Coven's Question of the Day - July 29, 2012

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
The sun has gone; And come again

So now I turn; To you my friends

Thread number two; With more to come

So grab a glass; Pour some rum

Jump right in; In to the fray

Its now time for; Coven's question of the day!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coven's question of the day - July 29, 2012

When should a soldier not follow an order?:

I came across a post yesterday that really hit me. One of our resident soldiers posted a LEWC entry with the main theme being "Why do we fight?" It was beautifully written and poignant. However it was a response from a fellow soldier that got me thinking. His answer was "Because it was our job". Now I have nothing but respect for soldiers who server honorably, but where is the line drawn between good soldier and mindless automaton? Everyday we hear of the heroic acts our soldiers perform in their duty to our nation. Every week we also hear of atrocities that our soldiers carried out on often innocent people in the name of our country. I acknowledge that many of these soldiers act inappropriately of their own accord, but there are also instances where they were directed to do these things, and always state that they were simply following orders. So when should a soldier not follow an order?

I want to thank all of those who have served honorably in our military. You are true hero's.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A leader is a man who had the ability to get people to do what they didn't want to do, and like it" - Harry Truman

"I was just following orders" - Trial of Adolf Eichmann
edit on 29-7-2012 by coven83 because: spelling




posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
the answer is simple the soldier must not follow the order to shoot those he is suppose to protect. His own people. Anyone wish to challenge this?
edit on 29-7-2012 by gaurdian2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I beleave that this type of problem, is just a thing that is caused by the command structure that is in place and used by the us military. I do respect the men and wemon that serve in the military, but if a soldier doe's not follow thier order's they are liable to be court martialed. This is the problem "even if a soldier find's the order or order's to be imoral or unethical they must carrey it out to the letter" such is explained in thier Department of Defence contract they sign to join the military. The commaning officer's ie general's and admeral's choose to have it this way, so that they may give any order while having the ability to deny that the incident was caused by thier order. Thier order's to the sodlier for the most part are classified so oversight to prevent such type's of thing's from happening is nerley imposible.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by gaurdian2012
the answer is simple the soldier must not follow the order to shoot those he is suppose to protect. His own people. Anyone wish to challenge this?
edit on 29-7-2012 by gaurdian2012 because: (no reason given)


So then you assert that there is not nor should there be a moral dilemma in carrying out the execution of an foreign innocent?



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by coven83

Coven's question of the day - July 29, 2012

When should a soldier not follow an order?:



Well I am not a military person, but I would say if something is unethical then they should not follow the order. However they signed their lives away to the gov't so I guess they do not have much of a choice.

Great question!


-SAP-



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by coven83

Originally posted by gaurdian2012
the answer is simple the soldier must not follow the order to shoot those he is suppose to protect. His own people. Anyone wish to challenge this?
edit on 29-7-2012 by gaurdian2012 because: (no reason given)


So then you assert that there is not nor should there be a moral dilemma in carrying out the execution of an foreign innocent?


Coven, I was going to reply to your original question with:

"A soldier should not carry out (or at least vehemently question) an order that goes against his/her morals, or against what he/she wholeheartedly believes in."

Then you bring up this next question...and now I know that my answer is the right answer...

If I was a soldier, and I was ordered to (essentially) commit murder by executing an innocent without provocation, I personally would refuse to obey that order.
edit on 29-7-2012 by edaced4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SloAnPainful

Originally posted by coven83

Coven's question of the day - July 29, 2012

When should a soldier not follow an order?:



Well I am not a military person, but I would say if something is unethical then they should not follow the order. However they signed their lives away to the gov't so I guess they do not have much of a choice.

Great question!



-SAP-


One thing my Father always taught me is there is always a choice, no matter how bad the consequences there is always a choice. So what would you chose, to ruin or end the life of another by following the order, or to ruin your own by not? Not an easy choice, but still a choice.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by edaced4
 


Exactly, to me it comes down to what would it be harder to live with, the memory of taking an innocent life, or the suffering of years in a military prison and the stigma of having been dishonourably discharged?

I would chose the latter.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by coven83

Originally posted by SloAnPainful

Originally posted by coven83

Coven's question of the day - July 29, 2012

When should a soldier not follow an order?:



Well I am not a military person, but I would say if something is unethical then they should not follow the order. However they signed their lives away to the gov't so I guess they do not have much of a choice.

