But this Akbar is a Sgt., not an Admiral. 
It might count as treason, since I heard that Sgt Akbar was opposed to the war. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem like his main motivation was to impede the war effort. Since the people he attacked were in his chain of command, it would seem the attacks were motivated by a personal grudge.
But if he’s convicted of murder and attempted murder I think the prosecutors will seek the death penalty.
I believe that the only forms of execution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice are hanging and firing squad, but I can’t find a cite.
And CaptBushido, I caught the reference. Admiral Akbar is a cliche on a couple of photoshop sites I lurk on. And I suspect die-hard Star Wars fans will know what you’re talking about.
Executed?
You betcha! and good riddence.
How about a link?
Or at least tell me what fragging is.
stuyguy: Breaker Morant?
“Fragging”, or fratricide, is the killing, or attempting to kill, one’s fellow soldier or soldiers, often an officer against whom the soldier bears a grudge. From “fragmentation grenade”, a common weapon used for fratricide.
radar ralf:
You are correct. You control the board.
No. He should not be killed. Not him, or anyone else. There has been enough death. Too many lives lost too lightly. I am tired of all this death.
That is not to say that murder is not a terrible thing, or that he should not be punished etc., that goes without saying. But for God’s sake, there is too much death in the world now 
I don’t want any more. even if the person probably does deserve it.
You get what I’m getting at? I hope so.
When I worked in Courts and Boards in the Army, a guy killed another guy by bashing his head in with a champagne bottle. He got a Bad Conduct discharge and a long stretch at Leavenworth.
I don’t think that Sgt. Akbar will be that lucky.
Couldn’t he, at times of war, be summarily executed?
stuyguy: Okay… I’ll keep it in the theme of this thread - what is the little piece of irony shown in the execution scene of the movie, “(The Ballad of) Joe Hill”?
heresiarch: While a firing squad or hanging would be a traditional execution for a soldier, I would assume they would use the more “humane” lethal injection. (But I don’t know. That’s why I asked in my second post.)
Infectious Lass: That’s why I framed the question as “will” he be executed instead of “should” he.
NurseCarmen: I don’t think so. But I could just be watching too many episodes of JAG.
stuyguy: I don’t get the Breaker Morant reference.
radar ralf: I have no idea what you’re talking about. 
Sorry, Johnny L.A. - stuyguy and I have been having a background hijack about movies dealing with executions. He asked about a line in the movie, “Breaker Morant,” and I have responded about a scene in the movie, “Joe Hill.” Please forgive us for the “ground clutter” (that’s a radar reference).
I’m sure the families of the soldiers he killed and maimed don’t share your sentiment.
You bet I think he will be.
And I think I support that with references to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, with special respect to:
Article 90, Assaulting or Willfully Disobeying Superior Commissioned Officer. (If committed during wartime, the maximum punishment is death.)
Article 118, Murder (If Premeditated, the maximum punishment is death and the mandatory minimum is life)
Article 119, Manslaughter
Article 124, Maiming
Article 128, Assault
Article 134, ANYTHING ELSE
heresiarch, I think I know the sites you mean, they’re something awful, aren’t they?
No. I don’t get it at all. This soldier threatened, and caused the loss of at least one of, the lives of his fellow soldiers. Regardless of ones views on the war, he took an oath to obey the orders of those placed above him. Part of his duty as a soldier is looking out for the well-being of his fellow soldiers and putting the unit above himself. His particular beliefs have no place on the battlefield, nor do petty squabbles with his team mates.
He has comitted the most serious crime a soldier can commit, IMHO. I would think (and hope) he could be tried also for 899.99 - Misbehavior before the enemy, and 904.104 - Aiding the enemy.
He is beneath contempt, and I hope for his speedy execution.
For what it’s worth:
Section. 3.
Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall
consist only in levying War against them, or in
adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and
Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason
unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same
overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Personally, I don’t think that this is treason in that he did not levy war against the United States. It was a mutinous(?) action though, where he tried to disrupt the military’s chain of command. I expect that he will be executed (and should be, IMHO, for endangering his fellow soldiers at the very least.)