The line between civilians and soldiers
#1
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
The line between civilians and soldiers
December 9, 2005 (CNN)
While interviewing an anonymous US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda in Afghanistan.
The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil."
While interviewing an anonymous US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda in Afghanistan.
The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil."
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Posts: 9,198
Car Info: 05 STi
Hell yes, that just made my night. Gotta love SF in Afghanistan. I have a bunch of SF friends who deployed there that came back with some good insight on the whole situation.
#3
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 2,070
Car Info: 1995 Impreza L
Originally Posted by 1reguL8NSTi
Hell yes, that just made my night. Gotta love SF in Afghanistan. I have a bunch of SF friends who deployed there that came back with some good insight on the whole situation.
Yup, just talked to a friend that should be back stateside soon over the phone. Damn I hate lag time
#5
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit, Where the weak are killed and eaten...
Posts: 2,064
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX Sedan & 2008 GMC Sierra 4x4
Originally Posted by Salty
December 9, 2005 (CNN)
While interviewing an anonymous US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda in Afghanistan.
The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil."
While interviewing an anonymous US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda in Afghanistan.
The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil."
#7
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lastweek Lane - Watertown, NY
Posts: 10,133
Car Info: 02WRXpseudoSTiWannabeWagon
Originally Posted by riptide2
"I can forgive them for killing my children. I cannot forgive them for forcing my children to kill theirs." (c) Golda Meir, former PM of Israel.
#10
Originally Posted by gpatmac
Relevance?
I do not doubt that the SF soldier in question is a trained professional who excels at his job. However, this thread insinuates that this individual is a good soldier BECAUSE he does not experience any emotions whatsoever while killing. The few responses to the original post appear to share this sentiment.
Now, this begs the question: what is considered to be a normal human reaction to taking another human's life? Personally, I wouldn't know. However, it would appear to me that the society generally considers it abnormal to kill somebody and experience absolutely no emotions about it.
Now, the logical conclusion from the above observations seems to be that it is impossible to simultaneously be a good soldier and a normal human being (a point I personally do not necessarily agree with, but which is primarily derived from the statements in this thread.) This would mean that the individuals who aspire to be good soldiers must relinquish their ability to react to certain stimuli in way which is generally considered 'normal'. If this is, indeed, true, then it's rather bad news, both for the aforementioned servicemen as well as for the rest of our society. Based on that, I find the enthusiasm about the incident (exhibited in this thread) to be somewhat unwarranted.
That's all. I think the quote presents the same idea, only more succinctly.
#11
Originally Posted by riptide2
Sure, I will elaborate.
I do not doubt that the SF soldier in question is a trained professional who excels at his job. However, this thread insinuates that this individual is a good soldier BECAUSE he does not experience any emotions whatsoever while killing. The few responses to the original post appear to share this sentiment.
Now, this begs the question: what is considered to be a normal human reaction to taking another human's life? Personally, I wouldn't know. However, it would appear to me that the society generally considers it abnormal to kill somebody and experience absolutely no emotions about it.
Now, the logical conclusion from the above observations seems to be that it is impossible to simultaneously be a good soldier and a normal human being (a point I personally do not necessarily agree with, but which is primarily derived from the statements in this thread.) This would mean that the individuals who aspire to be good soldiers must relinquish their ability to react to certain stimuli in way which is generally considered 'normal'. If this is, indeed, true, then it's rather bad news, both for the aforementioned servicemen as well as for the rest of our society. Based on that, I find the enthusiasm about the incident (exhibited in this thread) to be somewhat unwarranted.
That's all. I think the quote presents the same idea, only more succinctly.
I do not doubt that the SF soldier in question is a trained professional who excels at his job. However, this thread insinuates that this individual is a good soldier BECAUSE he does not experience any emotions whatsoever while killing. The few responses to the original post appear to share this sentiment.
Now, this begs the question: what is considered to be a normal human reaction to taking another human's life? Personally, I wouldn't know. However, it would appear to me that the society generally considers it abnormal to kill somebody and experience absolutely no emotions about it.
Now, the logical conclusion from the above observations seems to be that it is impossible to simultaneously be a good soldier and a normal human being (a point I personally do not necessarily agree with, but which is primarily derived from the statements in this thread.) This would mean that the individuals who aspire to be good soldiers must relinquish their ability to react to certain stimuli in way which is generally considered 'normal'. If this is, indeed, true, then it's rather bad news, both for the aforementioned servicemen as well as for the rest of our society. Based on that, I find the enthusiasm about the incident (exhibited in this thread) to be somewhat unwarranted.
That's all. I think the quote presents the same idea, only more succinctly.
While you make a good point, I think you need to understand what these guys go through training to deal with killing another human being. They could not perform their job if they felt bad about killing individuals. Its the ugly side of war, in my opinion nothing to glorify but thats just me.
#12
Originally Posted by Unregistered
While you make a good point, I think you need to understand what these guys go through training to deal with killing another human being. They could not perform their job if they felt bad about killing individuals. Its the ugly side of war, in my opinion nothing to glorify but thats just me.
#13
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lastweek Lane - Watertown, NY
Posts: 10,133
Car Info: 02WRXpseudoSTiWannabeWagon
Originally Posted by jvick125
You're absolutely right. That's why it's somewhat humorous to hear (or in this case see) this soldier's response to such a question. I'm sure that most of us, are aware of how the military breaks soldiers down and rebuilds/molds them into killing machines.
Soldiering is nothing new. As a matter of fact, we probably give prostitution a run for the money for oldest profession.
Murder is bad. Killing those, in accordance with a strict set of rules of engagement, who have no such rules; and specifically have nothing restricting their treatment of other non-combatants, is not a bad thing. As a matter of fact it is a good and honorable thing.
#14
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
What Jvick and riptide have to understand is that soldiers use these thoughts as a method of coping. Yes, they're trained to perform numerous or specific tasks that may require the use of deadly force. But these same people come back home as loving fathers anxious to start-up the old BBQ for their families and friends.
It's a profession and mindset that doesn't overwhelm their lives like the unstable psyche of a serial killer. Thankfully the so-called "brainwashing" that happens to these elite soldiers during their initial enlistment equates to pride whereas unknowing civilians link it to lunacy and being unstable.
It's a profession and mindset that doesn't overwhelm their lives like the unstable psyche of a serial killer. Thankfully the so-called "brainwashing" that happens to these elite soldiers during their initial enlistment equates to pride whereas unknowing civilians link it to lunacy and being unstable.
#15
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UCIrvine
Posts: 3,312
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
Originally Posted by gpatmac
Killing those, in accordance with a strict set of rules of engagement, who have no such rules; and specifically have nothing restricting their treatment of other non-combatants, is not a bad thing. As a matter of fact it is a good and honorable thing.
...according to who? I don't disagree neccesarily, but that is opinion. I mean....the 10 commandments didn't come with a list of exceptions...