Go to Here's A Thought: One Thing A Penny Still Buys
- Add a comment
- Go to Remembering All Our Warriors On This Infamous Day
Indirectly, yes, Parnell. The world exists in grayness. I blame the
individual soldier for doing atrocities on an individual level, but if he is doing his duty, even though that duty is an extension of an illegal act (say, like the invasion of Iraq), it is the state that shoulders the blame, for it is the state that must redress the infraction. The soldier's only recourse in this type of activity is to desert, which is a punishable offense, or become a conscietious objector, which has its own set of problems within the military framework. Barring these, he must perform his duty according to his orders and within the codes of the Geneva Convention. Sometimes, it is a neverending Catch-22.
posted by
saul_relative
on December 8, 2006 at 9:27 AM
| link to this | reply
But Saul
Doesn't that mean you are supporting the act of state-sponsored killing?
posted by
Antipodean
on December 7, 2006 at 11:40 PM
| link to this | reply
In a general sense, Parnell, all wars are crimes against humanity. But
the men and women who fight those wars are ordinary people simply doing their prescribed duty.
posted by
saul_relative
on December 7, 2006 at 11:35 PM
| link to this | reply
Saul
In America, it seems to me that when a crime is commited people are very sympathetic to the victim. But when a war is fought the general sentiment is to be sympathetic to the assailants.
But isn't this war simply a bigger type of crime?
posted by
Antipodean
on December 7, 2006 at 11:07 PM
| link to this | reply