![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sidereaI found this intriguing. YouTuber KnittingCultLady, who is an Air Force veteran and author about two books on military culture from the standpoint of cults(!), put out this rather frustrated video clarifying how members of the military respond to illegal orders. The tl;dr is they will follow orders of ambiguous legality, and refuse to follow orders of obvious illegality, and what is obviously illegal may not be what civilians think.
2026 Jan 18: KnittingCultLady on YT: Some Examples of Recent Malicious Compliance from the Military, ALSO Listen Carefully To My Words:
She doesn't put it this way, but it sounds from what she says that what makes something obviously illegal is that it resulted in a courtmartial or other nigh-universal condemnation when tried previously. Orders that are for doing things that are war crimes by the letter of the law but which did not result in prosecution or other negative consequences for the perpetrators when done in the past do not trigger the sense that they are illegal, e.g. if it was okay for Bush to seize Noriega, then clearly it must be legal for Trump to seize Maduro.
2026 Jan 18: KnittingCultLady on YT: Some Examples of Recent Malicious Compliance from the Military, ALSO Listen Carefully To My Words:
She doesn't put it this way, but it sounds from what she says that what makes something obviously illegal is that it resulted in a courtmartial or other nigh-universal condemnation when tried previously. Orders that are for doing things that are war crimes by the letter of the law but which did not result in prosecution or other negative consequences for the perpetrators when done in the past do not trigger the sense that they are illegal, e.g. if it was okay for Bush to seize Noriega, then clearly it must be legal for Trump to seize Maduro.
(no subject)
Date: 2026-01-26 01:19 am (UTC)My father as a very lowly officer requested written orders, the first level of non-compliance, when he was obliquely instructed by a superior officer to steal paint to make their part of the base look better. Dad put in an official request for paint, but the superior said that it wouldn't arrive until after the general's inspection and to do "whatever needed to be done, including a moonlight requisition" to get a good grade on the inspection. The officer refused to provide written orders, so Dad refused to steal stuff.
It is different for enlisted personnel. They also shouldn't accept illegal orders but also need to trust their officers not to give them. It appalls me that more officers in the current situation aren't putting in the request for written orders. At the very least, it could slow the illegality down.
EVERY officer should know that perfidy (pretending to be civilian for an attack) is illegal. I sincerely hope we impeach Hegseth and senior officers on that charge for the attacks on Venezuelan shipping.