Great question!



-SAP-


One thing my Father always taught me is there is always a choice, no matter how bad the consequences there is always a choice. So what would you chose, to ruin or end the life of another by following the order, or to ruin your own by not? Not an easy choice, but still a choice.



That's a tricky one...I would do what my heart told me in the situation. I couldn't hurt innocence though...

-SAP-



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Hello, Coven


I'm not sure if you're looking for a personal or a legal viewpoint. Here is the Armed Forces answer to that question:


duty requires that you refuse to obey illegal orders. This is not a privilege you can claim, but a duty you must perform

Army Study Guide


A military order must have a military connection and must not contravene existing law, such as the Constitution, treaties, and statutes. An illegal order is just that - illegal, and does not require that it be obeyed. As the law either has no valid military purpose or contravenes existing law, obeying the order may expose the person to prosecution.

Military Law/illegal military order

J
edit on 7/29/2012 by LadyJae because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyJae
Hello, Coven


I'm not sure if you're looking for a personal or a legal viewpoint. Here is the Armed Forces answer to that question:


duty requires that you refuse to obey illegal orders. This is not a privilege you can claim, but a duty you must perform

Army Study Guide


A military order must have a military connection and must not contravene existing law, such as the Constitution, treaties, and statutes. An illegal order is just that - illegal, and does not require that it be obeyed. As the law either has no valid military purpose or contravenes existing law, obeying the order may expose the person to prosecution.

Military Law/illegal military order

J
edit on 7/29/2012 by LadyJae because: (no reason given)


Nice post. I have one question then. If this is taught to new recruits, why do so many soldiers still follow orders that they know to be illegal or immoral? The sub culture of "dont ask dont tell" diddnt begin or end with homosexuality.

I actually did entertain the notion of a military career, even enrolled in my ROTC. But I quickly learned I have a problem with authority, thusly the military and I were not fated partners.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Great question for the day Coven...

Which came first. The uniform, or the man.

My personal feeling is, a Man has an obligation to the human race, before obligation to a national uniform. A Man has the ability to think and use reason. A uniform represents the *current* moral standards of the powers in charge of the uniform.

If a Man feels what he is being ordered to do, is reprehensible...he has the option to remove the uniform, and do what is right.

Des



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by coven83
Nice post. I have one question then. If this is taught to new recruits, why do so many soldiers still follow orders that they know to be illegal or immoral? The sub culture of "dont ask dont tell" diddnt begin or end with homosexuality.

I actually did entertain the notion of a military career, even enrolled in my ROTC. But I quickly learned I have a problem with authority, thusly the military and I were not fated partners.


Things aren't so easy to define when you're still wet behind the ears: E-2, 3 or 4. Nor do I know if this is actually "taught" to the recruits.

The military is the same hodgepodge of personalites that make up the general population, my friend. Some truly don't know and some just don't care. Some are too frightened to act. It seems logical to me that if one is prone to unnecessary violence in civilian life, they will be prone to the same in military life (and vice versa).

The good thing is that more and more soldiers are beginning to speak out and refuse to carry out orders that are unlawful.

I, personally, look forward to a time in which war is no more. I would have all the soldiers (no matter who's they are) safe and at home.

J



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Poignantly put Des


So then to some it is the notion that the uniform shields you. Your acts are not your own but those of the country you serve. Interesting



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
As others have said, soilders should reuse orders to kill innocents, most people would agree on this...

I think they also have a right to refuse any "experimental" drugs and tests......it's obscene that these men and women are being used as " lab rats " that are causing them long term physical and emotional harm...
edit on 30-7-2012 by MountainLaurel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
I can understand your point but, what i was trying to say with may post is
"your dammed if you do and your dammed if you don't"
by this i mean even if the order is found to be unethical you may not get a chance to prove it until they try to court martial you for dis-obeying a direct order.

you can choose to obey or dis-obey but, you should not be punished for dis-obeying an order that go's against what you beleave to be imoral or unethical.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and also i agree with [MountainLaurel]
our men and wemon of the military should not be used as lat rat's
as well as have the right to say "i won't be a test subject"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





top topics
 
5

log in

join