Ethics In Call Of Duty

Soldiers trained for combat refusing to kill; ironic, isn’t it? The article Existentialism 101, the short story Just Lather, That’s All by Hernando Tellez, and the documentary Soldiers of Conscience all share a common theme of morality and the guiding force of one’s conscience. The barber from Just Lather, That’s All and the soldiers, Kevin Benderman and Camilo Mejia, are each confronted with a dilemma under different circumstances, whether to act according to their moral values or against them. Eventually they follow their conscience to seek peace, however the internal dilemma and the consequences each character has gone through are unique and dynamic.

“My conscience told me to run, but some irrational and powerful force was resisting, like a weight pushing me towards war (49).” “I did not want people to think badly of me. Not my parents, not my brother or sister, not even the folks at Gobler Café (49).” These men were stuck between a rock and a hard place, and this was the case in many aspects of war, not

This particular incident, shown first hand through Paul's narration, is a significant reflection of how many soldiers behaved and reacted to similar situations. This demonstrates the consequences of war is the loss of the soldiers compassion, empathy, and humanity to one another. Ultimately resulting in further death that affects the soldiers and kills them, creating a vicious circle. Through war, the soldiers are unable to retain their humanity, shown through the events described above. As conveyed throughout this paper, the impacts of war completely stripped the men of their humanity.

The Brigade will advocate its commitment to the Army’s core values by focusing on Honor, Personal Courage, and Duty because these three values summarize what an ethical warrior must be. The other Army’s values remain important but focusing on three will bring clarity and simplicity. Honor is a “code of personal integrity.” This code ties the Army to the Nation. It is of course the soldiers’ honor to risk their lives to defend the nation. But it is also their honor to fight in accordance with American values. The US Army’s ethical warriors fight their enemies with determination, but respect. Acts of crime, misconduct, and ethical breaches

Tim O’Brien’s book “The Things They Carried” epitomizes the degradation of morals that war produces. This interpretation is personified in the characters who gradually blur the line dividing right and wrong as the motives for war itself become unclear. The morality of soldiers and the purpose of war are tied also to the truth the soldiers must tell themselves in order to participate in the gruesome and random killing which is falsely justified by the U.S government. The lack of purpose in the Vietnam War permanently altered the soldier’s perspective of how to react to situations and in most cases they turned to violence to express their frustration.

Deceased philosopher Bertrand Russell once said, “War does not determine who is right- only who is left”. Those left are the soldiers of the 1-502nd, specifically Bravo Company 1st plt, and the Janabi family and to a greater extent, the ever-changing global world we all live in today. The tragic events that conspired in a small Iraqi village became a microcosm of how leadership failures at every level shaped the actions of a few soldiers who committed atrocious acts. One can also see how a high operational tempo, along with prolonged violence and death, has on a person’s psyche. It is the ugly side of war that the average American citizen may not want to hear or talk about. For a soldier, it is inevitably what they train their

The movie Platoon tells the story of a platoon of soldiers during their time serving in the Vietnam War. The soldiers find themselves in a variety of ethically challenging situations, and many make decisions with massive ethical ramifications. The situations vary, from searching a village for enemy activity to deciding whether to save a fellow soldier, and the soldiers are forced to choose between varieties of less than ideal options. The movie’s ethical spectrum ranges from individuals concerned only with accomplishing their mission at all costs to those who express concern for the lives of all people they interact with. The two ends of this spectrum are represented in the movie by Sergeant Barnes as the soldier who values only completing his mission contrasted with Sergeant Elias who attempts to preserve the life and humanity of the Vietnamese people he encounters when possible (Kopelson, 1986). I believe that the decisions exemplified by Elias represent a better way of conducting warfare, while those of Barnes represent a descent into understanding only the immediate objective at the expense of winning the overall war. The following key ethical decision points from the movie demonstrate the superiority of the decisions made by Elias

Society’s perception on war is often clouded by popular media. Action packed movies with fictional war heroes, and video games set in past wars, are examples of such hyperbole. It is outlets like these that raise society’s expectations of soldiers into unrealistic ideas. While it may seem as black and white as killing the bad guy, majority of the population does not consider the long term effects war may have on soldiers. Most movies portray soldiers as emotionless killing machines and leave out the lifelong psychological effects war can have on a person. Tim O’Brien’s book The Things They Carried is a look into the mind of a soldier in the middle of war. In the book, we learn of First Lieutenant Jimmy Cross, a soldier who is carrying the guilt

