Ethical Concerns In The Military

The United States Air Force is comprised of 313,722 personnel. These personnel all have varying backgrounds and both positive and negative values and motivations for being in the world's greatest Air Force. With such diversity, there will be situations that challenge the first Air Force Core Value, "Integrity First." All Airmen will either find themselves in or be pressured into a situation that will challenge their ethics. Knowing how to decipher your way out of any ethical traps is the crux of Dr. James Toner's six tests and is the concept I value most from module 6. Being able to navigate ethical dilemmas is an important facet of a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO). Without this skill NCOs risks being taken advantage of and failing to

Ethics Theory for the Military Professional by Chaplin (COL) Samuel D. Maloney illustrates the complex ethical decision making process. Army Leaders are responsible for professionally, and ethically develop subordinates. Developing unethical subordinates in a zero defect Army is a leadership challenge. Goal-Oriented Aspirations, Rule-Oriented Obligations, and Situation-Oriented Decisions provide leaders an understanding of the ethical decision making process. The first step to Professionally developing subordinates is identifying, and providing input on all subordinate goals. Leaders are obligated to enforce rules and regulations. Understanding subordinate character provides leaders with the information to evaluate a soldier’s integrity. However,

How far would you go for your country? Would you lie, cheat, still, or even murder another human? How would your moral compass guide you? As members of the Armed Forces, we’re asked to do a number of things to keep America safe. There are times when those military tasks fail to align with our own ethical values. These ethical dilemmas require an array of skills to effectively address and decide our course of action. Additionally, having the knowledge and understanding of the different ethical frameworks is essential, and will help pave the way for future decision on ethical dilemmas.

Singer describes Iraq operations as they were being performed in 2008 with the threat of Improvised Explosive Devices, IEDs. “The Explosive Ordnance Disposal, EOD, teams were tasked with defeating this threat, roving about the battlefield to find and defuse the IEDs before they could explode and kill.” 3 Robots such as Packbot and Talon were used to disarm IEDs which save lives of Soldiers and civilians. The proliferation of technology in the battlefield can be seen in today’s combat environment on the ground, sea and air and will continue to grow. He states that “man’s monopoly of warfare is being broken” because digital weapons such as Packbot, Talon, SWORDS, Predator, Global Hawk and many others are a “sign” that “we are entering the era of robots of war.” 4 He supports his theory of the proliferation of technology in weapons by looking at industry growth by providing quantifiable data of rapid growth in industry to meet demands. As he states “in 1999, there were nine companies with federal contracts in homeland security. By 2003, there were 3,512. In 2006, there were 33,890.” 5 Mr. Singer then provides a history of robots, trends, and what we can expect in the future. The book also provides a glimpse of what the author believes can be expected on future battlefields and changes that he thinks U.S. policy makers and military leaders need to address. Some of the changes that can be affected concern law of war, robots role in war, level of robot authority to fight wars and robot

Ethical Dilemmas facing today Army Leaders demands that Soldiers adhere to Army ethical standards at all times. One understanding the whole concept of ethical behavior comes from believing right is right and wrong is wrong or good versus evil. In my opinion, we cannot consider good or bad within the Army profession outside its framework of norm behavior. The Army teaches Soldiers that our forces are protectors to enhance good life throughout the world and whatever we destroy degrades the ability of evil to survive. One of the main issues I have faced during my 28 years is how senior leaders function within the organization.

The essay identifies an ethical dilemma in the United States Army Aviation Branch. It seeks to identify the root cause of the problem using the ethical lenses of rules, outcomes, and virtue provide by the Center for the Army Profession and Ethic. Modern Army Leaders face an ethical dilemma, specifically in low-density Military Occupational Specialties, of completing the mission and enforcing the standards of Army Regulation 600-9. Units deploying or conducting critical training need Soldiers or pilots holding crucial skills. These Soldiers must comply with the body composition standards outlined in the regulation. There are no exceptions. Concrete experience obtained through interviews provided examples of the dilemma. The concrete experiences also provided the leaders action when encountering an ethical dilemma. The root problem produced two courses of action. The courses of action entered the ethical lenses. The impact on the force and recommendation to correct the root cause were given. Leaders must build, implement, and enforce a rigourous Physical Readiness Training program. They must also monitor and participate in the program.

