Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Meaning and importance of loyalty
Importance of Loyalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Meaning and importance of loyalty
Even though he was a visionary leader, there was a time in Norman Schwarzkopf’s career where he had been an unethical leader. This was not common throughout his career but for a short period during the Vietnam War era. . During a second tour to Vietnam, he took his first field command, taking over the 1st Battalion of the 6th Infantry. Schwarzkopf had success in just about everything he had done in his career, which led to a decision where lives were lost. In February of 1970, an artillery shell in route to its target collided with a tree shortly after firing. This incident killed two American soldiers by friendly fire. Norman Schwarzkopf gave the order to fire the shell. Focused on the current objective and success of the the war that …show more content…
This led him to fall into another ethical trap when faced with another situation during Vietnam. In May 1970, Schwarzkopf was travelling in a helicopter and discovered troops of another Company that were stuck a minefield. He noticed that two officers that were wounded and two soldiers were trapped. There was a fear that they could set off more mines if they were to land. Despite that fear, Schwarzkopf directed his helicopter to remove the wounded. When he attempted to assist the troops back out of the field, a soldier hit a landmine instantly breaking a leg and began to panic. Fearing he would set off another landmine, Schwarzkopf immobilized the soldier to the ground while another soldier performed self-aid and buddy care. In doing so, another mine was set off, killing three and wounding Schwarzkopf's artillery officer. The ethical trap of loyaty was evident during this situation. Although loyalty is a very good trait to embrace, when the lives of other individuals are a stake it may be best to consider the outcome versus being loyal. I cannot compare myself to the great accomplishments of Norman Schwarzkopf or the devastation of wrong decisions that were. However, I am aware of who I am as a leader and provide relevance of my career to that of
Military leaders may find themselves in questionable situations: perceived as unethical; lack moral consciousness, or question their character. Dwight Eisenhower demonstrated moral courage by leveraging the ethical principles of duty, loyalty and subordination in endorsing the French Vichy leader Admiral Darlan.
The regrets of the many lives lost in Vietnam. The former secretary of defense Robert McNamara published a memoir, two decades after the war ended. In the memoir he admitted that the policy he helped create was “terribly wrong”. He stated that the ignorance of the history, the culture of Vietnam, and the misguided belief that every communist movement in the world was led by Moscow, had led the United States into a war that was unwinnable and regrettable. (Foner, 4th edition, pg.1030) The students of The Port Huron Statement were right by being against the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was a military, political, and social disaster. Which only brought casualties in the lives of American people. It was an unforgivable mistake caused by Presidents that feared that the public would not forgive them for “losing” the Vietnam War.
Throughout the battle, you see numerous Army Values and Warrior Ethos being used. “I will never leave a fallen comrade”, was the etho used the most, to reach the separated platoon. The battle also shows that not all tactical orders are effective, but as a leader you must never second guess yourself.
Take Lieutenant Jimmy Cross, for example. Although he had no desire to be in Vietnam, not to mention be leading troops there, it is evident that he is selfless in the pursuit of the war, and genuinely concerned about the welfare of his men. Unfortunately, he is blinded by guilt to these qualities.
...of the struggle over how the war would be remembered. Blanketed by the discourse of disability, the struggle over the memory of veterans and the country alike would be waged with such obliquity as to surpass even the most veiled operations of Nixon’s minions. While Nixon’s plumbers were wrenching together the Gainesville case against VVAW in the spring of 1972, mental health and news-media professionals were cobbling together the figure of the mentally incapacitated Vietnam veteran. More than any other, this image is the one that would stick in the minds of the American people. The psychologically damaged veteran raised a question that demanded an answer: what happened to our boys that was so traumatic that they were never the same again? As it came to be told, the story of what happened to them had less to do with the war itself than with the war against the war.
LM01, Ethical Leadership. (2012). Maxwell Gunter AFB. Thomas N. Barnes Center for Enlisted Education (AETC)
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 grows its own ethical code and maintains it through the American people.
