Is A War of Agression A Crime or Not?

Tweet "Yet, unfortunately the Pentagon has failed to reconcile this position [court martials of Dale Nord & Ehren Watada] with the U.S. government’s prosecution of German officials for committing the war crime of waging a war of aggression after World War II, including Germany’s unprovoked attack on Poland. When German officials responded that they were simply following orders, U.S. prosecutors and judges at Nuremburg announced that “following orders” to unlawfully attack another country would not be permitted to be used as a defense in a war-crimes prosecution.

"So, which is it: Should a soldier follow orders to commit the war crime of waging a war of aggression or should he refuse to follow such orders? Does the Pentagon now feel that the U.S. government’s prosecution of German officials for waging a war of aggression was wrong? Does it now feel that the German defense of “we were following orders” should have been allowed at Nuremburg? Or does the Pentagon draw a distinction between war crimes committed by Germans (and Japanese) and those committed by U.S. soldiers?

"Is a war of aggression a war crime or not? If so, are soldiers criminally liable for following orders to commit such a war crime? If so, then why shouldn’t soldiers be permitted to avoid criminal prosecution for such war crime by refusing to obey such orders? What is wrong with what Watada has done — refused to obey orders to attack Iraq, a country that never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so? Isn’t that what U.S. officials say that German officials should have done when ordered to attack Poland?

"Doesn’t the Pentagon owe its soldiers an explanation? Where is the justice in threatening soldiers with criminal prosecution for refusing to obey unlawful orders to attack another country, on the one hand, and threatening soldiers with criminal prosecution for obeying unlawful orders to attack another country, on the other hand?

By Jacob Hornberger