Because they are afraid of what will happen if they do. Remember Sai Seng, beaten to death because he deserted? For child soldiers, disobedience is unacceptable. They don’t even think of disobedience because they see what happens to those who do disobey. They are told that spirits protect the commanders and they are brainwashed to just shoot at the enemy.
The people inside the home very well could be just innocent people, living their day to day lives. Intruding in on people’s lives is so irresponsible, unfair, and does not comply with humane conduct while fighting battle. The prisoners’ wives most definitely thought they were going to be tortured or ever worse killed, which is just not fair. Walzer critiques the idea of the naked soldier by explaining that once the opposition is dressed for battle, why is it only then that they are now dangerous? In the sense of Walzer then, the Marines would not have been acting unjust, and that all the insurgents should be killed.
While “honor” and “self-realization” may be ideological terms often associated with a war cause, “brutality” and “self-scarification” are perhaps more realistic descriptors. The brutal and ferocious atmosphere of war often forces its young soldier constituencies to sacrifice any childish views of life, and mature. Walter Dean Myer’s novel, Fallen Angels, details the tragic loss of innocence of group of young soldiers who, surrounded by the unspeakable horrors of the Vietnam War, are forced to prematurely journey into manhood. Though initially and wholly innocent, the tense atmosphere of war forces Richie Perry and his fellow soldiers to leave behind former romantic views of war and realize its moral ambiguity. A truly unfortunate byproduct
It quivers a little with each kick.”P145 chapter 9. This shows how the enemy is treated even once they are killed. The soldiers probably did this out of rage and a need for revenge. This results in the men dehumanizing one other less proving the point that this novel examples that war changes people. Today we regret the actions that we made in war and so do other countries involved.
This to me is different than a planned and strategic murder of another person. I do not agree with the idea that men and women in uniform defending the freedoms of their country are ever to be considered murders when they are only following the orders they were given to support our freedoms. Terrorists are a different story all together. In war there are people who are out to hurt others for no good reason. They pick on the weak; women, children and elderly.
In spite of the fact that every soldier is fighting for their survival and tortures the enemies for gaining important information in order to save someone’s life, this threat is applied bidirectional. It is hard to say which side is right or wrong under this messy circumstance. Therefore, it is hard to be justified as it will create inequity. On the contrary, some people may think that it can be justified since the side trigger up the war has the responsibility to face the torture and this consequent. However, the decision only related to the government but not the army, such as the First Opium War between China and Britain, the reason for the beginning of the war only due to the interest concerned by the British’s government.
In the end I believe it turned into a complete anti-military novel as Caputo tried to understand the purpose of the war. The inevitable answer was that America had no reason to be in Vietnam and only put their people at harm as the government ordered them to stay. Before entering the war, the country truly did not understand what war meant. “So I guess every generation is doomed to fight its war, to endure the same old experiences, suffer the loss of the same old illusions, and learn the same old lessons on its own” (81). Caputo reveals his true feelings throughout the story.
This explains why not all guards behaved in such a manner. Wanting revenge is an important factor, as these prisoners had killed fellow US soldiers who may have been close friends to the guards. Guards may have felt that the humiliation that the prisoners were subjected to was a more suitable punishment for their behaviour, and would ‘teach them a lesson’. Deindividuation and helplessness of the situation also have to be taken into account, as anyone put in the conditions and stress that soldiers are under may behave differently, not forgetting their job requires dehumanisation to enable them to be able to carry out orders they are given. This theory was based upon mainly male subjects and therefore it cannot be assumed that findings can be applied to the whole population, as there are obvious differences between male and female behaviours when considering aggression.
Although they know there is a sniper, they still fear him because they cannot discern when he will shoot them. “Sooner or later this German sniper, who keeps us cowering in cold fear, will be caught in an advance by our troops.” In the same chapter, the sniper kills the character Brown. Brown’s death has made the narrator more fearful of the unknown because he now knows what the sniper’s ability. This shows us why the narrator would fear the unknown in the novel. What’s more, the inhumanity is another big deal.
So many friends and family had been lost, people were angry and wanted someone to blame, so when the time came and the war of terror was announced many civilians were for it. There was not a doubt in their mind that they needed to be protected. Americans first resort was guns, what better way to kill the enemy. They were angry and acceoted the message given to them by the mass