Page 8 of 25 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 242

Thread: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

  1. #71
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    You put into quotations something I never said!!
    you are right, it was an approximation. Would you argue that there is not a heavy overlap between mindless autonomons and losers?

  2. #72
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    you are right, it was an approximation. Would you argue that there is not a heavy overlap between mindless autonomons and losers?
    I don't recall having said that either though.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #73
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I don't recall having said that either though.
    Alright. What did you mean by your implication that members of the military were stupid, in the context of responding to my disagreement with Fagan that they were not mindles autonoma?

  4. #74
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Alright. What did you mean by your implication that members of the military were stupid, in the context of responding to my disagreement with Fagan that they were not mindles autonoma?
    I didn't say they were stupid, or imply that they are or were. I don't consider them to be amongst the brightest or the dimmest. And Dave should probably speak for himself, but I imagine he's referring to the young and enlisted men, the grunts I think as he referred. But to the op, I don't know why the men in the military should refuse to fight the Ebola virus, when they haven't refused to target positions that kill innocent civilians along with alleged militants. Or perhaps some have, I don't know. I just find the op question strange at any rate.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  5. #75
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I didn't say they were stupid, or imply that they are or were. I don't consider them to be amongst the brightest or the dimmest.
    Ah. So when you responded to my comment that many of the smartest people I know I met in the military by laughing and saying that therefore I must run in small circles, what did you mean by that comment, monte?

  6. #76
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Ah. So when you responded to my comment that many of the smartest people I know I met in the military by laughing and saying that therefore I must run in small circles, what did you mean by that comment, monte?
    What I just said in the quote you posted, that I don't consider them amongst the brightest. And in fact, if Americans were generally polled as to who, or what group that they think are the smartest, I don't believe that the military would lead the list. So CP, want to get back to the topic, and actually post a comment on the op, or are you just trolling around?
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  7. #77
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Hey Beau
    Hey Kat...

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    To play devil's advocate here: what if those laws weren't in place? What if there were no such thing as an "illegal" order? Would soldiers still have a moral obligation to disobey those orders?
    It would depend on the military you're talking about. Historically, the US has always had a code of conduct, which preceded and which is not the law like the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is. The code of conduct is an ethical standard, a moral standard, that all members of the military are held to. Below is the current Code, but the first was written General George Washington:

    Code of Conduct for Members of the United States Armed Forces
    I
    I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
    II
    I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
    III
    If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
    IV
    If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
    V
    When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
    VI
    I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.
    Also, I was under the Airman's Creed (each branch has a Creed):

    THE AIRMAN’S CREED

    I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN.
    I AM A WARRIOR.
    I HAVE ANSWERED MY NATION’S CALL.

    I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN.
    MY MISSION IS TO FLY, FIGHT, AND WIN.
    I AM FAITHFUL TO A PROUD HERITAGE,
    A TRADITION OF HONOR,
    AND A LEGACY OF VALOR.

    I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN,
    GUARDIAN OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE,
    MY NATION’S SWORD AND SHIELD,
    ITS SENTRY AND AVENGER.
    I DEFEND MY COUNTRY WITH MY LIFE.

    I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN:
    WINGMAN, LEADER, WARRIOR.
    I WILL NEVER LEAVE AN AIRMAN BEHIND,
    I WILL NEVER FALTER,
    AND I WILL NOT FAIL.
    Specifically to ethical conduct, here is a link to a document that, although not short, should be a good read for you to have a better idea about military ethics.

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    You see, I just have a real fundamental problem with the idea that laws and orders have to be followed 100%. I am of the opinion that morality transcends the law. Following the law will generally steer you in the right track morally, but sometimes that is not the case. What then?
    In the majority of instances, orders go through many layers of command before they are given to the ones that actually carry them out. The exception are the orders given directly during a firefight or battle situation. An order that betrays the law or conventions of war or ethical standards would be corrected or withdrawn (or belayed) before it ever could be executed. I have never seen or heard of that having to happen. However, I have had an instance where the first hand type order during a firefight was respectfully disregarded by me and my team. We had to explain ourselves after of course, but when we did, the person that issued the order saw the error as well and agreed with our decision. That's because the military is made up of honorable men and women, who although are not perfect and do make mistakes, are quick to correct even their own mistakes and accept ethical reasons as a rule to not be broken.
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    What will these military men do when they are given a direct order, a legal order, to do something blatantly immoral?
    A blatantly immoral order is not a legal order. Therefore it does not have to be followed. Although, as I said before, you have to be ready to explain yourself and your actions. And, you better make sure you're damned right, not just right.
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Will they do it out of misplaced patriotism or a sense of duty?
    No. However, like I said, no one is perfect. In battle, emotions run high. When you're in combat, and the enemy is killing your friends, it's natural for you to want to get even, or take out your anger, hatred and fear on the enemy. In most instances, that's good, because it keeps you alert and motivated to live and survive while killing as many of the enemy as you can to achieve that (remember, killing the enemy is the goal - which some, as I've said previously in this thread, can be seen as immoral by some). However, once you have won, and the enemy has either surrendered or have been captured or have been killed, you have a moral duty to protect them if alive and treat them with respect whether they are alive or dead - sometimes that doesn't happen when individual soldiers, marines or airmen let their emotions overwhelm their ability to think and control their emotions. This is actually very, VERY, rare, even though the media makes a huge deal out of it like it's some normal event. Anyone that does not show respect for the enemy prisoner or the remains of the enemies dead always find themselves on the wrong side of a court martial, up to and including facing murder charges. That's right, a member of the military can be charged and convicted of murder, even during a battle where their job is to kill the enemy. We have a code, and murder is not part of it, not is peeing on the dead, or taking pictures of naked prisoners of war to degrade and embarrass them.
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Out of blind obedience to their government?
    There is a strong ethos of obedience to orders, but not blind obedience.
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Or will they disobey and risk prosecution?
    It rarely happens, because the instances of immoral or illegal orders is very rare. And when I say rare, I mean almost non-existent. But, yes. As I said, I have, only once, but it was more because the person giving the order didn't understand the actual circumstances more than they were trying to get us to do something immoral and unethical. Nonetheless, I had to "stand-to" and "lock-heels" when I returned while I explained our actions. I almost got my butt handed to me, but once it was over, we all were fine, including the CO that issued the order.

