I live in Central Wisconsin. I am married and we have two daughters. In 1997 I earned my degree in psychology from the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point. In my spare time I study psychology and philosophy.
Gender: Male
Location: Stevens Point, WI
Occupation: Phlebotomy Coordinator (Clinical Laboratory)
Age: 35
Member Since: October 19, 2005
Answers: 118
Last Update: January 24, 2010
Visitors: 18632
Main Categories:
Mental health
Families
Spirituality
View All
Favorite Columnists
karenR
Razhie
Chicken_flavored_eggs
|
| |
my questions are simple.
I'd like to see your opinion on my latest moral quandry. hypothetically put yourself in the shoes of a soldier in iraq or afghanistan, you have the fortitude to engage and destroy the average insurgent with whatever weapon you can grab, be it a bayonet, or a mark 19 grenade launcher. you are on patrol in the streets of samarra or some other craphole city, and some 12 year old boy comes around the corner with a PKM(russian assault rifle) and opens up on your squad.
1: would you open fire with the intent to destroy the target, or to injure and disarm?
2:is it right, in a moral sense, to shoot and kill this kid?
those of you who instantly say no are missing the point of this exercise. use quotes if you feel the need.
you fellas that like to act like a box of rubber dicks, please contribute.
you normal civilians are welcome to answer, i just like to let those specific groups know that their opinion, no matter how depraved, is still valuable.
thank you for your time and patience.
-gunner (link)
|
I am not a soldier and I am finding this hard to answer, yet I'm honored that a U.S. soldier has given me the chance to address a difficult issue with which I thankfully have no direct experience. Bearing that in mind, my answer is purely theoretical and somewhat idealistic. I don't ever want to be in your place, and I am thankful that men and women like you are willing to be there for me.
Noncombatants and prisoners of war must be treated as morally equivalent. If a person is unarmed and unable to defend or attack, then you have a duty as a human being to value this person's life.
As a soldier, you have a moral duty to kill the enemy. That is your function in a war. In battle, your allegiance is to your unit, your country, and yourself.
In battle, it is absolutely essential to dehumanize the enemy. You must kill or be killed, period. Morality has no place in battle. In the case of a twelve-year-old firing at you and your unit, you only need ask yourself: WOULD HE HESITATE TO KILL YOU? No. What good is a dead soldier?
If U.S. soldiers are unwilling to shoot enemy combatants who are children, then the enemy will exploit that weakness. There are no rules in war. You voluntarily adopt rules of engagement because you are a professional United States soldier. But the enemy in Iraq follows only one rule: kill as many as you can.
If you are unwilling to kill a lethally armed child, then be prepared to die by his bullet.
Now, I must step down from my soapbox and be honest with you. It would tear me apart inside if I had to choose between my life and the life of a child. How could I blame an Iraqi child for doing what he was told was right? What choice has anyone given him? He is more disadvantaged than I will ever know, and he doesn't really deserve to die, even if he is shooting at me. Martial law is all he has ever known. He is a child, and he deserves better. This is my conscience speaking. My conscience makes that lethally armed child into the innocent child who lives down the block from me in rural America. What kind of monster shoots such a child? THAT IS WAR.
Soldier, I am not worthy to stand in your presence. May God guide your hand.
Dr. Chad
|
|
Rating: 5
| |
that was well put, i thank you for your excellent contribution. I haven't been to either yet, but my unit is looking to make a go at it in less than a year. I'll keep that in mind. thanks-gunner
|
|