Abner Snopes would abuse his son and one particular moment Sarty realize that he did not want to live in fear with his father rules. In this context it is believable that Sarty wants to do the right things from now on,"If I had said they wanted only truth, justice, he would have hit me again." But now he said nothing. He was not crying. He just stood there”(Faulkner, 3).
I despise him and those who listen to him. I shall fight alone if I choose,” (Achebe 186). The quote exhibits that Okonkwo did not want the British to interfere with tribal matters by introducing a new lifestyle. He preferred that people continued to hold the traditional culture to a high esteem. This is expanded upon when Okonkwo is willing to fight the British by himself with the knowledge that they had more advanced technology, so he could try to preserve his beliefs.
These men may not seem super important, but there could have been casualties if they wouldn’t have been there to do their job, and without accountability they wouldn’t have to be there and do their job. At one point Weldon was also very adamant on not shooting and killing detainees when their backs facing the shooter. He was going to hold everyone accountable for this deadly force policy. Even though he had modified it, it had been for what he believed to be the greater good. He was the only one that could authorize for them to use deadly
Thus, when O’Brien mentions in the quote, valor was not the point, he is trying to explain to the reader that the men went like it was a job they had to do, not a random act of courage that willed them to proceed. The draft pulled them into it. They did not want to dishonor their fathers, their country and society who told them fighting is honorable. In “The Things They Carried,” it was this ‘dishonor’ that had lead them to enter the war, it was “nothing
Sophocles states that “But the hand that struck my eyes was mine, mine alone--no one else-- I did it all myself!” (Oedipus-1469-1471). Oedipus is owning up to his own actions and establishes his own sense of moral responsibility because he does not blame the gods for what happened, but himself. He says that “the hand that struck my eyes” were his own, expressing that he chose to blind himself due to the great moral responsibility he feels to own up for the action he did. The drive of curiosity and the consequences of complex minds do not just apply to Oedipus. Sophocles provides an excerpt from Teiresias stating, “Alas, how terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the man that 's wise!
As a soldier one is looked upon and trusted to tell the truth no matter what. Lying to an NCO or officer is not the correct choice for a soldier to make no matter what kind of situation he or she has gone through, as a soldier you are expected to always respond with the truth, and nothing but the truth. One of the reasons why a soldier shouldn 't lie to an NCO is because if he or she is caught lying, he could end up finding him self in a worst situation. The soldier will only dig his grave deeper and it will continue to go deeper. If the soldier is caught lying he might just end up getting into more trouble that what he first started with.
This can be seen through the officer’s reasoning when he makes his decisions and the traveler’s disapproval of the apparatus. Throughout the story, the officer appears as a man with values and principles, yet acts with total ignorance of either compassion or sympathy because of the power he holds with the apparatus. The officer does not feel responsible for his immorality and in fact, does not see himself as being immoral. He also does not see the point in telling a prisoner the reason why he is being executed. He proudly informs the traveler: “the principle on which I base my decisions is: guilt is always beyond doubt” (Kafka 199).
In conclusion, one aspect of the reading, The Road to Hell, we can analyse is the importance of understanding the people around you. John Baker’s intentions towards Matt Rennalls were not based on a bad premonition. His lack of understanding the behavioural characteristics of his worker was his major downfall. One business ethic we must hold sacred is the ethic of not offending our workers. John Baker forgot this ethic and that is why he was not successful in admonishing his workers.
As the leader, he is supposed to be an able leader who provides his troops with concise instructions to gain a substantial and measurable advantage over their enemy. Nonetheless, the nature of the war in Vietnam makes this leadership impossible considering the fact the goals of the war are obfuscated and undefined. Similar to the operations of the war, Lt. Cross shows inadequacy in fulfilling his role. Moreover, Cross is a powerless leader because he underwent the traditional training that focused on following standard operating procedures that had been pre-decided, rather than adapting to the current environment. Lt. Cross’s other character shortcoming is his emotional and personal inability to lead the Alpha Company.
This quote is believed to be true, but it does not explain not explain his life. Therefore, this critique is to be found false. It does not explain his loving other who showed and taught Garrison lifelong principles and lessons which helped him become who he is. Another trait that Garrison was critiqued for being his harsh and very stern opinions. “Garrison had gone so far to denounce the U.S. Constitution of it’s proslavery as ‘a covenant with death and an agreement with hell’” (Garrison).
Barret saw it necessary to show that they are capable of handling themselves and do not need the extra help as they are strong enough to take care of themselves. Ison was not justified in his murder to kill, but justified in his pride being hurt. Though he dealt with it in the wrong way, he had the right
The responsibility was laid out to them clearly, but the decision to downplay this massacre would lead to events soldiers wished never happened. By omission and commission, they suppressed reports of the incident and submitted false or misleading accounts to higher headquarters. (My Lai Massacre) By suppressing the news of the massacre, Calley and his fellow officers just dug themselves a deep hole. Surely they should have expected the cause and effect from this small decision. Even if those claims made by Calley about the massacre were incorrect, since international law and the military code of conduct expressly forbade the killing of civilians, it was still the responsibility of the chain of command to ensure that Calley knew those policies.
These people may not be bad people themselves, they may just be trained to be this way. "Most of the time, soldiers who commit atrocities are not sadists or 'bad apples '.... These soldiers are 'normal people ' but they have been trained to obey orders with no discussion” (Staff 12). This 88 year old may not of wanted to do this but he may have been forced to by his commander but still. War crime are bad things that nobody should be trained