Replies

I assume that those who gave the orders were anti-Christian and those who obeyed them were ignorant.

Then I can assume that you are IGNORANT, because you probably have never served a day in uniform. If you had then you would know that a military organization does not vote on what actions to take. Men give orders, men obey orders, things are broken, and people die! If military organizations were a democracy maybe things would be fair, but nobody would be around to enjoy them because they would all be killed while the votes were being counted.

Military leaders make the best possible call based on the information that they have, and good or bad they live or die by their decisions.

I was about to tell him about my nephew who's graduating from West Point this year, as a counter example of the "ignorance" - to use his phrase - of our officers, but you took care of it from the other angle. Mr A. Pole is the ignorant one.

Then I can assume that you are IGNORANT, because you probably have never served a day in uniform. If you had then you would know that a military organization does not vote on what actions to take. Men give orders, men obey orders, things are broken, and people die! If military organizations were a democracy maybe things would be fair, but nobody would be around to enjoy them because they would all be killed while the votes were being counted.

Is the soldier obeying criminal order guilty or innocent? I presume that if he is ignorant of the criminality of it he is excused. But the leader is not, even if ignorant. The leader has obligation to be knowledgable.

In a country where I grew up the common convition is that soldiers are obliged to disobey criminal orders and that for example the Germans who commited atrocities in Poland were not excused by their orders. (And in Poland almost every men was in an army since there is a general draft)