There is a lurking ethical issue that is facing contemporary society and that has already started to affect the military, but has the potential to grow even more monstrous. Online privacy or internet privacy is the root of this issue and “following the revelations of widespread data collection by the United States government, among others, the public has to decide whether to push for legislation that would safeguard their online privacy, and which criteria, if any, should first be met by government agencies before invading civilians' privacy”.

One risk of artificial intelligence is that machines can malfunction and not know when to stop advancing on the enemy or distinguish between an enemy and a citizen, and not have a risk of unnecessary carnage. Today’s modern warfare is high-paced, mobile, and technologically advanced. It has been stated that “today’s sophisticated weapons can malfunction, be too lethal, and their speed and effective range reduces reaction time and decreases the ability to distinguish

Ethics matter in any kind of business or organization, but they are especially significant when it comes to the US Army (Blackburn, 2001). The reason behind this involves the chain of command and the risk to life and limb that are such large parts of military life. When a soldier in the Army has no ethics, he or she can cause trust and respect problems with other members of his or her unit. The US military is a stressful organization for most people involved with it, and people's lives are on the line frequently. Issues like PTSD and other medical problems are commonplace for those who leave the military and must adjust to civilian life, so it is very important that those who are in the Army work with their colleagues and higher-ups to get the help and support they need during and after their service. There is more to ethics in the Army than the problems that military individuals can face, though.

As far as the grading of the APFT goes, although FM 21-20 specifies the correct way to do a push-up or sit-up, the actual scoring for these events are wildly inconsistent from grader to grader. Sometimes these inconsistencies hurt a Soldiers score, but often these inconsistencies give an unfair advantage to a Soldier over his or her peers. The inconsistencies in grading the APFT and measuring a Soldier’s body fat are magnified by those leaders who don’t even bother and just “pencil whip” the results of both.

Every organization, both large and small, will typically have a well-defined set of values that they wish to espouse. This is the template for a successful, trained work force. These values will guide individuals during the decision-making processes that they will encounter. This blue print helps to ensure the integrity of the company and the individual, as well. Our Army today is no different. We can find our values and creeds everywhere we turn. One quick trip to a company or battalion headquarters will yield all the information a Soldier ever needs to assist them in making ethical choices. We hang posters touting the seven Army values on every wall. Units will prominently display the

However, in the heat of battle, fear, anger, and vengefulness can cause even the most trained soldiers to commit war. There is a possibility that machines may one day reach a point when they make more ethical decisions on the battlefield than humans. In the short time they are given, as we advanced our technology and we are no longer safe behind our weapons from 100 years ago. We are forced to

As bloody wars drag on in Iraq and Afghanistan the United States military increasingly turns to human-less warriors to stem the loss of lives. The MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper aerial drones are seeing an increase in use, while remote controlled robots are being used to dispose of improvised explosive devises. At what point do these computer systems move from machines capable of unethical actions, to machines whose very existence is unethical? I argue that fully automated systems should not be used in an offensive manner; rather they can only see ethical uses in limited defensive roles. In exploring this question I will draw on the only fully autonomous US armed forces weapon system I am aware of, the Phalanx CIWS, a missile defense system

The field of robotics has changed dramatically during the last 30 years. The first mobile robots with any degree of autonomy did not receive attention until the 1970s-80s. Since then, major strides have been made, including applications of learning, interaction, robot cooperation, and simulated emotions. But the issue on the table right now is this: are robots capable of moral or ethical reasoning? This question is no longer a farfetched science fiction fantasy – the question itself has been put to the United Nations. I am sympathetic to the spirit of the motivation behind such a project – humans should try to develop ethical machines in hopes to eliminate human suffering. Yet as it stands, there are several major problems with this view. Although robotic warfare has the potential to diminish casualties and human suffering in future wars, the possibility of artificial intelligence learning ethical understanding to the standard held in warfare today is near outlandish at best. Automated warfare has many complications that humans would still be held responsible for concerning the morality of war, and there is not an algorithm capable of understanding human compassion. Foresight is critical to both minimize undesirable consequences as well as influence the benefits of technology. The issue must be approached in a critical manner, as to assure a task as large as this is handled properly.

During my time in the military there were many accounts of ethical and unethical decision making. When in uniform we are often forced to make quick decisions to get the job done. Like many organizations we also have our own code of ethics, morals and principles that we follow. The problem with this is that in times of need we often can make decisions that were unethical but got the task completed. We also must factor in the many differing opinions on what is ethical and what is not.