Military Ethics Essay

1410 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Different processes in military decision making

To What Extent is it Ethical for a Soldier to Disobey the Orders of a Superior?
Introduction:
A soldier receives information about some armed militants protecting a compound filled with chemical weapons. He receives a mission to infiltrate the compound and take out the armed guards, allowing the government to seize the chemical weapons. However, if he does not successfully complete this task, these weapons will potentially destroy entire cities and harm thousands of people. Upon entering the compound, he does not find armed insurgents; rather he finds women and children who appear unarmed. And then the questions emerge in his mind, “How do I react?” What decision will create the most favorable outcome for the soldier, and everyone …show more content…

A philosopher by the name of Jeremy Bentham described this ripple effect by explaining the number of people viewing each level of the effects. As a ripple expands it affects a much larger area, just as when a decision is made, it affects a small crowd and moves out slowly. In the early 1800's, Bentham's studies showed that if one focuses on who is involved at the most immediate level, the person making the decision can quickly deduce the “ethicality of any decision by helping the greatest number of people” (Mautner). When a soldier decides whether it would be ethical to pull the trigger or not, they must think of how it will affect others. On the immediate level, the soldier may save his entire team. However, this soldier may have also killed or injured a civilian in the process. This would then expand to the civilian’s family, who may develop a vendetta against the United States, become terrorists, and first us thousands of lives down the road. For Bentham, an ethical person would stop to consider the long-term consequences of their actions and do the greatest good for the greatest number of innocent people. However, if a soldier for the United States kills another United States soldier to save innocent foreigners, they would immediately be tried for treason. If the soldier still protected the most innocent people, what made this decision …show more content…

As far as the military code of ethics is concerned, “if an order does not cause the deaths of innocent people, it must be followed” (GC, DOD). While the Department of Defense continues to elaborate into broad ideas from this quote, the general idea represents that all soldiers should unquestionably be ready to act however their superiors wish them to. As far as the military’s concern reaches, a soldier’s job requires him to act upon what he is told and no more. The military views the only innocent way to disregard a direct order as the protection of an innocent bystander. But what if you disregard an order for the life of a teammate, or for yourself, to selfishly avoid paying the ultimate price? The men who created this document find it easy to declare a soldier guilty, but do they have the

Show More
Related

  • Military Disrespect Essay

    1027 Words  | 3 Pages

    In today’s time frame the term disrespect can be defined by many different things. The dictionary defines disrespect as the lack of respect or courtesy. In the military disrespect can be show as not only talking back, but hand gestures, body language, the emphasis of your voice when responding to a command, or even not acknowledging one command. Out of all the possible signs of disrespect I think personally that talking back, body language and the emphasis of your voice are the major ones that can get you in trouble. Even not going to the authorize position of parade rest is a sign of disrespect, because as Non Commissioned Officer if you out rank the subordinate the person who is receiving information, criticism, or a command should be at

    Read More

  • Comparing Beloved and Night

    2450 Words  | 5 Pages

    We are all human beings.  We all have feelings, and families whom we love.  Sometimes the force behind the brutality is too powerful to disobey, and people (soldiers, the white man, the Americans and Hiroshima, etc., etc.) have no choice but to obey,  or face the consequences.  In the military you don't question an order; you just do it (as in Othello and Billy Budd).

    Read More

  • The Guilt They Carried in Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried

    1414 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the aftermath of a comparatively minor misfortune, all parties concerned seem to be eager to direct the blame to someone or something else. It seems so easy to pin down one specific mistake that caused everything else to go wrong in an everyday situation. However, war is a vastly different story. War is ambiguous, an enormous and intangible event, and it cannot simply be blamed for the resulting deaths for which it is indirectly responsible. Tim O’Brien’s story, “In the Field,” illustrates whom the soldiers turn to with the massive burden of responsibility for a tragedy. The horrible circumstances of war transform all involved and tinge them with an absurd feeling of personal responsibility as they struggle to cope.

