# Should this marine be rewarded for defying orders?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [September 16, 2011, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454 "2011-09-16T00:47:06Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/1 "2011-09-16T00:47:06Z")
I ask because [he was](http://news.yahoo.com/defying-orders-hero-marine-saved-other-troops-215814570.html) in fact given the medal of honor for actions he undertook in defiance of orders.
I find this interesting, and possibly worth debating? But I know it has aggravated dopers in the past when I started a debate thread where I myself had no clear position on the subject. So I hesitate. But then I plunge in.
I am not sure what I think, but to make an argument, I’ll say:
In the military, it’s important to follow orders because your superiors are causally linked to much more information than you both concerning the state of battle and the goals of the conflict. There may be times when things seem crystal clear to you, but because you are in a poor epistemological position compared to your superiors, you shouldn’t trust that appearance of crystal clarity. No matter how things seem to you, what you should do is follow orders. Not just lives are at stake in the general adherence to this principle, but the well-being and well-orderedness of the nation you serve as well.
So even if by defying orders you turn out to cause good things to happen, your actions shouldn’t be _rewarded_. You got lucky. You were in a poor epistemological position, acted without justification, and things turned out okay. That’s luck–and it makes no sense to reward someone for being lucky.
It might even be appropriate here to punish the person–they did, after all, defy orders. Failure to punish an infraction is itself a kind of reward–encouraging further infractions.
That’s the argument. What do you think?
---
### Author:  [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/2 "2011-09-16T00:52:20Z")
In normal situations, I would say no - but part of an article states that the officers in charge that day were reprimanded
> [@](#):
>
> Two Army officers were reprimanded for being “inadequate and ineffective” and for “contributing directly to the loss of life” following an investigation into the day’s events.
Which would suggest strongly that the orders he was not following were not ‘legal’ orders - meaning I have no issue with him not following them.
If there were any question that his actions were against ‘legal’ orders - he would not be awarded the commendation that he has been.
Good on him and the driver.
---
### Author:  [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/3 "2011-09-16T00:55:44Z")
They were supposed to fight for Willie.
Good job, I say.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/4 "2011-09-16T00:58:09Z")
> [@simster](#):
>
> In normal situations, I would say no - but part of an article states that the officers in charge that day were reprimanded
>
> Which would suggest strongly that the orders he was not following were not ‘legal’ orders - meaning I have no issue with him not following them.
>
> If there were any question that his actions were against ‘legal’ orders - he would not be awarded the commendation that he has been.
>
> Good on him and the driver.
I didn’t know that inadequate and ineffective orders are illegal. I’m surprised that they are–but I might understand it better if I knew what “inadequate” and “ineffective” mean as technical military disciplinary or judicial terms.
---
### Author:  [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/5 "2011-09-16T01:10:08Z")
Did he disobey orders from an army officer in order to rescue fellow marines?
---
### Author:  [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/6 "2011-09-16T01:12:07Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> It might even be appropriate here to punish the person–they did, after all, defy orders. Failure to punish an infraction is itself a kind of reward–encouraging further infractions.
Zero tolerance rules are stupid. Always have been, always will be. Punishing this guy for saving 36 guys out of dogmatism and fear of the slippery slope is not morally or politically acceptable.
---
### Author:  [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/7 "2011-09-16T01:12:57Z")
In certain case, the ends do in fact justify the means. This would appear to be one of those cases.
---
### Author:  [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/8 "2011-09-16T01:22:34Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> That’s the argument. What do you think?
At the risk of Godwinizing the thread, to agree with you would put you in a position where you’d turn in Anne Frank’s family because they were breaking the law.
Sometimes orders need to be disobeyed.
---
### Author:  [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/9 "2011-09-16T01:25:17Z")
Defiance of orders isn’t quite as clear cut a legal issue in the military as one might think. There are zillions of cases where an order must be defied when the situation dictates a different course of action must be followed. Heck, most of the greatest military commanders of all time were known for their willingness to defy orders in pursuit of the greater strategic objective. Nelson famously said he saw his overriding order as defeating the French and that he would happily disobey any order that interfered with that.
As to when you should defy orders and when to follow difficult orders - well, it’s a judgment call. There just isn’t any clear line. Life is complicated.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/10 "2011-09-16T01:29:29Z")
> [@Odesio](#):
>
> Did he disobey orders from an army officer in order to rescue fellow marines?
Apparently he disobeyed “inadequate and ineffective” orders from his chain of command to rescue Americans and Afghans.
I’m seriously of two minds about this. There’s generally pretty good reasons why military personnel are expected to obey orders. Is the review of the orders being termed “inadequate and ineffective” due only to the fact that he got away with it? What if his actions had led to a Taliban breakthrough at the point in the line he wasn’t defending?
Certainly he was brave. Why didn’t the other guy get the Medal of Honor too?
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/11 "2011-09-16T01:45:27Z")
If he’d been wrong about defying those orders, he probably would’ve died. Hard to punish him worse than that.
Nelson famously held his telescope up to his blind eye (at the Battle of Copenhagen, I think?) and said he couldn’t see the signals ordering him not to attack. His heroism and aggressiveness are now justly celebrated.
