It’s not easy but you must disobey it ‍️

I too am confused by that. I am curious how easy it is to disobey an order even an illegal one.

Even though they were given order to conduct the Red Code, it is illegal and they should not follow the order. That's why they are given dishonorable discharge.
Orders for illegal acts are still punishable if you follow them.

The only part of the ending that I felt was "cheesey" was when Dawson stood up and saluted Lt. Kafee, it would NEVER have happened. Also let me point out the fact that they are not in the Army, they are in the Marine Corps and would be considered an insult in being referred to as soldiers.

Service members are not bound to follow illegal orders, in fact they are encouraged to do so. Code Reds are illegal. They are told such I'm sure.

"Its just in the movie so you can have that cheesey ending the movie has. "
Yeah I thought the same thing the spent the entire movie building and building the story line and then boom - oh we're out of time here's the end.

The conflict comes in when one does not have the courage to challenge their superiors on the legality of an order. And the consequences for being wrong can be dire as pointed out in the film.
This is what is real: "I was just following orders!" is no defense for any soldier, marine, sailor or airman when they do something wrong - even if they were following orders.
People forget that the "I was just following orders" defense was used by the Nazis at Nuremberg and that is where the military precedent was set. It didn't work then either.

Just wanted to give you a shout out and say I admire your acknowledgement that you stand corrected. Wish there were more people like you on the Internet, and I know I try to act this way as well.

Well then, i stand corrected o7

Collection
http://www.imdb.com/list/4zXrE3AAzT4/

That sentence doesnt make sense at all. You are soldiers, you should follow orders, you did follow orders, now gtfo out of our army.
You never served, did you?
In basic training every recruit is thoroughly trained on what an order is, when an order is legal, and when an order should be disobeyed.
The conflict comes in when one does not have the courage to challenge their superiors on the legality of an order. And the consequences for being wrong can be dire as pointed out in the film.
This is what is real: "I was just following orders!" is no defense for any soldier, marine, sailor or airman when they do something wrong - even if they were following orders.
In the film, they were given an illegal order to subject Santiago to a 'code red' a physical beating by his peers to get him to straighten up and be a better marine. They were not given an order to kill Santiago. That was a tragic accident.
And why were Code Reds prohibited? Because they can get out of hand and people can get hurt!
Dawson finally figures that out when he says "We were supposed to fight for Santiago!"

This message has been deleted.

No, because there was no intent. In order to be convicted of murder, the government/prosecution has to demonstrate intent. Regardless, they still obeyed an illegal order that resulted in unintentional harm. This justifies a "dishonorable discharge".
They got off easy, in reality they would've done time and not merely dishonorably discharged.

People are not found guilty of murder in drunk driving accidents that is called manslaughter. Manslaughter covers the accidental killing of people without intent. The two soldiers in AFGM were not on trial for manslaughter. They probably could have been convicted of manslaughter but once the Gov went for murder the Gov lost and cannot try them again for the same crime.

Then explain how people are found guilty of murder in drunk driving accidents? I don't think people get drunk and then decide to go out and "intend" to run somebody over or to collide into anothr car, thus taking another life.

Exactly. They carried out an order that they didn't think would result in death and it wouldn't have if Santiago hadn't had a heart condition. That being said, because they knew the order was illegal, or at least they should have, their conduct was wrong and therefore deserve to be kicked out.

Then they need to be guilty of murder as wel
No, because there was no intent. In order to be convicted of murder, the government/prosecution has to demonstrate intent. Regardless, they still obeyed an illegal order that resulted in unintentional harm. This justifies a "dishonorable discharge".
This artist:

Then they need to be guilty of murder as wel.

Collection
http://www.imdb.com/list/4zXrE3AAzT4/

But it was an illegal order. Marines, like other members of the miltary, are not supposed to obey illegal orders.
Fowler's knots? Did you say fowler's knots?

Its just in the movie so you can have that cheesey ending the movie has.
That sentence doesnt make sense at all. You are soldiers, you should follow orders, you did follow orders, now gtfo out of our army.

Collection
http://www.imdb.com/list/4zXrE3AAzT4/

But they did kill Santiago, even though that was not their intent and they were following orders. Killing a fellow Marine is generally discouraged.
It wasn't mentioned in the film, but there are procedures for appealing a less-than-honorable discharge, and possibly get it upgraded to a General or even Honorable discharge.
Fowler's knots? Did you say fowler's knots?