The points from the New York Times story are:
They delivered a load of helicopter jet fuel to one location and had it rejected because it was contaminated.
They reported it was contaminated. They were then asked to deliver the same fuel that was known to be contaminated to another location.
They refused that order. Another group from the same unit was ordered to deliver the same fuel and did so.
By refusing, they put other soldiers in the place of having to run the gauntlet instead of themselves.
Secondly, it would take an idiot for an officer to ask them to deliver useless fuel.
In the end, we might see select members of this group disciplined for refusing orders. You can't get away from that.
And you might see the person who ordered an attempt to pass off contaminated fuel disciplined as well.
A parent of one of those arrested makes a good point, saying a refusal to obey saved lives since helicopters might have crashed from the bad fuel.
Stupid orders that kill people is a universal circumstance in any war since the dawn of time.
One example, in the Falkland Islands in 1982, the UK sent two troop carrier ships into a cove where they should have known they were under observation. An Argentinian airstrike killed 50 Brits and wounded about 150.
An update on those arrested in Iraq. They've been released, some demoted.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=171763
Cowperson