I would never punish a soldier who disobeyed orders in such a way that he thus won a victory, achieved an objective or saved his buddies’ lives, which wouldn’t have happened otherwise. But as his C.O. I might have a quiet word with him later and say, “You pulled it off this time, and well done. But next time you might not be so lucky, so don’t let this go to your head.”
---
### Author:  [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/12 "2011-09-16T01:51:07Z")
> [@Frank](#):
>
> Apparently he disobeyed “inadequate and ineffective” orders from his chain of command to rescue Americans and Afghans.
>
> I’m seriously of two minds about this. There’s generally pretty good reasons why military personnel are expected to obey orders. Is the review of the orders being termed “inadequate and ineffective” due only to the fact that he got away with it? What if his actions had led to a Taliban breakthrough at the point in the line he wasn’t defending?
>
> Certainly he was brave. Why didn’t the other guy get the Medal of Honor too?
I think he got a Navy Cross. Not easy to get one of those either.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/13 "2011-09-16T01:58:53Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#):
>
> At the risk of Godwinizing the thread, to agree with you would put you in a position where you’d turn in Anne Frank’s family because they were breaking the law.
>
> Sometimes orders need to be disobeyed.
Hiding Anne Frank’s family is among other things a criticism of the rules which say they should be turned in. That criticism–and the fact that its target is rightly criticized–is what justifies resistance to the nazis.
Was this medal awardee criticising the rules which said he should obey the orders? If so, was his criticism justified? If the answer to either question is “no” then the analogy to the nazi situation fails.
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/14 "2011-09-16T02:02:54Z")
> [@Frank](#):
>
> Certainly he was brave. Why didn’t the other guy get the Medal of Honor too?
Maybe he’s a wookie.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/15 "2011-09-16T02:04:13Z")
> [@Grumman](#):
>
> Zero tolerance rules are stupid.
Is it that zero tolerance rules are stupid, or that the rules zero-tolerance has often been applied to are stupid?
“No knives in school.”
The kid accidentally has a butter knife in his car, and is expelled.
Is it correct to conclude from this “they shouldn’t have had a zero tolerance rule,” or rather, is it correct to conclude “their zero-tolerance rule shouldn’t have been ‘no knives’ since that’s too general”?
Of course there will always be fuzzy cases that require special judgment. But the judgment in the knife case, for example, will ideally turn not just on what gives people warm fuzzies but rather on a grasp of the intention of the rule.
In the OP I claim that one intention of the rule “obey orders” is to ensure that soldiers always understand themselves to be in a worse epistemological position than their superiors. Do we have reason to think that the individual in this situation was justified in thinking himself an exception to this? Did he know himself to be in a better epistemological position than his superiors? If he did, then good judgment might advocate for allowing his order-defiance to stand. But if he didn’t, then shouldn’t he have followed orders?
---
### Author:  [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/16 "2011-09-16T02:51:50Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> I didn’t know that inadequate and ineffective orders are illegal. I’m surprised that they are–but I might understand it better if I knew what “inadequate” and “ineffective” mean as technical military disciplinary or judicial terms.
Thats why I put illegal in ‘quotes’ - in that the orders were probably not technically illegal, but given that the command was summarily punished for being inadequate and ineffective, it gives rise to the idea that the orders were not the kind one ‘should’ follow in that situation.
---
### Author:  [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/17 "2011-09-16T02:52:33Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> Is it that zero tolerance rules are stupid, or that the rules zero-tolerance has often been applied to are stupid?
It is that if it’s not a stupid application of the rule, you don’t need to fall back on the zero tolerance mindset. It’s effectively a circular argument: “I say you must be punished because I wrote a rule saying you must be punished”.
This isn’t the same thing as an absolute rule against, say, eating babies. It’s the difference between an act being indefensible and just not caring whether it is defensible or not because the rule’s the rules.
---
### Author:  [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/18 "2011-09-16T06:01:48Z")
Yes he should have been rewarded, because orders aren’t everything, even in the military.
---
### Author:  [@RandMcnally](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RandMcnally)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/19 "2011-09-16T06:29:53Z")
In the military there are sometimes situations where if you pull it off you’ll be given a medal. If you screw up you’ll be dead. And if you survive you’ll be put in Leavensworth.
---
### Author:  [@Norse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Norse)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2011, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454/20 "2011-09-16T06:54:34Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#):
>
> At the risk of Godwinizing the thread[…]
At the risk of continuing the Godwinizing hijack, there were these rather well-known trials in a German city some decades ago, where it was established by an international court that orders never relieve the soldier from individual responsibility for his or her actions. When I did my service, one of the things we were taught in basic training was that as a soldier, it’s your obligation to **not** follow orders you believe are morally wrong. There may be a court-martial afterwards, but that’s one of your duties as a soldier.
This soldier used his conscience and refused to follow orders he thought were wrong. Hindsight proved him right, therefore, in hindsight he should be rewarded. If he’d messed up, he’d have been wrong and should be punished for not following orders.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-this-marine-be-rewarded-for-defying-orders/596454.md?page=2)