Is this example of animal torture in the Iraq war justifiable?

Question

This appeared today in the New York Times in a story about an American medic:

Petty Officer Kirby began to list the schools he had attended to be ready for this moment. Some he had paid for himself, he said, to be extra-prepared.
In one course, an advanced trauma treatment program he had taken before deploying, he said, the instructors gave each corpsman an anesthetized pig.
“The idea is to work with live tissue,” he said. “You get a pig and you keep it alive. And every time I did something to help him, they would wound him again. So you see what shock does, and what happens when more wounds are received by a wounded creature.”
“My pig?” he said. “They shot him twice in the face with a 9-millimeter pistol, and then six times with an AK-47 and then twice with a 12-gauge shotgun. And then he was set on fire.”
“I kept him alive for 15 hours,” he said. “That was my pig.”
“That was my pig,” he said.
****
Are you outraged about such cruelty to animals? Or, do you think it is justifiable?

Answer 1

"Set on fire"?

You are caught in a dilemma. On the one hand, this kind of training is necessary.

On the other hand, a pig is not a person and a person would react differently.

It's just another version of "Project X"

"Set on fire"?

Answer 2

This does not sound right. I would like to see a link to it. Can you please provide it?

For anyone interested: here is the link

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/02/world/middleeast/02medic.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

It is unfortunate that you took this little bit out of the article and did not tell how the corpman was using the skills he learned to save lives. The man is a hero. Would you rather the pig died or our military die?

You may not believe this, but many advances that are made in medicine are made due to the military. Next time you go to your local ER, look at the triage center, developed by the military.

DId you realize that during Viet Nam, that a person had a better chance of surving a battle field injury in Viet Nam then a person did of surviving a comparable injury in the states. Because the corpman received aggressive training. Where do you think the basic of EMT and paramedic came from.

Next time you want to question something, use the whole article not just the part that struck you as wrong.

Answer 3

sounds like some one yanked your chain.. The NY Times reports many anti military articles and probably cant/wont release the contact info on their "Petty Officer Kirby". (who may only exist in the mind of the "journalist" who submitted/created the story...
--Nothing wrong with love/concern for animals BUT there is something wrong when you can NOT realize that if all the items listed were true --the "pig" wouldn't have survived the # of shots let alone from a 12 guage shotgun...
In advanced trauma "training" they r not teaching how to deal with "shock". one wound or many doesn't matter as the focus is to stop/slow blood loss,treat pain, treat shock, maintain airway,etc and get them transported out quick (if possible)..
..My suggestion is to not react to things you hear as all gross stories are not true and generated by some twits simply to provoke reactions in those that react before they think...

Answer 4

No! And I will tell you why. This is a course given to special forces medics. It is designed to teach the corpsman how to keep a MAN or WOMAN alive. I sounds like this guy passed his test. Although it may sound cruel, and it may even be cruel to a point. it serves a noble cause and should be continued. It has led to the saving of many human lives. And, the pigs are drugged so they feel nothing. You can not put a price on a human life. A pig however is $3.99 a pound at the grocery store..

Answer 5

They were extremely bad marksmen, or he was the best corpsman ever. It would be cruelty only if the pig was not eaten.

Answer 6

what can i say? the world is getting crazier & spiralling out of control.