Court Martial

Well let's see. A clear conscience and a beautiful lady by his side is what he got after that ordeal. I don't think a dishonorable discharge would even phase him.

Yeah he's a man with his words and a balls that's all you need..too bad most people in the military are afraid to ever disobey their orders and do something like this..

Your comment suggests that you missed much of the point of the film. Did you miss the part where Zee and LT confront each other? Zee tells LT that he's doing the right thing and this is sort of pay back for all the times they followed orders and treated people like packages, LT's response was payback for past sins. Finally, when LT pulls his men together to advise them they are about to get into some serious fighting, he asks for this opinions. Of his 7 men six fully support his action because it's right. The 7th supports it because he'e stands with his buddies. Finally, at the beginning of the film, it was made clear that the removal of the priest and nuns was optional. As for almost getting the doctor killed, she was the reason why the group didn't take the easy way out. Bottom line, the team accomplished its mission but not as planned. If saving the lives of 70 civilians rather than leaving them in the jungle is a court martial offence then maybe we need more court martials. Let me ask you this: If those 70 people were white Europeans do you think orders would have been to leave them to die?

One, it's not a major criminal offense, so he wouldn't see jail time, if court martialed. The most likely outcome, following an investigation, but before a court martial, would be that Willis exercised poor judgement and disobeyed his orders; but, that he had secured the safety of his assigned mission and the lives of multiple civilians, including the son of the deposed president. As such, the recommendation would likely be that a letter of reprimand, for violating orders, be put in his service record, which would probably affect his chances at promotion. He will probably never command a SEAL team, though that isn't necessarily assured. The final outcome of the mission might create plenty of political backing for his actions, which would serve to protect him.

Speaking from experience, the Navy doesn't like to call courts martial for officers, particularly in political circumstances. I served on a destroyer squadron staff, during the first Gulf War. One of our sister squadron's ships, the USS Nicholas, had a skipper who failed to honor a surrender attempt by Iraqi soldiers, during an attack on an oil platform (or similar structure). I spoke with one of the junior officers from the ship. The charges were true and the skipper had displayed bizarre behavior throughout their deployment, like firing a sidearm at marine life off the side of the ship. The official investigation pretty much found that he had violated the rules of engagement, but they weren't about to sully the victory. Instead, the public report stated he "exercised poor judgement," but had committed no criminal acts and recommended nothing worse than a letter of reprimand. What it really meant was that he was at or close enough to retirement age and was never going to be promoted to captain, so he would be stuck away somewhere until it was time to retire. Same kind of thing happened with the Tailhook Incident. The official report listed some 80+ violations of the UCMJ, yet no one received punishment greater than a letter of reprimand.

"Fortunately, Ah keep mah feathers numbered for just such an emergency!"