Does U.S. war history deter prosecutions?

As a patriotic American, retired Army officer and decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, I am disgusted, sickened and outraged by the refusal of the American military to support war crimes prosecutions against the Russians for their clearly egregious misconduct that violates the rules of warfare in the Ukraine aggression.

Why would the American military take this position? I think it is because they fear being implicated themselves. What is the evidence? For example, during the Vietnam War a unit lead by Lt. William Calley killed hundreds of civilians, including men, women, infants and other children at My Lai and outlying hamlets. This was documented by an Army photographer who showed the photos to officers in the chain of command. What action was taken? None! They tried to cover the whole thing up. Eventually, the indisputable weight of evidence released to the public by low-ranking participants forced the military to act, and Calley was tried, convicted and spent three years under house arrest. Note that none of the other officers in the chain of command made aware of the massacre were ever punished for their abject dereliction of duty. In defense of the enlisted members of the unit, some of the soldiers under Calley refused to obey his homicidal orders and a helicopter pilot, seeing what the unit was doing, tried to save some of the civilians. The pilot was given increasingly hazardous missions thereafter to try to eliminate a witness.

There are almost certainly examples of such dishonorable conduct and lack of discipline from our more recent wars that have been hidden by the military, hence their reluctance to prosecute the Russians. The top military personnel should be made to plainly state their objections to prosecution of the Russians and if their objections do not conform in every particular to common decency and the Geneva Conventions that govern military conduct during war, they should be dishonorably discharged immediately.

MALCOLM CLEAVELAND

Fayetteville