... landing on the president for putting the soldiers out in the jungles of an un-winnable war. In conclusion, there are just too many people and too many things to place blame easily for this disturbing event. So the easy road was taken, just do not let this happen again. The military took time out to think about their training of soldiers. "Commanders sent troops in the Desert storm operation into battle with the words, “No My Lais—you hear?” (Linder) History is said to be good for one reason- to learn from past mistakes so they will not be repeated, and that is a very good lesson to learn from My Lai and one that all hope was, in fact, learned.
Dereliction of Duty, by McMaster, is a book written to explain the why and the how of the United States becoming involved in the Vietnam War. The author gives military and political reasons for this involvement and how the decisions were made by the nation’s leaders, who led not with honesty and integrity, but through mistrust and deceit. This group, who led this nation into war, involved the President of the United States, his military and civilian advisors, and the Joints Chief of Staff. What happened can be summed up in this statement from McMaster, "The war in Vietnam was not lost in the field, nor was it lost on the front pages of the New York Times or the college campuses. It was lost in Washington, D.C."
Steve Roland “Pre” Prefontaine once held every American record from the two-mile to the 10,000 meter. He has often been called the greatest American distance runner in history, all because “ Steve Prefontaine did the impossible: He made distance running cool to Americans” (Murphy 203). Steve Prefontaine depicted the embodiment of hard work, determination, and he trained hard every day in an effort to pave the way for other amateur athletes.
But judge we must. Why did Arnold desert the cause for which he had fought so gallantly and twice been wounded? Was there any justification for his conduct?
Gustav Stresemann, the Reichskanzler of Weimar Republic and a German Foreign Minister in 1923-1929, had a short-term significance on Germany’s role in Europe as his diplomatic skills and policies of cooperation helped his country to ultimately gain its equality in the European arena. From its birth until 1923, the Weimar faced problems, which seemed to reduce under Stresemann’s time in power when “diplomacy served as a lightning rod for the currents of opposition to the Weimar Republic.” Stresemann’s main objective was to end German diplomatic isolation. His key foreign policy achievements were the Locarno Treaties 1925, the Treaty of Berlin 1926 and German entry into the League of Nations 1926. Stresemann was instrumental in the development of German's role in Europe, leading his country to the “Golden Years of Weimar”, which is evident from his Peace Prize award for his diplomatic work.
During the Vietnam War, the first platoon (approximately forty men) was lead by a young officer named William Calley. Young Calley was drafted into the US Army after high school, but it did not take long for him to adjust to being in the army, with a quick transition to the lifestyle of the military, he wanted to make it his career. In high school, Calley was a kind, likable and “regular” high school student, he seemed to be a normal teenager, having interest in things that other boys his age typically had. He was never observed acting in a cruel or brutal way. In Vietnam, Calley was under direct order of company commander, Captain Ernest Medina, whom he saw as a role model, he looked up to Medina. (Detzer 127).
As I watched the two videos, I notice that, Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, had similarities on many issues. I found myself agreeing with them both? The reason why I agreed with both was because they both presented relevant experiences in their lives. Csikszentmihalyi states; “His live experience by introducing his life story as; “Then I came to this country to study psychology and I started trying to understand the roots of happiness. This is a typical result that many people have presented, and there are many variations on it. But this, for instance, shows that about 30 percent of the people surveyed in the United States since 1956 say that their life is very happy. And that has not changed at all. Whereas the personal income, on a scale that has been held constant to accommodate for inflation, has more than doubled, almost tripled, in that period. But you find the same results, namely, that after a certain basic point -- which corresponds more or less to just a few 1,000 dollars above the minimum poverty level -- increases in material well-being don't seem to affect how happy people
In a world where the nuclear bomb was never invented, many key events could have turned out differently. Leo Szilard played a lead role in such a development as this and many other incidents. He was a very dynamic character in places throughout America under the fields of science and politics. His contributions also impacted the lives of many far beyond the borders. He was born in 1898 to a Jewish family in Austria-Hungary. After attending college, he went off to Germany wishing to have a career in physics. He studied physics in the capital city of Berlin until the Nazi regime came to power (Lowen). Following this event, he fled to England then the United States. Szilard's dynamic characterizations are especially prevalent in his early life