The Ethical Dilemma Of `` Enemy At The Gates '

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 notion of choice in an individual’s life is subject to constant questioning. We have what we like to call the freedom of decision-making, but often it simply seems like a facade. Many believe that one’s morals and ethics are solely responsible for the decisions they make, major or minor. Others attribute the external pressures surrounding them and societal factors as the facilitator of choices. Unquestionably, both personal characteristics and societal factors influence the the majority of choices of individuals everywhere. We must consider, however, that one plats more of a role than the other. Pieces of writing such as Christopher Browning’s Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland, Michael Bess’ Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II, and Milton Mayer’s No Time to Think explore the idea of both influential aspects. Nonetheless, more influence can be attributed to societal factors and this idea is supported throughout all of the pieces of writing. Societal factors, for the most part, are composed of a plethora of external pressures that we either actively acquiesce to or subconsciously conform to. Societal factors play a much larger role for the average individual in regards to decision-making and this goes for individuals of all backgrounds and beliefs. This is shown in the lives of the Chambonnais, the Reserve Police Battalion, and the two famous experiments known as the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison

When it comes to any war, soldiers are placed in dangerous situations based on the orders given to them. They are forced to make quick decisions, usually out of their control, to defend their country against its said enemy. The act of killing is in no way ethical, but when done under the circumstances of war, military duty and survival, the wrongness of it can be debated. Consequently, the act of not killing can be unethical as well, since the outcome can be the sacrifice of a fellow comrade. The process of ethical reasoning cannot be used when faced with these kinds of decision because soldiers of war are unable to see all sides of the story, making it impossible to weigh the outcomes.

As US military expert Rod Powers explains how those who are military members who fail to obey their superiors risk serious consequences in "Military Orders", and could relate to why Dawson and Downey were convicted for their crimes (Power). Required to follow orders, a soldier does not need to obey an unlawful order, but those who obey can be pinned with criminal prosecution and in this case, it matches with Dawson and Downey's situation where they taped and tied up Santiago (Power). Fromm can conclude that irrational authority is used by using a comparison between a slave and their master; the superior wants the best they can draw from their subordinate and tries to exploit them, leading them to control with force (Fromm 126). When it comes to deciding whether or not an order is ethical, it is also the soldier's call to believe the legitimacy of the order; according to Saul McLeod, who is a psychologist and the author of "Obedience to Authority," obedience is a form of social influence by responding to a direct order from another individual (McLeod). Although Col. Jessup urged for no one to touch Santiago, Kendricks directly ordered Dawson and Downey to treat him with a Code Red, going against Col. Jessup's orders. Numerous situations occur where two people will discuss the same topic, but would contradict each other. It is easy to say "I was only following orders" to justify one's self to explain their reasoning, but that statement, also known as the Nuremberg Defense, is not going to save a person every time. Yes, Dawson and Downey were only following orders, but did they ever take a moment to question whether it was the right action and for a sensible reason? Probably not in consideration that it is a routine to follow a command because if they deny their superior's order, many consequences will follow. Kelman and Hamilton logically claimed that

Every day we are faced with certain situations that challenge us with how to act in an ethical manner. It can be human nature to feel unsure or conflicted with the correct moral choice. Some can say that one should know how to handle such dilemmas and others may say that there should be a reference of some sort to help guide through such conflicts. Sometimes we know the answers and sometimes we are unsure of how to handle certain situations. Most times we go through life wondering what we should do. As I become further educated on the different theories of ethics, I believe there are answers that are available in guiding one through an ethical dilemma and or judgment. I will discuss Vincent Ruggiero’s three basic criteria, Robert Kegan’s order of consciousness, the three schools of ethics and the correlation between all three.

In the case of military ethics killing is justifiable. "’Those who are involved in the killing that takes place in war should be under the moral justification of killing in war,’ Kilner said. ‘Whether we vote for leaders who commit the U.S. military to war, or we design the weapons or train the Soldiers, or actually pull the triggers, we share in the responsibility for that killing and we should understand its moral justification,’” (Misurelli).that people who actually pull the trigger aren't the only ones who killed, from every step of the gun being made till the trigger is pulled each person is responsible. The military has rules when killing another so it's justifiable unless the rules are broke. “The community has the right of defence and self-protection. If necessary, armed force should be used against those who

The following are the key ethical decision points shown in Platoon. In each of them soldiers make decisions with large ethical ramifications. For each example, where the

In criminal justice, there are many ethical dilemmas at every stage of the system, which allows people to manipulate the criminal justice to rule in individual favor, resulting to serious consequence on an individual or a time community security. These incongruous laws, policies, regulation and practices in many a time create conflicts and distortion of the foundation of justice, resulting to an ethical dilemma. The purpose of this paper is to find out the course of action to take to handle such dilemmas, what principles to serve in such situation, and what moral reasoning for taking such decisions.

Combating in modern warfare does not simply mean killing the enemy. There are ethical rules and standards of behavior that soldiers must strictly follow because these rules are essential for defeating the enemy, winning "hearts and minds" of potential allies, and maintain the morale of the troops. These tasks have become especially challenging in the face of the proliferation of guerilla warfare that has been adopted by weaker military forces in the twentieth- and twenty-first centuries. In fighting insurgencies, abiding by the ethical standards of the Army behavior may be even harder than in fighting conventional battles. The ethical rules may sometimes put the soldiers in dangerous positions. Disregarding the acceptable standards of behavior, however, may have even graver consequences, putting innocent non-combatants at risk and risking total demoralization of the Army unit participating in disorderly behavior. It is therefore essential that Army leaders maintain an ethical command climate during the war.

If the order isn’t lawful or is illegal you have the right to disobey the order, without fear of punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). If you happened to follow the illegal order given to you by a superior and you were caught, the excuse “I was only following orders”, as you will find is a very doomed position to have in our courts.

Soldiers are trained to always follow orders, and to never question orders. But that belief is somewhat illogical. Soldier's are to obey any lawful order given. But the training involved, the often chaotic nature of battle, and the need to follow authority to maintain survival can lead to a very blurred vision of what is right or wrong. One's animalistic instincts may take over. Sometimes there are such situations when you've stepped over the line. Such as the horrendous act that took place on March 16, 1968 in the village of Son My.

As explained by McMahan, it is acceptable to kill the opponents in a war in regards to self-defence. In the wars; of which some had happened in the past, and some are still going on right now, soldiers are expected to protect the nation’s residents by working with their fellow soldiers, their unit and the Army as a whole. Logically speaking, soldiers have the rights to kill the opponents in order to fulfil their obligations.

There are a variety of different ethical systems that have developed of the course of millennia. However, even though the subject has been covered so thoroughly, it is still heavily debated. The varieties of ethical systems that are in existence look at various ethical problems from different perspectives and can be applied differently in different circumstances. Because of the subjective aspects to applying ethics, they can be as much an art as they are a science. Ethics are something that must be practiced and really cannot be perfected. In this way, studying ethics is a continual process that does not really stop. This paper will argue that ethics are the most important subject that an individual can pursue.

As an organizational- level leadership, he will confront many thorny problems and missions that challenge their moral criteria and military profession. In particular, when they receive the order from the upper- level, how he employ his expertise to exercise his moral leadership and undertake the tasks. Actually, both of the profession and ethic are interdependent, and inseparable. Thus, a professional commissioned officer should understand how to fit ethic into his expertise. Moreover, people would face the dilemmatic situation between the obedience of rules and the consideration of the consequence. When it comes to the moral or ethical, should I follow the deontology or consequentialism? Which one is the most critical priority to the stewardship

Management constitute amongst major components of a company, organization or a business. As such, management oversees employees interactions with their supervisors and also control of people within a particular organization. Also, it includes critical and ethical decision-making process so as to address various ethical dilemmas experienced by employees while undertaking their respective assigned duties within the company. Ethical dilemmas are hereby to stay as issues usually arise now and then and place a variety of options that bear different repercussions. Therefore, it calls for ethical and critical decision-making skills so as to make the most appropriate option that bears more benefits in comparison to other options presented. While making ethical decisions, it 's substantially important to play heed to a certain ethical decision-making theory. This would enable an individual making the decision to ripe best possible consequences rather than living to regret. Moreover, ethical decision making is typically important in business as making a wrong decision may result not only in huge losses but also poor relationship amongst colleagues and miserable life for employee(s) working in a particular company or business in question.