I was jist following orders : microblogmemes

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This is a reason why I kinda like the psudo religious concepts that back US founding documents.

Now before everyone gets to typing about annoying evangelicals or whatever (trust me I understand) you don't have to believe in christianity or any other religious institution for the "natural law" concept to work. All it takes is an understanding that human rights are a default and don't magically disappear because your area's govt says so.

It's summed up nicely by this quote from John Locke.

"And where the Body of the People, or any single Man, is deprived of their Right, or is under the Exercise of a power without right, and have no Appeal on Earth, there they have a liberty to appeal to Heaven, whenever they judge the Cause of sufficient moment."

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago

Hopefully you're right. Because they're going to send in Marines next.

load more comments (3 replies)

[+] [email protected] -9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

When a soldier did not follow orders in nazi Germany they were executed. Would you rather be executed now for treason or maybe not at all later?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe we don't let ourselves get to that point in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good idea, maybe you should start by not electing a man who only likes dictators and would like to be one himself.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Preaching the choir mate

[–] [email protected] 70 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 104 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago (2 children)

“I was just living paycheck to paycheck” won’t be a valid defense either :P

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Except it will. As will "I was just following orders". It works for cops. It worked in Vietnam. Hell, it even worked for the majority of Nazi's; only a small percentage actually faced reprocussions for their actions.

Welcome to real history, where the good guys don't always win and the bad guys don't always lose.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Of course, but most people will prioritize their own family members over others. It's an explanation, not an argument against being moral.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 44 points 2 days ago

The same applies to most gang members.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 2 days ago (4 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Could change rapidly. I doubt Nazi Germany started under the purview of the ICC. (I think ICC was created in response.)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

American soldiers aren’t in the jurisdiction of the ICC or any international court anyway.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

America isn't in the jurisdiction of the ICC, but American soldiers who commit crimes within ICC countries are. This means that American soldiers according to international law can, for example, be prosecuted for crime they commit in support of Israel's genocide.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That really isn't how that works. The US has declared that they won't allow the international courts to get involved, but that doesn't necessarily prevent those courts from disagreeing.

"Jurisdiction" is only a thing when a court answers to some higher authority who has limited what that court can do. Since the international courts theoretically don't answer to the US government, they can make any ruling they like.

They're unlikely to bother, since they probably won't be in a position to enforce any ruling against typical foot soldiers, but they absolutely could if it came to that point

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I have no idea if the gaurdian is a good source but I had no idea about this so I figured I'd grab an article link for anyone who also had no ideas this happened recently

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/05/marco-rubio-sanctions-icc-judges-israel-gaza

(Feel free to reply with links to better sources if you'd like :)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago

The guardian in general is a pretty trustworthy source afaik.

load more comments (1 replies)

Microblog Memes