is their a difference between murder and killing as a soldier?

Question

what makes the militaries of the world exempt from the general rule against taking a human life?

why does civilian murder constitute a serious crime, but when a soldier kills, it's not only accepted but business as usual?

Answer 1

Yes there is a difference. Soldiers are generally killing other people who are trying to kill them. Also, they are not killing because they want to, but because they have to. So it generally falls under self defense. Not every killing is considered murder, even among civilians. And even a soldier who acts beyond his orders can be held accountable for his actions. Soldiers take up arms to defend the interests of their country. When their country sends them into battle they fight because they want to defent their way of life. It is very different from a person who murders for pleasure or greed.

Answer 2

Personally I do not think so the only difference is Soldiers are trained and paid to do it. I believe this is unfair but that is how the government has total control over everything. They mislead us alot so its kinda of hard to tell if they are fighting for a good cause or not that is the only part that confuses me however you do not want people all over the world killing whom ever they feel whenever. Take for instance road rage if it were okay to kill lots of people would be dead for something as simple as that. Would you want to have that in your mind that at any given time someone can just kill you your family etc.

Answer 3

Because "murder" is ultimately a human invention. Animals kill each other all the time, and although others might take revenge for it, there are no laws or rules. We create rules like this to cooperate and make our lives better, but that may not extend to certain people, like opposing armies. Then everyone kills each other like animals and it's a big waste of life.

Answer 4

Because it is assumed that the killing that goes on in a war serves a greater purpose--so the war casualties are in a sense the lesser of two evils. Problem is BOTH sides believe that they are reaching toward a "higher purpose".

Answer 5

i do no longer think of that's ever ok, different than possibly an unintentional killing jointly as attempting to guard ones self or kinfolk from an outsider/attacker. actual Christians would not soak up palms against one yet another, whether for u . s . or very own motives. The Bible teaches us to be loving to our neighbor, and at Matt 26:fifty two Jesus suggested to "return your sword to it is place". Isaiah 2:4 says "And he will somewhat render judgment between the countries and set concerns rapidly respecting many peoples. and that they're going to would desire to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. u . s . won't carry up sword against u . s ., neither will they learn conflict anymore." And Exodus 20:13 says "you may desire to no longer homicide." I do discover it humorous that for the duration of many circumstances circumstances there are Christians on the two components of the sector, and that they're going to mercilessly kill one yet another interior the call of their God (in many circumstances an identical God). Many infantrymen pray to God the two for risk-free practices or power or for their component to win. yet why would God help that? there are various that even have been positioned into penal complex for identifying to no longer combat in wars. (Conscientious objectors)

Answer 6

It is murder and they can attempt to twist it four ways to Sunday and it will still be murder. Thou shall not kill! All that join in to the murdering frey will get their just reward!

Answer 7

A soldier sign a document that gives them the ability to kill "enemies of the US"

A civilian doesnt

Answer 8

they are called "legal bullets"