A leader is not responsible of subordinate's deeds

As a kid I wanted to be a leader in the future. Other kids said that if I for example as a captain in a war commanded my subordinates, I ought to carry responsibility about what they do and not the subordinates themselves, and they widened it to that they do not need to carry any responsibility themselves. At that age I agreed that when one commands subordinates ina war, one causes what they do if they obey the command, and so the one commanding should carry responsibility about what one commands, but I did not think that subordinates would not need have any responsibility themselves.
Now as an adult I think that one needs to carry responsibility about what one causes and about the quality of what one does and about the values that one respects, regardless of whether one is an subordinate or commands others. People cause things also in more slight ways than commanding. And usually people do not follow orders in a straightforward way but isntead use their own understanding, which of course is a good thing but demands responsibility, beautiful enough values. So if one for example causes some tendency, one ought to carry responsibility of it's consequences. Or if one chooces a certain tactique, one ought to carry responsibility over how it changes things and what it causes. Etc.