When the identity of the horseman was revealed, my first reaction was surprised because I realize that Druse kills his own father and I understood why every kinds of war are destructive for family relationships. I realize also the significance of the duty for a soldier because if Druse didn’t kill his father, he can be considered as a criminal. 9. What do you think the author’s messages are concerning “duty”, “family” and “war”? in this short story, the author would like to denounce firstly the war and the conditions of leaving that known soldiers.
Are you satisfied with the killing? We believe that a peace treaty should be distributed. Without your help it only gets worse and worse everyday. More and more people die, more kids get brutally murdered in front of their families. And all because you are too scared to call it a Genocide because repercussions could develop.
In the chapter “The man I Killed,” O’Brien narrates an incidence which had permanently destroyed his life, murdering an innocent man. He had a lot of difficulties describing the man he killed, and that is why he avoided using the first person in his narrative. The reason for doing this was to relieve some of his guilt which had possessed him. Nevertheless, O’Brien could not hinder himself from picturing a complete imaginary life for the Vietnamese soldier. He outlined the similarities that he possessed and those of the dead man.
When comparing the two one has to look at the fact that individuals were upset about what happened to the United States soldiers during the Bataan Death March even though years prior the United States put the Native Americans in an identical situation during the Trail of Tears of 1838. The United State caused the death of Several Native Americans with no sympathy but willingly executed a man for doing the exact thing that their government allowed. When comparing these two major events, the Trail of Tears and the Bataan Death March, one
Some decisions Johnny made that were influenced by the gang members were killing the Soc, wanting to turn himself in, and saving the children in the burning church. A clear sign of the gangs influence on Johnny was when he decided to prevent the Soc’s from drowning Ponyboy and defending himself instead of letting the Socs beat them up and have them possibly drown Ponyboy. More specifically, after finally fighting back and killing Bob, he says to Ponyboy “‘I killed him’ he said slowly. ‘I killed that boy”’(Hinton 56). Here the author is explaining how shocked Johnny was once he killed the Soc.
Hugh was part of the group of soldiers who were present, but he did not participate in the killing. He saw the scene from above in his helicopter. Thompson was not sure what had exactly been occurring below him, but he knew he must intervene. He flew down into the hamlet and turned his guns on his fellow soldiers to save a group of Vietnamese civilians. He recued eleven Vietnamese soldiers with two helicopters before heading back to his base to report and end the killing ("The My Lai
His massacre didn’t just hurt the kids or the future but it also killed the parents of the kids mentally as parents spend all their life wanting something good for their kids. I think the father who executed the massacre was similar to Oedipus. This comparison can be proven true using the thematic statement of Ignorance leads to the blindness of knowledge. In both the scenarios the subjects couldn’t see the truth cause it was blocked due to their blindness. The thing that blinded Oedipus was his hubris and the thing that blinded the father was the influence of a terrorist group on
Perhaps George got tired of Lennie and took his life out of anger as his job and dream of sharing a farm with Lennie became impossible, or maybe George had had enough and killed Lennie because “(…) he [Lennie] gets in trouble alla time because he’s so God damn dumb.” (OMM, 42). On the contrary, after Lennie had killed Curley’s wife George knew what Curley’s lynch mob would come for Lennie and make his death painful by “(…) shoot[ing] the guts outa that big bastard” (OMM, 96-97). George simply helped Lennie the only way he knew how, by taking his life quickly after telling him what he wanted to
At first, he second guessed the bloody murder of his king. However, his wife, Lady Macbeth, talked him into this by calling him a coward and asking if he was a man. To prove to her that he was a strong individual, he followed through with the act of killing King Duncan. This confirms that the pressure of others persuaded Macbeth’s actions. Macbeth wanted the blame to be placed on someone other than himself so the people showed loyalty to him as the new king.
Mr. Morrison risked his life for the Logan family. When Mr. Morrison was stopping the Wallaces by hurting them, they got very mad. The Wallaces wanted to kill him. Mama told Mr. Morrison that he should probably leave because they are after him. Mr. Morrison decided to stay because the Logan kids were like his children and he wanted to protect them.
Foul language, which I won 't repeat. In fact, I’d rather not say anything at all. (29). Most of John’s problems relate to his experiences in My Lai, where his platoon was ordered to eliminate the “Viet Cong” in the village. Because the men had seen so much in Vietnam and because of how the war was fought (Guerrilla warfare), they had little to no remorse when gunning down children and woman.
Hoover had veteran support before the removal of the protestors, after the protest, “Hoover also lost support of the VFW [Veterans of Foreign Wars] and the American Legion, both of which condemned Hoover’s actions in local newspapers throughout the country” (Keaney 2). William R. Rice, the commander of an American Legion post, sarcastically complimented Hoover on revealing his, “sadistic principles of government,” to the nation (Lisio 39). Additionally, the Veterans Central Rank and File Committee, ridiculed the unjust treatment of the protestors, stating, “We got bullets in 1917. Many of us [veterans] were maimed and crippled for life. In 1932 we get the bullets and gas of the police, as we did in Washington, and the troops, which Hoover called put against us.
Just because one soldier claimed that he was treated well, does not account for the fact that eighty four American soldiers were slaughtered by Peiper 's division, which makes Peiper accountable. Peiper 's sentence lawfully and fairly punished him for his ruthless actions and disregard for human life. After an officer stated that the trials were "unlawful" the US senate would soon be debating on the matter and Peiper would be released. Approximately one year after the trials, an officer claimed that the interrogations had been unlawful, "the trials were tainted by later testimony that SS men had been tortured by US investigators before their trial" (Cummins). Without acknowledging the fact that the SS were notorious mass murderers, there was never any proof that the men were tortured, including Peiper.
Colonel Magnus saw the Special Forces Soldiers as traitors to the cause. His mindset hadn’t changed. You were either with him or against him. The SF soldiers were against him, so he ordered their bodies disposed of in a common unmarked grave and refused to recognize them. This concerned many of the senior officers within his command, what it a war crime many of them wondered.
Then, out of fear, he justifies his action by suggesting that Medea might harm himself and his daughter. He is ultimately correct, when Medea causes the death of both Creon and the princess, but it does not make the original decision just. After the deaths of the king and his daughter, Medea feels that her justice will not be completed until Jason is punished as well. In seeking this justice, Medea performs the most violent act against natural law by killing her own children. By committing action the idea of justice becomes more problematic.