By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The current administration has been accused of authorizing and carrying out extrajudicial killings, violating the rules of engagement and potentially committing war crimes. Multiple strikes in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean have resulted in at least 83 deaths, targeting individuals not officially at war with the U.S. Despite this, orders have been given to kill all targets, including survivors of initial strikes, directly contradicting both military and international law. American service members are reminded that they have the right and duty to disobey unlawful orders, as the “just following orders” defense has been rejected for over half a century. Ultimately, those carrying out these actions, not the commanders, are the ones at risk of facing court-martials, federal indictments, and imprisonment for their actions.
Read the original article here
Dear Troops: Please Don’t Go to Jail for Pete Hegseth
The core issue here is straightforward: Do not go to jail for Pete Hegseth, or anyone like him. The warning, echoing through the comments, is stark and unambiguous. The risk is real, the consequences are severe, and the potential reward – loyalty to a figure who is unlikely to reciprocate that loyalty – is virtually nonexistent. Think about the Admiral, thrown under the bus to protect the architects of a problematic order. It’s a stark example of what you’re up against, the lack of protection, the potential for career ruin after decades of service, all for the benefit of those who might view you as expendable.
The heart of the matter lies in the oath you took, the duty to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. If an order is illegal, you are obligated to refuse it, even if it means facing prison. Despite the common misconception, “just following orders” is not a defense that will hold in a court of law, particularly when it comes to war crimes. The Nuremberg trials made that abundantly clear. The historical evidence suggests that an army’s morale is not maintained through the threat of punishment. The fact that the military attracts a more conservative crew, and may thus be more easily manipulated, is a reality that further complicates things.
Here’s the harsh truth: individuals in positions of power, like Trump and Hegseth, will likely not share your fate. They’ll be shielded, protected, and potentially pardoned, while you could face the full weight of the legal system. They will not be held accountable. And if you think they will go down with you, think again. The American people have had enough of this. Do not jeopardize your future for the benefit of a corrupt leadership that will not have your back.
The track record of pardons paints a clear picture. Those who have committed serious offenses, including war crimes, have been granted clemency. This includes individuals convicted of murder, for ordering killings and for carrying out the executions themselves, including cases like the My Lai massacre where only one person was jailed. This makes it painfully clear that the higher-ups will not suffer the same consequences as those on the ground.
Refusing an illegal order is a brave act, even if it means facing prison. It’s a stand for principle, a recognition of moral responsibility that transcends blind obedience. But the system is designed to punish those who refuse. You are in a difficult situation, and you must make a decision about how to protect yourself.
The question becomes, who benefits if you commit unlawful acts? Who will protect you? Consider the fact that a commander could order you to kill fishermen. The response is almost certainly jail for the executor, but never for the one who gave the order. The system is designed to keep the order givers protected. The potential for future accountability is virtually nil.
The core question remains: What will you get if you commit war crimes? The response should be “jail”. The military’s core principle of cohesion and discipline should be the protection of those who are most likely to suffer.