So many soldiers are being sent to Iraq to kill the enemy. They have to learn to kill and deal with the mind games it plays on them. Is it possible for someone to go into that situation and be diplomatic about how and where they will kill?
2007-01-31 11:57:45 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
All US soldiers are trained to be honorable and to observe the Geneva conventions which forbids the abuse of unarmed persons and of prisoners of war.
That is the main thing that separates US soldiers from those who committed atrocities in WWII.
It can be so stressful to combat an enemy that blends in with the population that soldiers get too edgy and fire before they should. They can even become so enraged they line up unarmed people who they think are helping the enemy and gun them down. That is called combat rage or insanity and it has happened in other wars but must not be allowed to happen or go unpunished if the US is to be held to a high standard of morality.
If we allow our soldiers to mindlessly kill anyone they suspect of being the enemy, then the US would be as guilty as the enemy it is fighting.
War is horrible dirty business and it sometimes breaks the spirit and minds of those trapped in it. But we must see to it our soldiers are the ultimate example of decent morale behavior. Otherwise we don't deserve to call ourselves a democracy that stands for human rights.....
2007-01-31 12:18:31 · answer #1 · answered by mindbender - seeker of truth 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that it is disgusting for a society to send soldiers to war (in which killing takes place pretty regularly) for it and for that same society to heartlessly condemn those soldiers for doing their best under the situation given to them. Soldiers in WWII had a lot more liberty in this respect, but came home heroes regardless of some of the horrible things that happened there.
The soldiers still need to be responsible about where and when they kill (and that it is not done in rage), but otherwise they should have a lot more leeway.
2007-01-31 12:16:33 · answer #2 · answered by Pyebwa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the nature of war that there will always be atrocities. It is the nature of society to take one or two of these to make an example of in order to limit the damage and appease the folks back home. If you note it is the poor grunt in the field that gets the chop and not the command people who ordered the mission. Unfortunately it is the same in every war.
2007-01-31 12:15:36 · answer #3 · answered by Bruce H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because all soldiers have to fight by the rules of the Geneva Convention(prisoners are imprisoned,not shot,thats murder),sadly the terrorists don't have the same rules.
2007-02-01 07:25:45 · answer #4 · answered by Countess 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Killing unarmed, helpless individuals will always be murder. The setting doesn't matter.
2007-01-31 12:05:30 · answer #5 · answered by Amalthea 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