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.”
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
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. The percentage of victories reported went from 62% before the Tet Offensive to 44% after, clearly a significant amount.
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.
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.
After the Red Scare tensions became high in the United States. People were afraid of communism and immigrants. This included Sacco and Vanzetti. The Supreme Court tried to come up with evidence to pin the robbery charges on the two Italian anarchists. (Linder, Doug. "
“Gentleman, Your Verdict”: A Moral Dilemma 1. In my opinion, I don’t think the jury should convict Commander Oram of murder because he wanted at least some people to survive and to do that, many men had to die. The fact that he commits suicide makes a difference because if he hadn’t it would have made it look like he killed 15 other men so that he could survive. If he hadn’t commit suicide, I would definitely change my answer to ‘yes, he is guilty’. I don’t think that the other crew members are guilty because they didn’t have a say in what was done.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the Founding Fathers of The United States of America is quoted to have said, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail” (Benjamin Franklin). World War Two is a story of countries learning from their mistakes and not repeating them. The Dieppe Raid on the coast of France seemed like a well thought out plan to gain control over the coast, but in reality, it was a disaster. Due to the lack of planning put into the raid, the lives of many Canadian soldiers were lost. A plan that was created to outwit the opposition, lead to total disaster and humiliation.
Platoon The first sociological topic to discuss is multiculturalism. In the movie, the platoon is made up of a diverse group of men, they are from different places throughout the country and different races. When I speak of the culture of the blacks and whites within the movie, I am not referring to the culture of Africans embodied in the behaviors of the black men; rather, the black culture within America during the 1960’s. At the beginning of the movie, it shows the platoon marching.
Ethical Dilemma: Discovered by Unarmed Combatants During Operation Red Wing, a reconnaissance mission partaken by a group of U.S. Navy Seal Team 10, Lieutenant Michael P. Murphy and his team were spotted by three civilians. LT Murphy was immediately asked the most discomforting question of a young Leader’s career, “what do we do?” Considering the question in accordance with similar events and laws concerning the Law of Warfare, I often ask myself what I would do if I was behind enemy lines and my positioned was uncovered by unarmed civilians. I would allow the civilians to go free and immediately attempt to return to my operational outpost because killing innocent people is against the law, unethical, and counterproductive to the overall goal within the Global War on Terrorism.