    Read More

  • The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal Analysis

    1049 Words  | 3 Pages

    Milgram complies with a follow-up questionnaire of a subject. In the follow-up, the man was appalled by the way he was able to be obedient throughout the experiment and states that his wife referred to him as Eichmann, a WWII Nazi official who maintained an alibi of merely following orders (Milgram 84). Complying with Szegedy-Maszak and Milgram, Robert Hoyk, a doctor of psychology, found similar results in the work office. In his article “Roots of Unethical Behavior,” he found that bosses can direct employees to do unethical actions which the employees morally question. But due to fear of losing their job, the employees perform these acts (Hoyk). Milgram would agree with Hoyk and add that for his experiment, the “experimenter” was simply a man in a lab coat and did not threaten with any form of consequence. How does that relate to Szegedy-Maszak and the Abu Ghraib scandal? In the article “Military Orders: To Obey or Not to Obey?” written by Rod Powers, the oath in which all military personnel must swear to is written. The oath states, “. . . and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice” (Powers). As mentioned by Powers, these recruits are instilled with the practice of obeying immediately and without question (Powers). In fact, if military personnel do not obey their superior officers, it is considered a crime by Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to the same site, such acts are punishable by death (www.usmilitary.about.com). Szegedy-Maszak might conclude that this could be a possible reason as to why those American troops found that they were

    Read More

  • The United States Army as a Profession of Arms

    518 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Army currently has an ethical code ebodied in the Army Values, which provides guidance to the individual and the organization. These values are universal across the Army regardless of an individual’s personal background or religious morals. Professional Military Education schools teach the Army Ethic and evaluation reports for leaders affirm this ethic. The Army punishes individuals, especially leaders, who violate this code. The Army administratively punishes Soldiers who do not adhere to this code, and the severity of punishment increases with rank. One recent and highly visible example of this is former General Petraeus’s adultery and the subsequent professional sanctions he experienced. The Army gr...

    Read More

  • Malevolent Obedience In The My Lai Massacre

    1520 Words  | 4 Pages

    The first factor I believe that can help explain the obedience at My Lai was routinization. Routinization influences obedience in general by focusing on the little details and procedure rather than the big picture. It requires cognitive resources and eventually becomes automatic because you have done it so much. Routinization is a distraction from moral issues and independent judgement. (Lecture). During training, the soldiers were trained to kill the enemy. The malevolent obedience (routinization) started during the training. They are taught how to use weapons to kill and how different maneuvers are carried out by orders from a superior. They are taught how to deal with the enemy when they are faced against them. Many of the soldiers explicitly say they were trained to kill, but the

    Read More

  • Substance abuse in veterans

    966 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...e military has different chains of command, and each branch is called something different. I will have to implement the NASW Code of Ethics by understanding that my superior can have superior as well, and in times I will have to recognize and follow their ranking system. In the end however I do have a code to follow, and I have to adapt to following the ethics, and respecting their rules as well.

    Read More

  • Positive And Negative Effects Of Blind Obedience

    1002 Words  | 3 Pages

    The issue of morality, concerning absolute obedience within the military, has been debated inside courtrooms and all areas of society for decades. Is it possible for there to be positive and negative acts of blind obedience? In his article “The Perils of Obedience,” Stanley Milgram administers an experiment in order to understand the negative side of blind obedience (Milgram 77-89). His findings prove that people display a higher probability of hurting others when ordered to act out. Likewise, in his article “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror,” Crispin Sartwell explains to his readers the cause of a “moral hero,” and he conveys why normal people display the capacity to commit heinous acts (Sartwell 117-119). Finally, examining the positive

    Read More

  • Essay On Army Values, And The Importance Of Respect

    1042 Words  | 3 Pages

    Respect to me is admiring someone for their abilities, qualities, or achievements. I think respect is always earned an can never be given. As soldiers soldiers we should always respect our peers because they have made the same sacrifice as us. But as soldiers we should have a higher level of respect for our NCOs because they have done their time an have earned it. Being respectful is not hard it is simple, just treat others the way we would like to be treated ourselves.

