Of two officers of equal rank, only one will be in the private’s chain of command, and that will be the one that he obeys. Or, if they’re both out of his chain of command, then his response should be to ask the officer who is in his chain of command which he should obey.
I never served in the military, but in my retail days I had two bickering managers who gave me conflicting orders and basically made me a ping pong ball, where each one demanded I do the opposite of what the other did and would be upset if I didn’t. They were of equal rank and equal authority over me. And yes, I wigged out.
Toys R Us was not a great place to work for many reasons. At least I never had to worry about facing a court martial there.
When they do have them, does Geoffrey preside?
So it’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t?
In a command structure that’s issuing illegal orders? Well, yeah.
In that case it might be a hard choice whether to obey. 
As a member of the service (especially in the case of officers), you should be expected to care more about your integrity and fidelity to your oath than about your career prospects.
Absolutely, but only one choice is the right thing to do
I worry that I’ve given the impression that his point was “don’t risk it” and nothing could be further from the truth. He absolutely drilled into us our obligation not to follow illegal orders. He just wanted us clear that it was hugely consequential.
A couple of my thoughts here…
If I follow orders I know are clearly illegal, forget for a moment the moral implications. I expect I’m also putting myself at legal risk. We all know that the “just following orders” excuse isn’t a magic shield.
Secondly, regarding my career prospects, would I want a career where I’m being ordered to commit war crimes? I don’t think I would want that.
ETA: Let me add, I’m not a military member. I have not spent years of my life in service, where I’ve built up a career. I have not gone through the process of being broken down in boot camp and then built back up to be more compliant. I haven’t dealt with the daily indoctrination and routine that drills conformity into a person. So, I can’t say what this choice might look like to someone who might actually be in that position, and can’t fairly judge anyone who is in that position.
Sound like a cool dude.
The thing about trying someone for refusing an illegal order is that the order itself and its legality will become the subject of a court martial, which is something the person who issued the order in the first place might not want. So I’m guessing that many - maybe most - refusals to follow problematic orders are ultimately swept under the rug, so as not to raise a fuss.
It’s still a good way to make enemies, though.
Simplify it. Here: a senior officer. There: a junior officer. Over there: a known drug dealer. Senior officer says to the junior officer, “Take out your handgun and shoot that known drug dealer over there in the head.”
Legal order or not?
“Can I have that in writing?”
Nice. Seriously, I found your post helpful. There’s no logical reason the psychological distancing effect of a drone strike should make a difference.
Cool under pressure? Absolutely. Cool dude to hang out with? Not so much. The guy was very intense; even for a Marine.
The only thing this ‘administration’ does is blame others for the administrations misconduct. That’s it.
That’s Trumps administration. It’s a criminal enterprise. A stupid one. But still criminal.
This is leaving out a very very big piece.
Background: the command in chief of your country has declared drug dealers as unlawful combatants, and the elected Congress feels no need to contradict him.
Yep, or “I am not sure if I heard that correctly”.
Ruh Roh… Petey’s in trooooouble!
My strategy was to get the two of them standing there together as I asked what I should do.