Microblog Memes

It is important to add that even though the US has committed atrocities, for decades, from Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos through Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza; illegal invasion, torture, genocide, war crimes; nothing meaningful ever came from it. There has never been Nuremberg trial equivalent for the United States, and there never will be. Every single president since Eisenhower, every single one, no exceptions, has been a war criminal by the standards of the Nuremberg trials and the Tokyo tribunal, and not one of them ever spent even a day in court for it.

There are no consequences for war crimes committed by Americans. None. Aside from 9/11, but the ones who died, the ones who suffered, were not the ones responsible for the atrocities committed by the US. So sure, "just following orders" isn't a valid defense, but you won't need one anyway.

Remember that we had to fight a world war before we got to decide that just following orders wasn't an excuse?

There are steps between 'Human rights and abuse of power' before we get to 'put on trial for atrocities'. We're not preparing for those steps right now.

The British soldiers at the Boston Massacre and Nazi war criminals of the Holocaust had their day in court.

That's what due process is. Everyone -everyone - enemy or not, gets a trial. That's how it should be, that's how it needs to be, or there is no justice.

That's why "expedited removal" is nothing but fascism. No due process, no justice at all.

Yes, it IS as cut and dry as that, but actually determining if those orders are, in fact, legal isnt. It shouldn't matter who you ask or when, but, unfortunately, it does.

Remember that in reality the US saved the top Nazis and made them head of NATO.

I was on a camping trip. What happened?

That's only partially true.

For starters, nearly everything German soldiers did was legal under German law.

Side tangent: GDR soldiers who killed civilians trying to flee the country could easily be prosecuted after reunification because this was explicitly illegal under GDR law.

It's harder to prosecute "legal" crimes. It requires establishing there are "natural laws" which stand above any law humans put in place. For instance, slaughtering civilians is one such violation of "natural law". It's more complex but that's the rough summary.

Besides, most German soldiers simply became prisoners of war and faced little to no legal consequences. The Nuremberg trials were mostly for those who gave the illegal order - no one has time for millions of legal cases.

I have little to no clue about US law but as far as I can tell, executive orders are legal until deemed illegal by a court. The order would therefore have to violate "natural law" - not the constitution - or be so obviously illegal beyond any reasonable doubt to allow for prosecution of those who follow it. Both of those are a very high bar to clear.

It's an annual training requirement, they all know.

Like the US justice system gives a flying fuck about precedence anymore.

I have faith that there are many people in the military chain of command who are smart enough to ‘interpret’ orders and posture deployments in a way that does not escalate and lead to killing.

ICE and the civilian LEO have less discipline and the risk of escalation is immensely higher. I’d take the National Guard who follows orders and is subject to court martial over the jack boots any day of the week.

However it was deemed a valid defence in the trials of US war criminals in the Vietnam War.

While true, most of them are likely one paycheck away from having their family living in the streets. That's a powerful deterrent against refusing orders that the US has somehow mastered. That too.

The US literally sanctioned the ICC judges. There's not gonna be a Nuremberg trial for them lol.