Killing the Innocence in War, Justified or Murder

Abstract The debate surrounding the justification of deaths of innocent people caused by warring soldiers during war is a complicated issue to deal with. For fear of being attacked by disguised enemies, soldiers have ended up killing innocent civilians including older men, women, and children. While some people have argued that this may be acceptable, others think otherwise.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Killing the Innocence in War, Justified or Murder? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More To a large extent, this is linked to the belief that human beings are mostly reasonable. Generally, killing of civilians during war time is regarded as a serious offence that should be dealt with carefully if the innocent have to receive protection. On the other hand, however, it is possible for warring soldiers to find themselves in difficult situations requiring them to act fast to protect themselves from attackers unknown to them. This is especially true whenever a soldier is fighting on the enemy’s soil. While it is ordinarily believed that most civilians especially women and children are the innocent ones, there are instances where they have been used by soldiers to ferry dangerous weapons to be used against the opponents. This has led to situations where a soldier ignores the fact a civilian may be innocent and goes ahead to kill in self defense. This is based on the fact that it may be difficult to determine the innocence of the civilian. To be on the safe side, soldiers generally regard every person as a potential threat. Introduction The appeal to what would cause outrage in the general sentiments of humanity is a common way to think about the elements of normal moral perception of which each person is thought to be capable. Certain things are thought to be so heinous that any person would be outraged when perceiving them. The killing of civilians during war time is one of the commonly cite d examples of this kind of monstrous act (May, 2005). But consider, for a moment, the conditions of war fare when one is acting in enemy territory. In some war time situations, every person, soldier or civilian, is a potential threat. If the civilians seem to be unarmed, and the soldiers are armed, then the idea of the civilians as potential threats is only partially blunted, because the soldiers often do not know which civilians are members of the enemy forces.Advertising Looking for essay on ethics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Arguments for and Against Killing the Innocent in War It is clearly an outrage against the sentiments of humanity for soldiers to kill civilian men, women, and children? Initially, it seems that the answer would be clearly yes, as was held by the American military tribunal that convicted Lieutenant Calley. The shooting of seemingly unarmed civilians, especially children, at point blank range, appea red to be morally outrageous. Virtually, all societies have had strong moral prohibitions against the taking of innocent life (McMahan, 2009). The standard morally acceptable bases for justified killings, whether in self defense or in defense of others, can not be seen to justify killing those who do not have the capacity to harm or kill a well armed, typically male, adult soldier. Ordinarily, soldiers are trained to kill. When soldiers follow their training, and kill, it is not as much of an outrage as it would be for a non soldier to engage in such killing. But when a soldier or non soldier kills an innocent person, especially a child, this is considered to be enough of an outrage to our civilized instincts to think that it should be heavily sanctioned so as to prevent future acts of this sort at almost any cost (Buhk, 2012). In My Lai massacre, it is uncontested that Lieutenant Calley and his men killed more than 100 unarmed civilian men, women, and children. However, as one read s through the various court opinions in the case, there is quite a lot of disagreement of how best to characterize these killings. As pointed out earlier, the military tribunal found Calley guilty of war crimes, and the Court of Military Review upheld the conviction. But the first civilian court to consider the case took a very different position. Here is how the U.S. District Court characterized some of the facts: The petitioner was 25 years of age and had been an enlisted man for approximately 14 years. The petitioner’s first assignment in Vietnam was at Doc Pho. This was the first indoctrination about the character of the potential enemy. He was told that women were as dangerous as men, and that children were even more dangerous because they were unsuspected. He was also informed that women were frequently better shots than the men and that the children were used to plant mines and booby traps. During Calley’s earlier limited missions, the unit was continually subje ct to fire from unknown and unseen individuals.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Killing the Innocence in War, Justified or Murder? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More A number of men in the company had been killed or wounded and prior to the operation at My Lai, they had never seen the persons responsible for the death or injuries of their buddies. Consequently, the formed the opinion that civilians were in part responsible. When Calley was supposedly to go to My Lai and kill everyone there, his background assumption seems to have been that all the people in the village, including men, women, and children, were enemies and potential threats. The U.S. District Court, therefore, granted Calley’s petition for habeas corpus relief in part because of how it understood the facts. On the other hand, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District, also at least in part because of its very different construal of the factual record. In reversing the U.S. District Court, the Circuit Court of Appeals seemed to see the My Lai incident as nothing other than a slaughter of unarmed, unresisting old men, women, and children. What complicated the picture in My Lai was that the distinction between civilian and combatant had become blurred, with even fairly small children being used to transport weapons. So while there may be strong sentiments against the killing of civilians, especially children, there was a possible defense in the case of My Lai that might have been an exception to the moral judgment about what was normally acceptable or appropriate behavior. For there was reason, according to the US District Court, to believe that some civilians, and even some children, could be trying to inflict injury or death on the American soldiers in this Vietnamese hamlet.Advertising Looking for essay on ethics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More At Calley’s military trial, and also in the US Circuit Court of Appeals, such reasons were indeed considered and rejected, after much discussion and debate. However, the US District Court seemed to believe that some of the civilians who were killed might have been thought to be threats to the soldiers in Lieutenant Calley’s unit. In retrospect, it seems that the District Court opinion was seriously flawed. For even if Calley had feared that the civilians in the My Lai hamlet might be enemy soldiers in disguise, they gave no indication that they were armed or that they were posing an immediate threat to Calley and his men. According to McMahan (2009), the moralized notion of a combatant as anyone who poses a threat in war is different from the legal notion. In law, combatant status is accorded to persons who satisfy certain criteria, such as disguising themselves visibly at a distance by some conventional sign, carrying their arms openly, subordinating themselves to a h ierarchy of authority and command, and obeying the laws of war. Failure to satisfy such criteria can result in the forfeiture of combatant status under the law. While combatants in this legal sense are all presumed to pose a threat, not all of those who pose a threat in war are combatants in this sense. While all those who pose a threat in war are combatants in the moral sense, a major problem in war theory is that there are many people who pose a threat in war who would not be considered combatants by anyone (McMahan, 2009). In partial defense of the District Court, I would point out that we do not always require soldiers to prove that enemy soldiers pose an immediate threat before it is considered justifiable to kill them. It may be too late by the time it discovered that suspected enemy soldiers are concealing not only their identities but also their weapons. The point here is not to argue that Calley should have been relieved of responsibility, but only to indicate that even in this seemingly clear case, two courts came to different conclusions about how to regard the My Lai massacre based on how they reconstructed the threat faced by Calley and his men in Vietnam. This discussion does not call into question the normal sentiment that innocent life should be preserved. Rather, what is uncertain is the very judgment that a certain adult or even a child is to be seen as an innocent person. And yet it is this judgment, really a matter of moral perception, which is crucial to the determination of whether it was indeed an outrage for Lieutenant Calley’s unit to kill civilians in the hamlet of My Lai in Vietnam. Defenses against Killing In the US tort law, one way to make sense of whether one is liable for a given harm that he or she did not intend to cause is to ask whether one violated a duty of care owed to the person armed (May, 2005). To ascertain if one had such a duty, one looks, among other things, at what the burden would have been to the agent if he or she had conformed to the duty. If the crucial issue before us concerns the possible culpable ignorance or moral negligence of soldiers, then the tort analysis of duty and negligence becomes relevant. What makes many battlefield situations so tragic is that the cost of acting with due care toward civilians is often that the soldiers risk death to themselves. In non battlefield situations, one is hardly ever faced with imminent death if he or she exercises due care towards others in his or her life. It is for this reason that the superior orders defense shows up most commonly in the battlefield situations, and not very often off the battlefield. It may be helpful to think of conspiracy as a model of most types of shared or collective responsibility. If Susan, Smith, and Alex recruit Peter to drive a gateway car in a bank robbery scheme cooked up by Susan, then it makes sense to think of all four as collectively responsible for the resulting bank robbery. This is especially appa rent if Peter is paid well for his contribution and understands perfectly, how her contribution to this joint venture will aid in its successful completion. The driver, Peter, is a cog in a machine like enterprise that will make the robbery possible in ways that would not be true if any of the four people involved were acting on their own or in only a loosely connected manner. For this reason, they are collectively responsible for the results of their joint undertaking. Their individual responsibility will depend on the role that each plays in the joint venture. Suppose that while Peter is driving away from the scene of the crime pedestrian steps off a curb in the path of the gang’s fleeing car. Peter, generally a compassionate person begins to apply the brake, but Susan, the insensitive ring leader puts a gun to Peter’s head and urges him to drive on to avoid being court. Should Peter be held responsible for the injuries of the pedestrian as well as for the robbery? O n the assumption that one held a gun to Peter’s head to get him to join the conspiracy in the first place, Peter seems to be in a different moral position with respect to the pedestrian’s injuries than with respect to the robbery itself. Certainly, Peter appeared to have a choice of whether to join the robbery conspiracy, but not much of a choice about whether to run down the pedestrian. Was it a moral choice of Peter to ignore the order given by Susan? There are many parallel cases in international law, such as when a soldier or subordinate feels that his or her life is threatened if he or she does not follow orders. The same consideration should be operative, making us reluctant to say that in such situations, there is a moral choice available to the soldier (Kurtz Turpin, 1999). In cases of collective guilt, subtleties of context are still relevant in determining how to apportion blame to the members of the group, especially concerning legal blame and guilt (Buhk, 2012). It is, however, important to place the reasonable person standard into the specific context that the actual person was faced with. In order to do this, it is often necessary to bring in some of the beliefs of the actual person in considering what a reasonable person would have done. On the other hand, battlefield situations are so abnormal that it will often be hard to merely drop a reasonable person into a situation without taking into account how the actual person in question reacted to the situation. On several occasions, war crime tribunals have had to decide what price is too high to pay in order to expect people to reasonably exercise due care not to injure one another. In the case of Lieutenant Calley, it may be true that he and his soldiers feared for their own lives if they did not do what they thought they had been legitimately ordered to do. In Calley’s case, he never claimed that someone literally had a gun to his head, forcing him to shoot the civilians. I n the same way, his concern that the seemingly innocent civilians might be enemies in disguise was not sufficient to establish the proposition that he had no other moral choice but to follow orders, for it is important to consider what sort of threat those civilians posed. If the killings of the civilians had been clearly and unambiguously wrong, then Calley would have needed a very strong showing that he had no moral choice but to do what was clearly and unambiguously wrong. An important question that to be asked is whether a reasonable person in Calley’s situation would believe that these civilians posed a threat to his safety, and that of his troops. If so, then perhaps even moral choice was restricted in this situation. Conclusion Much philosophical discussion about political violence is taken up with argument about whether and to what extent acts of violence can be justified as a means to good ends. According to Kurtz and Turpin (1999), there are limit on what may justif iably be done in pursuit of good or worthy ends. Even though many actions can be justified by their beneficial consequences, some actions are simply wrong in themselves. Some people typically take the view that, other than in circumstances of war, the only acceptable justification for violence is that of self defense or defense of others from wrongful attack. Persons have moral rights not to be wrongfully injured or killed, and consequently, they have rights to defend themselves against wrongful physical attacks. It is also sometimes argued that to violently attack someone who is not engaged in or threatening violence is a kin to punishing an innocent person. Conversely, one who engages in wrongful violence against another may be said to have relinquished his or her normal rights to be attacked. We can only be justified in using as much violence against an attacker, however, as is required to defend ourselves. From the arguments presented in this paper, it is apparent that one of th e tests of whether an act of the defendant violates the requirement by law is if the act shocks the conscience of humanity. In most cases, there is an overlap of the law and morality indicating the relevance of moral matters to questions of whether a crime was committed wrongfully or not. It is, therefore, important for the court to exercise considerable restraint in prosecuting, convicting, and sentencing soldiers for deaths occurring during war. References Buhk, T. T. (2012). True Crime in the Civil War: Cases of Murder, Treason, Counterfeiting, Massacre, Plunder, Abuse. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books. Kurtz, L.R. Turpin, J. E. (1999). Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, and Conflict. Massachusetts: Academic Press. May, L. (2005). Crimes against Humanity: A Normative Account. New York: Cambridge University Press. McMahan, J. (2009). Killing in War. New York: Cambridge University Press. This essay on Killing the Innocence in War, Justified or Murder? was written and submitted by user Jasiah David to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Mexican War essays

Mexican War essays The Mexican War by Otis A. Singletary This book by Otis A. Singletary deals with different aspects of the Mexican war. It is a compelling description and concise history of the first successful offensive war in United States military history. The work examines two countries that were unprepared for war. The political intrigues and quarrels in appointing the military commanders, as well as the military operations of the war, are presented and analyzed in detail. The author also analyzes the role that the Mexican War played in bringing on the U.S. Civil War. The Mexican-American War of the 1840s, precipitated by border disputes and the U.S. annexation of Texas, ended with the military occupation of Mexico City by General Winfield Scott. In the subsequent treaty, the United States gained territory that would become California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, and parts of Wyoming and Colorado. Mr. Singletary has been remarkably successful, despite the brevity of his book, in describing with important details the Mexican War. The book can be break into two main parts. The first part gives background which explains different reasons that played a decisive role for the break out of the war, and it relates the different campaigns that allowed the invasion of northern Mexico and the city of Mexico. The second half of the book deals with the way politician and generals behave during the war, and the book ends touching the role played by diplomacy in this war. The book has been organized in chronological order, which gives to the readers the opportunity to follow the events of the war without confusion. But it is not only a mere account of dates and events, because it explains briefly but concisely every decision making before the occurring of battle. The book uses maps and pictures. Maps and pictures are really helpful in visualizing what is being described, and they allow having and idea of how it was during this war. ...

Use the sources below to extend the paper to a 4-pages research(MLA Essay

Use the sources below to extend the paper to a 4-pages research(MLA Style) - Essay Example At Southern most labors the slaves were freed, the following new issues were different with the antebellum U.S. As the winner, the changes between the Northern which promoted the industrial capitalism and the freed slavery south was embedded after the Civil War was ended. The most popular questions were: would the Black people go or stay? Where should the 4 million go or stay? Under the wave of abolishing the slavery, the capitalism creates a special group: The Sharecropper. What influence did sharecropping have, and was it good or bad for the black people? Who started sharecropping? Was the situation the same as the president Lincoln had suggested? What influenced the U.S. and what was different between sharecropping and slavery? My opinion on this is that sharecropping did not change the black people’s situation and it did not lead the African Americans to an economic independence and autonomy fundamentally â€Å"All facts suggest that black sharecropper’s income was less than white sharecropper’s income. This is not astonishing given the history of slavery, which was bestowed to the blacks† (Federico 261). So, what is sharecropping? Sharecropping is a way of agriculture in which a landowner allows their tenant to utilize their land in return for a split of the crops produced on the land. The tenant signs a contract for such arrangements. Somehow this seemed like freedom for the blacks, but it was not. â€Å"Sharecroppers compensated their lease to the landlord as portions of their crop yield; this gave room for exploitation by the landlords† (Roumasset and James 640). Sharecropping, along with tenant farming, was a dominant form in the cotton and especially in the South from the period between 1870s to the 1950s, among both whites and blacks, but it is largely disappearing since 1966 when Civil Rights and the Workers Union abolished Peonage (Forced Labor). The word,

Reality Tv Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Reality Tv - Research Paper Example Media plays a great role in keeping the society updated on current issues and entertainment among other benefits to the society, but it can turn to be disastrous when ethical issues are not well considered. Media could promote pornography, propaganda and false/doctored information, which promote culture rot and immorality among other negative societal traits (Kieran, 39). Ethics applies in different areas in the media industry, and each country has established ethical guidelines to guide each media personality depending on the type of interaction he/she have with the audience. Media personalities in their profession must understand the prevailing ethical and legal guidelines in the industry. They act as the eye or mind openers of the society. They are required to inform the society on the current occurrences or happenings in the economical, political, entertainment, religion, Educational, governance and health among other societal issues. The majority of the media personalities are t he role models or mentors to several individuals, more so the teenagers, who are likely to take over media personalities’ dress style, walk style and language among other issues. It would be better if the media personalities consider some ethics in the career to mentor or encourage development of responsible and respective society members. It is worth mentioning that media is among the most complex careers, due to the nature of interaction it has with the public. Everyone is always watching eager to learn the current happenings, any slightest mistake or misconduct may compromise their respect and relationship with the public. News manipulation forms one of the ethical issues in the media industry. It is the omission or alterations of some elements in the news in favors of certain individuals or community. This is common with politics where some political