    Read More

  • Obedience In A Few Good Men, Directed By Rob Reiner

    2127 Words  | 5 Pages

    The United States Military has always had a high standard of only accepting those who are willing to follow strict orders, always obey authority figures, and have complete conformity. In the movie “A Few Good Men,” directed by Rob Reiner and released in 1992, the impacts that obedience and disobedience have are prevalent. In the movie, Lance Corporal Harold Dawson and Private First Class Louden Downey accidentally kill a member of their unit, William Santiago, during a code red, a way to punish misbehaved marines. Santiago was not fulfilling his duties as a Marine and therefore received the code red. He was killed during the process by his lungs bleeding when a rag was shoved down his throat. It was thought by the opposition in court that the

    Read More

  • My Lai Massacre

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    Soldiers are trained to always follow orders, and to never question orders. But that belief is somewhat illogical. Soldier's are to obey any lawful order given. But the training involved, the often chaotic nature of battle, and the need to follow authority to maintain survival can lead to a very blurred vision of what is right or wrong. One's animalistic instincts may take over. Sometimes there are such situations when you've stepped over the line. Such as the horrendous act that took place on March 16, 1968 in the village of Son My.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Following Orders In A Few Good Men

    1230 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the film A Few Good Men this is found in the way that Lieutenant Corporal Harold W. Dawson did not salute Lieutenant Commander Kaffee as he left the room. This is a sign of disrespect and defiance toward Kaffee. Dawson also defied orders when he brought food to a fellow comrade when he was restricted to barracks only. He could not leave the barracks at all, including getting food. Dawson defied the orders and brought him food anyway. Does that mean that not all orders given need to be followed? Are the officers orders only followed to a point? If that is true why did Dawson and Downey administer the “code red” to

    Read More

  • Authority In A Few Good Men

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    At a young age, children are taught to obey their parents and students are taught to obey their teachers. As a race, humans are naturally inclined to obey. Obedience is an attribute numerous people strive to achieve; however, the possibility of a negative outcome from blindly obeying orders is prominent in life and in the movie A Few Good Men. In the movie, Private Louden Downey and Lance Corporal Harold Dawson are charged with murder, conspiracy, and conduct unbecoming of a U.S Marine. These charges stem from the marines completing a “Code Red”—a punishment for misconduct or fallacy—on a fellow marine, which was issued by the greatest authority in their unit. As seen throughout A Few Good Men, and according to authors Kelman, Hamilton,

    Read More

  • Jim Y. Kim's Story 'Key To Disaster Survival'

    524 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “Moral Logic of Survival Guilt” there are soldiers that would return home from war with guilt. The guilt they had was with their team they would go to war an when a soldier dies he would take it out on himself. Soldiers can only go beyond their moral actions. Not everyone can save lives and if you can't don’t feel guilty or held accountable for not being able to save that

    Read More

  • Ethics in War Are Necessary

    815 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Politician and the soldier have a common goal; to win the war. But there is a difference in their mindsets. The politician, safe behind his desk, has never experienced the fear and terror of being in battle. He has not seen the blood or heard the screams of suffering soldiers. He has not watched his best friend die in his arms after being hit my enemy fire. He is an onlooker, free to analyze and critique every aspect of the war from the safety of his office. He is free and safe to talk of ethics and proper war etiquette. The soldier, immersed in battle, fighting for his life, can think of only one thing. Kill or be killed. When bullets are flying past his face and mortar shells are exploding all around him, he is not mindful of fighting ethically. Nor is he even mindful of fighting for his country. He is fighting for his life. To stay alive, he must kill the enemy, destroy the enemy. The longer the war persists, the more likely he will not go home alive.

    Read More

More about Military Ethics Essay

Open Document