The fault of the tragic engagement was on the battalion command. However, it was merely circumstantial that Wanat was ambushed and there was no humanly possible way to know the size of the enemy force. General Charles Campbell ended all investigations with his statement: “To criminalize command decisions in a theater of complex combat operations is a grave step indeed. It is also unnecessary, particularly in this case. It is possible for officers to err in judgment—and to thereby incur censure—without violating a criminal statute.” Thus, though the battalion command made fatal decisions, as well as Chosen Company; they had no way of knowing the size and scope of the attack.
Like I said up there, everybody has their own theory and some of them make sense as to the Vice president killing him to become president. His assassination also caused a permanent distrust within the people of their own federal government; the federal government couldn’t even catch the right assassin that killed their beloved president, John F. Kennedy. It also changed our troops in Vietnam, Kennedy wanted a lot of troops over there for a strong military presence, and many people say if he would’ve lived we wouldn’t be where we are now with
The first reports claimed that this was an attack on the Viet Cong but these reports did not fool the public for long. Other soldiers decided to tell the true story of what went on in My Lai and the media was livid with how the military censored the information. Soon after, more reports about unreported deaths by the survivors of the My Lai massacre began to surface. As a result of these events, news reports became increasingly negative. Two years after the My Lai Massacre was revealed, the Pentagon Papers published by The New York Times showed that the government lied to the people about the entire war.
Therefore, he gathered numerous documents about the case into his documents. The atrocities committed against Vietnamese civilians was a political threat to Nixon’s strategy of Vietnamization. Nixon’s goal was to turn the war over to the South Vietnamese so that he is able to withdraw most of the U.S. troops. The massacre in My Lai would further justify the resistance of the enemy and it was the complete opposite of what Nixon wanted to accomplish.
To begin, in all jurisdictions there is a high expectation to ensure that human life is protected. Unfortunately, this was not carried out in the Trial of Border Guards as border guard H broke the German Democratic Republic constitution when deciding to shoot and kill Chris Gueffroy in order to prevent him from crossing the border of the German Democratic Republic (Adams #). For this reason, I would uphold the Berlin State Courts (BSC) decision to hold guard H guilty because it was an unlawful act that resulted in not only the violation of Chris Gueffroy’s rights, but also a breach in core law; thus, guard H acted immorally as he should have had the experience and intelligence to know that his actions were unjust. As a result, this case involves
The Unit command could not allow one of its own to just leave. This would create moral problems, this war was unpopular, to allow one of their own to troll the streets back in America without the standard debrief would only court certain disaster. The solution turned out to be simple. Send one of their own to “chase” and apprehend Greeley. If Greeley resisted and killed the chaser, CID could move in quickly and kill Greeley.
The decision by LT Saville to make these civilians jump into the Tigris River as a non-lethal threat describes the permissive attitude allowed that leads to unethical behavior in combat. There was no standard operating procedure for unethical behavior and is there one today beyond the army core values? The case study also stated LTC Sassaman’s superiors were not reprimanded or reviewed for their part in this unethical behavior of 1-8 IN BN. The generals in charge failed to have a clear battle plan, and left it at the battalion, company and platoon level to figure out, which set many Soldiers up to fail in this chaotic theater of operations during this
The American people’s unwillingness to accept the continued loss of human life with no clear end caused the United States to change its policy regarding offensive operations – which were thought to be more prone to producing casualties. The new policy focused on withdrawing United States forces and limiting offensive operations. This change to policy had an effect on the nature of warfare in Vietnam. When military leaders did not acknowledge changes to United States policy it resulted in the Battle of Fire Support Base (FSB) Ripcord – a heroic effort by the 101st Airborne Division, but ultimately a loss of life for no potential change in the outcome of the
This statement disproves the definition of massacre because it was not an indiscriminate slaughter of people. If the soldiers were begin attacked it was merely self defense. Mr. Woodall was not the only account that stated the soldiers were being attacked by the townspeople before any firing took place, Jane Whitehouse said that same. She said that one man threw wood at one of the soldiers. Further more looking at the Revere painting, Preston’s deposition and also testimonies from people that gave their account of the story we can conclude that calling it the “Boston Massacre” would be stretching the truth of an event that has been warped for years.
But when we fired the gun we don’t dare offer a hand because we know that they would see the blood stained on it. That’s not to say that we are all held responsible for the actions of some, but our lack of concern means that we are just as much in the wrong as those who support this brutality. We may not be guilty of firing the gun, but we are definitely guilty of turning a blind eye. It seems as though we wait until something has reached a state of devastation to consider it worthy of our attention. We act so oblivious to these problems though thousands of people have died.