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Better question, what would you do?
    I've told you above. That was the only time I even came close though. It's such a rare thing, that like I said, I've never even heard of it happening, other than the one time it happened to me. Others in here may be able to give you another example. I do know of one instance in A-Stan that I read about where an officer refused an order he thought was illegal, but he got in a lot of trouble over that, even though it had nothing to do with an order regarding the enemy. You have to be damned right, not just right. To not follow an order is insubordination at the very least, cowardice in the face of the enemy potentially, and desertion under fire at it's worst (which used to be punishable by firing squad).
    Last edited by Beaudreaux; 09-19-14 at 12:42 AM.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    Hey Kat...

    It would depend on the military you're talking about. Historically, the US has always had a code of conduct, which preceded and which is not the law like the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is. The code of conduct is an ethical standard, a moral standard, that all members of the military are held to. Below is the current Code, but the first was written General George Washington:



    Also, I was under the Airman's Creed (each branch has a Creed):



    Specifically to ethical conduct, here is a link to a document that, although not short, should be a good read for you to have a better idea about military ethics.

    In the majority of instances, orders go through many layers of command before they are given to the ones that actually carry them out. The exception are the orders given directly during a firefight or battle situation. An order that betrays the law or conventions of war or ethical standards would be corrected or withdrawn (or belayed) before it ever could be executed. I have never seen or heard of that having to happen. However, I have had an instance where the first hand type order during a firefight was respectfully disregarded by me and my team. We had to explain ourselves after of course, but when we did, the person that issued the order saw the error as well and agreed with our decision. That's because the military is made up of honorable men and women, who although are not perfect and do make mistakes, are quick to correct even their own mistakes and accept ethical reasons as a rule to not be broken. A blatantly immoral order is not a legal order. Therefore it does not have to be followed. Although, as I said before, you have to be ready to explain yourself and your actions. And, you better make sure you're damned right, not just right. No. However, like I said, no one is perfect. In battle, emotions run high. When you're in combat, and the enemy is killing your friends, it's natural for you to want to get even, or take out your anger, hatred and fear on the enemy. In most instances, that's good, because it keeps you alert and motivated to live and survive while killing as many of the enemy as you can to achieve that (remember, killing the enemy is the goal - which some, as I've said previously in this thread, can be seen as immoral by some). However, once you have won, and the enemy has either surrendered or have been captured or have been killed, you have a moral duty to protect them if alive and treat them with respect whether they are alive or dead - sometimes that doesn't happen when individual soldiers, marines or airmen let their emotions overwhelm their ability to think and control their emotions. This is actually very, VERY, rare, even though the media makes a huge deal out of it like it's some normal event. Anyone that does not show respect for the enemy prisoner or the remains of the enemies dead always find themselves on the wrong side of a court martial, up to and including facing murder charges. That's right, a member of the military can be charged and convicted of murder, even during a battle where their job is to kill the enemy. We have a code, and murder is not part of it, not is peeing on the dead, or taking pictures of naked prisoners of war to degrade and embarrass them. There is a strong ethos of obedience to orders, but not blind obedience. It rarely happens, because the instances of immoral or illegal orders is very rare. And when I say rare, I mean almost non-existent. But, yes. As I said, I have, only once, but it was more because the person giving the order didn't understand the actual circumstances more than they were trying to get us to do something immoral and unethical. Nonetheless, I had to "stand-to" and "lock-heels" when I returned while I explained our actions. I almost got my butt handed to me, but once it was over, we all were fine, including the CO that issued the order.


    I've told you above. That was the only time I even came close though. It's such a rare thing, that like I said, I've never even heard of it happening, other than the one time it happened to me. Others in here may be able to give you another example. I don now of one instance in A-Stan that I read about where an officer refused an order he thought was illegal, but he got in a lot of trouble over that, even though it had nothing to do with an order regarding the enemy. You have to be damned right, not just right. To not follow an order is insubordination at the very least, cowardice in the face of the enemy potentially, and desertion under fire at it's worst (which used to be punishable by firing squad).
    Thanks for the well thought-out and very long reply.

    Hope you have a good night!

  9. #79
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    The only problem I see with that is that morality is subjective.
    True. That is why the military not only has the UCMJ and the Conventions of War, but also the Code of Conduct and Military Ethics to follow. All are considered irrevocable and unchallengeable, although orders are challengeable under certain circumstances.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  10. #80
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: If you were military would you refuse to "fight" the Ebola virus.

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Thanks for the well thought-out and very long reply.

    Hope you have a good night!
    You too Kat...
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

Page 8 of 25 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •