Private Ryan Ethical Dilemma

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

James R. McDonough sets a spectacular example of what it is to be a second lieutenant in the United States Army and what it is truly like to lead a group of enlisted soldiers for the first time. Lieutenant McDonough, a graduate of West Point, was deployed as a platoon leader in a small fort with the mission of holding a Vietnamese village out of the hands of the Viet Cong. When he arrived, Lieutenant McDonough discovered that the former Lieutenant and platoon leader of the 2d Platoon, Bravo Company, 4th Battalion, 503d Infantry (Airborne) hardly ever left his

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,

Colonel (Col) Michael Steele’s resolute beliefs regarding how to prepare his unit for combat and his bravado demeanor commanded respect from other bemused military officers. While serving as Commanding Officer (CO), 3rd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, Col Steele aggressively cultivated a command climate focused on three core principles: personal protection, precision, and lethality. Although these three core principles narrowly aligned with the Army's "Soldier's Creed", Col Steele’s principles did not reinforce the Army’s individual and organizational core values. 3rd Brigade’s disassociated ethical subculture fostered a toxic environment which compromised both subordinate commanders' and individual soldiers' moral standards to various extents. Col Steele’s vague guidance concerning proper ethical behavior during the execution of high stress Counter-Insurgency (COIN) missions resulted in subordinates failing to conduct kinetic operations in accordance with established Army ethical standards. The military establishment shall remember May 09, 2006 as the day the revered "Rakkasans" failed to personify the unit's motto of "Ne Desit Virtus," meaning "Let Valor Not Fail". For on this day, four soldiers assigned to Charlie Company, known to the “Rakkasans” as the "Kill Company", murdered eight unarmed Iraqi citizens during Operation Iron Triangle. These four soldiers failed to understand the nature and consequences of their iniquities as they could no longer distinguish

Lt. Carroll was the kind of character that would be the hero of the squad and put himself on the line if it meant life or death for the rest of the squad. Lt. Carroll, the first lieutenant when Richie was in Nam, prior to Richie arriving in Nam walked out in the middle of a firefight to try to save 2 squad members. As Walowick was explaining more about Lt. Carrolls personality in the war, he said ” When the chips were down, he put his ass on the line for the guys” (46). Lt. Carroll put his life on the line in attempt to save others. “You guys get out the ditch okay? Peewee asked. Unh-uh Walowick said. That’s why you guys are in the squad” (46). Putting yourself on the line in order to save others is very close to the definition of heroism. It shows that you would and will put others safety in front of your own if it meant life or death.

While these three points are extensively discussed and dissected, it is apparent that the key factor that makes us professionals is the ethical standard that we must hold every individual soldier, from the lowest private to the highest general, to. One of the major points that are missing is what happens when the ethical standard is breeched and how it is dealt with.

The movie Platoon tells the story of a platoon of soldiers during their time serving in the Vietnam War. The soldiers find themselves in a variety of ethically challenging situations, and many make decisions with massive ethical ramifications. The situations vary, from searching a village for enemy activity to deciding whether to save a fellow soldier, and the soldiers are forced to choose between varieties of less than ideal options. The movie’s ethical spectrum ranges from individuals concerned only with accomplishing their mission at all costs to those who express concern for the lives of all people they interact with. The two ends of this spectrum are represented in the movie by Sergeant Barnes as the soldier who values only completing his mission contrasted with Sergeant Elias who attempts to preserve the life and humanity of the Vietnamese people he encounters when possible (Kopelson, 1986). I believe that the decisions exemplified by Elias represent a better way of conducting warfare, while those of Barnes represent a descent into understanding only the immediate objective at the expense of winning the overall war. The following key ethical decision points from the movie demonstrate the superiority of the decisions made by Elias

You have to consider for a moment the serious nature of this action. When we deploy, we rely on the person to our left and right. The profession of arms is one that requires all to do their part. Combat, by nature, is a physical, difficult, and demanding task. A person’s very life may depend on the actions of those around him or her. Ask any Soldier pulled from the vehicle hit by an improvised explosive device if that is true or not. You must have personnel on whom you can rely. The actions and directions from the brigade forced us to accept people who may be

not only cost him is life and the life of his comrades, but cause a military undertaking to fail and his team to be defeated. On the

The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual clearly states that Army leaders and soldiers alike must uphold ethical standards of behavior in war. It also states that "unethical behavior quickly destroys organizational morale and cohesion it undermines the trust and confidence essential to teamwork and mission accomplishment. Consequently doing the right thing forges strong character in individuals and expands to create a culture of trust

Military personnel operating in combat missions must maintain mental and situational awareness of their area of operations. This includes a complete understanding of their physical and doctrinal training. Besides accomplishing their mission, soldiers must also consider the rules of engagement and the personal and professional ethics, values and morals that factor into their decisions in high stress environments (Allen, 2013). Well planned missions will never be executed perfectly. Due to human nature, soldiers may be faced with an ethical dilemma.

On the battlefield in Afghanistan, Lt. Cmdr Gennari, who is a navy nurse, saw an injured marine with a live Rocket Propelled Grenade stuck in his leg. When the marine arrived at the medical station, a surgeon told Lt. Cmdr Gennari that a bomb squad would remove the RPG. Lt. Cmdr Gennari went up to the marine and grabbed his hand, saying “I promise you, no matter what, I won’t leave you till that thing is out of your leg”. Lt. Cmdr Gennari gave the soldier a sedative so the explosive specialist could attempt to pull the RPG out of the soldier’s leg. After the extraction of the RPG, Lt. Cmdr Gennari kept the marine alive by pumping a manual respirator after a power failure on a helicopter flight to another camp for more treatment. Lt. Cmdr Gennari was awarded the bronze star for his heroic actions. Lt. Cmdr Gennari’s willingness to put the needs of others in front of his own showed the selflessness and courage of a true hero. Also, If Lt. Cmdr Gennari hadn’t been at the camp when the marine arrived, there is a good chance that the marine might have

These three soldiers chose wrong and with their already poor attitude the mixture of alcohol with it cause them to have no control of common sense, they became a powder keg of emotions, and essentially this was their downfall. They are not ready to make decisions for themselves they think that because they were the uniform of the soldier it makes they above the law but even we are subject to law. It is the basics of life going back to the time of Moses and the Ten Commandments, what we do, we will always be accounted for, and actions speak louder than words. These few soldiers simply chose to forget that or completely ignore it. What we do in life is seen by the majority and although we sometime wish and hope that we are only seen by the few that will never happen. I cannot say that I am proud of what my actions were that night and I know that I could have done more things right than bad but when it is all said and done I am only one of many and even though it only takes the voice of one sometimes, sometimes it takes the strength of many. As a member of the team I failed to do my job, I let the man to the left and right down, that night I could have just stayed away and

Dawson and Downey's participation illustrates ethical relativism because in the base in which they are stationed following the command of a Cornel you follow those orders no matter what. Ethical relativism is basically knowing what right and wrong in a person's culture and in this situation the culture is the base in which the soldiers are stationed. We can evaluate decisions as moral or immoral by using the golden rule as stated in the leadership book. If you would want something to be done onto you then don't do it to somebody else. The action was following the code red which both of them did anyways because they where both scared of the

I should have gone to the people who have experience in how to handle the situation and would do what is best for the soldier.