Neil Macdonald - World - CBC News

You need to understand, Broadsword***, that International Law is only as good as the norms it grows from, and its enforcement, like any other body of law. It's a bit less clear than the local statute against dumping hazmat in the local reservoir. Sadly, since you don't understand that, you seem to have put "international law" up on a pedastal in an ivory tower. Of course you are going to be disappointed ... you've set yourself up for it. Some people are under fewer illusions about what international law is, and how it gets established or followed.

Neil Macdonaldof the CBC
He put his finger right on the G spot there ...
He then goes on to endorse the idea that America must accept the Muslim world's blame for the Crusades, and all other colonial malfeasance in the Mid East by the west's varoius powers, as a valid guilt by association.

Well, **** him, and **** every cnut who takes that position.

I don't blame the Egyptians for what Saddam did to the Kurds, because I am not an idiot. I also don't blame the Ayatollah today for what the Persians did to the Greeks back before Alexander's time, because, again, I am not an idiot.
Whilst I appreciate Neil's frustration with American exceptionalism, since I guess it makes his Canadian dick smaller (???), even though that very principle has been an immense benefit to Canada since about 1917, and a lot of the world thanks to American Exceptionalism's influence on the UN being started, sustained, and funded for about 70 years ... **** him again.

Neil wrote a pretty good article, and a good critique of the policy fubars currently in progress. That he could not contain his less brilliant feelings is unfortunate, but not fatal.