I’m trying to understand what this guy did.
“He was only 21 years old when Corey’s squad was sent into Thar Thar with orders to “kill all military aged males.” When they instead took three Iraqis prisoner, he and Specialist William Hunsaker were ordered to release the detainees and kill them.”
He killed two prisoners?
One jailed for following orders the other for not following orders. Yet there are those on this forum who would state that following orders is not an option. I’m certainly thankful that I have trusted in God’s rule rather then trust any rule of man.
The title of your post captures my initial concern with the Lakin decision. On the face of it, the Lakin decision stands for a proposition that is the opposite of that produced by the Nuremberg trials.
I think the military command structure can be charged with dropping the ball re Obama. It had notice (at the least) of the public record and the national outcry over whether Obama was Constituionally eligible, together with Obama’s ongoing effort to conceal his personal history, and all prior to the election.
It also had notice that the January 2009 statutory certification by which Congress conferred the position of CinC was flawed in a material way relative to Obama’s qualification.
Thus, it can be argued that the military through proper channels should have immediately requested of Congress subsequent to its flawed certification that Congress correct the matter. One could ask what the military should have been done if Congress certified Mickey Mouse as CinC.
Of course, if the Lakin decision spurs productive political intervention, as it should, Lakin will have succeeded,
Lots of finger pointing or acquatisations of who said what during this fiasco. But the bottom line is both
......Spc. William B. Hunsaker and Pfc. Corey Clagett pleaded guilty, cooperated with prosecutors and were sentenced to 18 years in military prison. Both men said during their court hearings that Girouard ordered the killings......
The soldiers had previously told investigators they were given rules of engagement by 3rd Brigade commander Col. Michael Steele to kill all military-age men. Steele has denied this, but invoked his right not to testify.
A judge ruled last week that Steele won’t be forced testify, but defense attorneys could cross-examine the witnesses about their understanding of Steele’s order.
Gene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said it has become common in military trials for soldiers to testify they were just following orders or rules of engagement. But it’s not always an effective argument.
“If an order is illegal or commonly understood to be illegal, then it’s not a defense that you acted in compliance of that order,” Fidell said. “The fact that such an order was given doesn’t necessarily get anyone off the hook.”.........
end snip
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258424,00.html?r_src=ramp
We CANNOT win a war in which our soldiers fear lawyers more than the enemy.
Apparently the lesson for both of them is, don’t mess with da man.
“But those ten Leavenworth prisoners should be released to go home to their families.”
What about LTC Lakin? Seems you piggy backed your guys onto LTC Lakin.
In the end, Lakin folded and testified that the orders were legal, thereby screwing both himself and those of us trying to bring down the usurper.
Had he stuck to his principles, he would be a courageous hero. Now he lost both his career and his honor.