aspirants or leaders may use his/her power or office to influence whatever is being conveyed to the public. Some media comp anies may also manipulate media content on some bribes or tokens by the wealthy and influential political class. Although there is no specific law describing certain consequences to such act, but a company may lose the public trust. Some external stakeholders like advertising companies or agencies may cut their links and deals with such media company. Social researchers more so in developing nations indicate that major civil and international wars have been caused by the manipulation or doctoring of the actual facts. The audience or viewers will have no time to evaluate the news or any other media content but take to the streets and cause havoc. Manipulating the news is more about telling lies to the public and this is demoralizing. Some of the modern media companies do not observe certain international media ethical standards. The advancement of technology implies some life changes like dress code, entertainment as well as relationships among other aspects of human life. Media pers onalities hardly consider their career ethics so long as their audience is entertained or contented. Modern ladies in the media companies wear short and sex appealing uncomfortable dresses to keep the male audience attracted. This may be appealing to the younger generation unlike older adults who appreciate good morals. Media personalit

Valero Energy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Valero Energy - Essay Example 4. Critically discuss whether Valero Energy has diversified its products and services. Provide 3 recommendations with a timeframe included of how Valero Energy can create better value through diversification of its corporate-level strategy. 5. Critically discuss whether Valero Energy has created and sustained a competitive advantage through its business-level strategy. Provide 3 examples of different environmental influencers that have affected its business-level strategy. [1] Valero is a refiner of oil feedstock. It buys oil from companies that extract them from the ground and Valero turns the stuff into clean fuel and other products like plastics, asphalt, aromatics, etc. that it sells to other companies. Valero’s entrepreneurial philosophy is closer to that of a small family business where all who work for it feel that they have a stake in the success and profitability of the company. In a June 2006 interview with HR Magazine, Valero’s first CEO (who retired in 2005) admitted that the concern of management is basically how to take care of its people so that they improve their operations, increase refining capacity and yield, and help run the company better. Profits usually follow because the people are happy working for the company. Since 1980, the company has taken care of its people – it has not laid off a single employee in the last twenty-nine years – and so has the luxury of getting the best among those who apply for jobs there, rewarding them for their contributions to the company. Process and product innovations at Valero are managed by sharing the R&D expertise of researchers for its four fuel (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and renewables) and eight specialty (aromatics, asphalt, propane, sulfur, base and process oils, petroleum coke, solvents and natural gas liquids) products following the basic guidelines of being environment-friendly,

The Puzzling Message of Figure in the Carpet :: Figure in the Carpet Essays

The Puzzling Message of Figure in the Carpet At the beginning of "The Figure in the Carpet", the main character considers the criticism of literature to be a career, something he does for money. "I had done a few things and earned a few pence" (p. 357), declares the narrator in the opening line. He says later in the paragraph that having an advanced copy of a prominent novel to review was desirable because it would advance his career: "Öand whatever much or little it should do for his reputation I was clear on the spot as to what it should do for mine." (p. 357) The character sees Vereker's work as a vehicle to advance his career. There seems to be little excitement as to the content of Vereker's work, the reader is never given even so much as the subject matter of a Vereker novel. Instead, all of the focus of the opening scenes is directed towards the narrator's struggle to become a renowned critic. Henry James is contrasting the practice of literary criticism with the ideal of what literary criticism should be. Even the characters that seem to be in the purest pursuit of Vereker's great secret, Corvick and Gwendolen, will not share it with their friends. When they discover it, they all want to publish it for themselves. Vereker himself seems to hold the literary critics in the book in contempt, citing their lack of vision. Vereker speaks to the narrator at several points in the novel, "You miss it, my dear fellow, with inimitable assurance; the fact that your being awfully clever and your article's being very awfully nice doesn't make a hairs breadth of difference." (p.365) The work of a literary critic in Vereker's eyes is to find the figure in the carpet. Which is to say that what a literary critic and readers of literature should do is to look for a deeper meaning or context in works of literature. Vereker is upset because the critics fail to grasp the deeper meaning in his works. James himself must have been quite upset at the critics of his day. Influential critics can make or break a writer. More than anyone else, critics can sway how people perceive the work of an author. As James illustrates in the story, critics are not to be trusted as authority.

