I may have missed something but I haven't seen anyone mention the latest developments with Lt. Ehren Watada.

On May 7th, the Justice Department dropped the government's case against Iraq war resister Ehren Watada.  Watada was the first commissioned officer who refused to deploy to Iraq, on grounds that he felt this was an unjust illegal war and did not want to be party to war crimes. This development is significant as it Watada essentially put the legality of the Iraq war on trial.  Faced with this, the prosecution opted for a mistrial instead.

From The Nation:
(http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070226/brechersmith)

Watada believed his duty, under his oath and military law, was to refuse to participate in an illegal war. As the underlying question of the war's illegality emerged like a family secret in the courtroom, the judge agreed to the prosecutor's motion to declare a mistrial.

Background from wiki:

Watada joined the Army after the war in Iraq had begun, stating that he was motivated "out of a desire to protect our country" after the September 11 attacks. He was commissioned by the Army's Officer Candidate School, on November 20, 2003, at Fort Benning, Georgia as a Second Lieutenant of Field Artillery -- one month after UNSCR 1511 authorized a multinational force in Iraq. Watada served one year in South Korea, and was subsequently reassigned to Fort Lewis, Washington.

Soon after reporting to Fort Lewis, Watada discovered that his unit would be deploying to Iraq, in support of ongoing operations there. In preparation to deploy, he began conducting research on the country, its culture, and the reasons for the U.S. involvement in Iraq. Watada claims that, after reading several books and articles about the history of Iraq, international law, and the evidence used to justify the war, and speaking with veterans returning from Iraq, he ceased to believe in its legality and justification.

In January 2006, he attempted to resign his commission. The Army denied his request because he had not fulfilled his eight-year military service obligation for which he had contracted, as required by law. He used as justification for his request that the war violated the Constitution and War Powers Act which "limits the president in his role as Commander in Chief from using the armed forces in any way he sees fit." He also cited the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and the Nuremberg Principles, which "bar wars of aggression." He argued the command responsibility would make him personally responsible and liable for legal challenges for violating international law. Further, he asserted that the war was based on misleading or false premises such as the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and that the occupation itself did not follow the Army's own legal rules of conduct for occupying a country.

Watada has said he is not a conscientious objector because he is not opposed to all wars as a matter of principle, and he claims he has offered to serve in Afghanistan, which he regarded as "an unambiguous war linked to the September 11 attacks." This was also refused. Watada, in turn, refused an offer for a desk job in Iraq without direct combat involvement.