Explaining what he once heard to be from Plato, O’Brien uttered that proper courage came from wisdom and nothing else. For one to be a true sublime human being, they must demonstrate wisdom, justice, temperance, and lastly courage. As for a man without wisdom cannot be courageous, something a man without courage cannot contain any of the other three virtues (wisdom, justice, or even temperance). To Plato, wisdom is simply not just knowing what is right and what must be done, but following through with it. Courage, portrayed so perfectly by Tim O’Brien, is “the endurance of the soul in spite of fear” (140). The act of bravery is a battle within itself. Bravery is not about acting upon one’s desires, but instead setting them aside and putting the needs of the people around them first. It is about humbling yourself to your best ability, no matter how much fear one may obtain. There are people who simply just do not understand what is right due to their lack of intelligence, states O’Brien. Then there are so many men who might know what is right, however, they have too much fear to build up the courage to fight for it. As fear so often overtakes one’s whole self without even true recognition, courage is acting against that (136). All throughout the war, soldiers are constantly faced with fear as fear tends to come hand in hand with death.

Ethics matter in any kind of business or organization, but they are especially significant when it comes to the US Army (Blackburn, 2001). The reason behind this involves the chain of command and the risk to life and limb that are such large parts of military life. When a soldier in the Army has no ethics, he or she can cause trust and respect problems with other members of his or her unit. The US military is a stressful organization for most people involved with it, and people's lives are on the line frequently. Issues like PTSD and other medical problems are commonplace for those who leave the military and must adjust to civilian life, so it is very important that those who are in the Army work with their colleagues and higher-ups to get the help and support they need during and after their service. There is more to ethics in the Army than the problems that military individuals can face, though.

Although the soldiers are expected to be emotionless and tough their mind still produces ideas to get themselves out of the war, but they never actually carry out any of the acts thought of. The temptation was always there, “They imagined the muzzle against flesh. So easy: squeeze the trigger and blow away a toe. They imagined the quick, sweet pain, then the evacuation to Japan, then a hospital with warm beds and cute geisha nurses” (O’Brien 459). The soldiers would have an easier time at war if they did not have to balance their imagination and emotions.

Combating in modern warfare does not simply mean killing the enemy. There are ethical rules and standards of behavior that soldiers must strictly follow because these rules are essential for defeating the enemy, winning "hearts and minds" of potential allies, and maintain the morale of the troops. These tasks have become especially challenging in the face of the proliferation of guerilla warfare that has been adopted by weaker military forces in the twentieth- and twenty-first centuries. In fighting insurgencies, abiding by the ethical standards of the Army behavior may be even harder than in fighting conventional battles. The ethical rules may sometimes put the soldiers in dangerous positions. Disregarding the acceptable standards of behavior, however, may have even graver consequences, putting innocent non-combatants at risk and risking total demoralization of the Army unit participating in disorderly behavior. It is therefore essential that Army leaders maintain an ethical command climate during the war.

Combat compliance is framed as an analytic puzzle related to the variability of behavior, or responses of combatants, both individuals and as a collective, to the realities and risks of warfare. The underlying assumption here is that there is an intrinsic risk of death in any scenario of combat (Magagna, 2016). The enemy is always rationally assumed to have an interest in your death. What follows is that obeying of commands presents itself as an implicit acceptance of such risks. The puzzle here is figuring out how and why vastly differing reactions occur. At some points soldiers show limited levels of compliance, sometimes even ending up in mutiny, while in other cases units show extremely high levels of compliance, exhibiting tenacity under conditions of overwhelming odds (Magagna, 2016). This essay attempts to explain the factors that give rise to the variability of combat compliance. What is important, as alluded to earlier, is to be able to provide a generalizable argument that is applicable across time and space. The essay will first lay out of varying levels of combat compliance to discuss the characteristics and consequences of variability. Secondly, it will explore and contrast the factors of automaticity as a function of training and institutional design and the factor of the combat contract as a rational cost benefit analysis of material and moral incentives, in an attempt to critically analyze their merits in accounting for the variability of combat compliance.

As an organizational- level leadership, he will confront many thorny problems and missions that challenge their moral criteria and military profession. In particular, when they receive the order from the upper- level, how he employ his expertise to exercise his moral leadership and undertake the tasks. Actually, both of the profession and ethic are interdependent, and inseparable. Thus, a professional commissioned officer should understand how to fit ethic into his expertise. Moreover, people would face the dilemmatic situation between the obedience of rules and the consideration of the consequence. When it comes to the moral or ethical, should I follow the deontology or consequentialism? Which one is the most critical priority to the stewardship

Personal Courage: it takes Personal Courage physically to get up, get ready, and be where the soldier needs to be. It takes Personal Courage morally to do the right thing, just like