Effects of Agriculture Essay

Because it was tremendously essential for survival, had a monumental impact immediately on society and continues to affect us even to this day, agriculture was the most influential development of the early civilizations. The people of the first civilizations needed agriculture because it was an easy, more efficient way of obtaining food. The early peoples had to hunt and gather their food, and, â€Å"Hunting depended on the careful observation of behavioral patterns† (Duiker, W. J. & Spielvogel, J. J. 2001). It must have been challenging to always be moving and searching, just so they could find food that day. However, deciding to stop and grow food, in one reachable convenient location, would have solved the issue of having to go through all the extra steps of hunting down animals. After a long time of humans living successfully in the Old Stone Age, and ice age occurred cause a devastating drought, which killed off most of the vegetation. â€Å"All living things started clustering around sources such as lakes and river† (Howe, H. , & Howe, R. T. 1992). Because all living things clustered around water sources, there was more competition, human and non-human alike, for the already diminished food supply. Naturally, the people of the early civilizations would need to grow their own food in order to sustain their population. Shortly after farming’s conception many life-changing discoveries, like trade, were made. â€Å"Some people became artisan, made weapons, and jewelry that were traded with neighbors† (Duiker, W. J. & Spielvogel, J. J. 2001). When people started to farm they began producing more food then they need. These food surpluses allowed people to do other things with their time such as, make weapons and jewelry that could in turn be traded for other people’s goods. The change to farming also immediately affected the relationships between men and women. â€Å"Men assumed the primary responsibility for working in the fields and herding animals, jobs that kept them away from the home. Women remained behind caring for the children and weaving cloth, making cheese from milk, and jobs that required considerable labor in one place† (Duiker, W. J. & Spielvogel, J. J. 2001). The men had to go work in the fields because planting, growing and harvesting crops required long hours of great physical labor that the women couldn’t take. Also the work in the fields was seen as more important, and so men assumed a more dominant role in society. Not only did agriculture immediately change society, but the changes it created are still evident today. Trade is done in the almost same way and for the same reasons as in ancient times. People still make goods and perform services in exchange for something else. However, rather than exchanging work for another good or service, people today use the cash system. In the cash system people provide labor so they get money in return. The money they earn can then be used to by various products or services. The relationship between men and women established because of agriculture is prevalent today as well. Not only do men still have a more dominant role in society but they still do more difficult and important work. The standard of men working while the women stay home and care for the house is still typical for families today. If the women do work though, they almost never have physically demanding jobs with long, hard hours like being a construction worker or farmer. Also not only are the vast majority of politicians, C. E. O. s, business owners, and other powerful workers men, but men also more often than not get paid higher than women. Truly, because of the fact the early people needed a more steady food source, it almost instantaneously changed humankind, and it evidently still affects the world today, agriculture was the most significant advancement of the early peoples. Bibliography Duiker, W. J. & Spielvogel, J. J. , (2001) Third Edition World History Comprehensive Volume. assBelmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc. Howe, H. , & Howe, R. T. , (1992) A World History. White Plains, NY: Longman