the 48th regulator said:
Unprofessional to be calling your Enemy names, yet you have no challenge with terminating his life?
I am sorry C-D, now you are really digging at the bottom of the politically correct barrell. You have no qualms with killing or maiming an enemy in batttle, but you take issue with name calling?
I shall retire to Bedlham....
dileas
tess
Valid point, and I'll address it. One could argue that the reasonings behind the killing of the enemy are of a greater good, or they are for the very purpose we are employed by via the state and the country. I.E. Ours is not to reason why but to do or die, to quote a cliche. However, demonizing the enemy does not serve any higher purpose at all. It has no justification other then pure vitriol and hatred. Yes, emotions run high in these circumstances and I am not downright denouncing nor judging those who do it (as it is very understandable), I just wish the military had better institutions involved or something to combat that demonization. Otherwise, it seems to me that many of the past human rights violations have been motivated, or atleast justified in the minds of those involved, by the demonization of the enemy. The reason I believe it is unprofessional is because it is something that is very emotionally charged, and emotions in the line of work we are involved in need to be checked sometimes to control what we do. We do a very unique, extremely difficult and emotionally challenging job. With this job however we are given powerful tools and training to take on the task that is the most unnatural and difficult thing a human being has to do; that is, kill another human being. Now let me make it clear, I am not discussing the morality of "killing" in general, I am just pointing out that it is indeed difficult for a human to kill another human, biologically and socially speaking. We however do this because we know there is a higher purpose, guided by various ethos and disciplines that we are instilled upon in our institutions.
I find it very uncouth to be spilling such vitriol on an enemy force. When one is put in a position whereby they have to kill another human being, it is because there is in fact a greater reasoning behind it. Call it the ends justifying the means or whatever, however in the end, in the military we do not kill because we want to, we kill because we need to in order to accomplish the mission. However by taking it on a personal level, but actively demonizing the enemy we slowly chip away at the foundations of our ethics. We slowly move towards the forewarned "undisciplined mob, more dangerous to the state" (paraphrasing) then a disciplined, professional tool of a civilian government.
Now I do not suggest we start charging people, or "jacking-up" people who do demonize the enemy, because they themselves are simply the products of their training an environment. However what I would like to see is a value instilled and furthered upon whereby we understand the foundations of our job and that the emotional contexts of it should be wrestled with so it does not inhibit our mission. How we should do this? That is a difficult question without an easy answer. Maybe it should be something installed ethically? Eitherway I don't believe that it should be perpetuated as much as it is,
however I cannot stress this enough I also do not believe that we should actively attack and antagonize those who do. We need to find a progressive option so the next generation of the CF can have these values instilled upon them without antagonization.
Really! I really don't understand your logic at all. Do you have any concept at all as to what kind of training Combat Arms soldiers must go through? It doesn't matter what military, or in fact, what insurgent organization, is engaging in "KILLING"; they all will dehumanize their enemies. What do you think the Taliban call Western soldiers and NGOs? They demonize their enemies just like anyone else.
What kind of principles are you teaching your soldiers/combatants if you tell them that their enemy is their best friend? Get your head out of wherever you have it stuck and smell the coffee.
I am aware of the kind of training Combat Arms soldiers go through, as a Reserve Infantryman having completed courses up to DP2A (aka IPSWQ), though obviously not to the extent that a Regular force (or Reserve force for that matter) combat arms preparing for an operational tour overseas. That being said, I still do have Combat Arms training to base some of my assumptions off of. I understand that militaries, and insurgent organizations (probably these being even more prone to due to lack of discipline and organized structure such as a military) will dehumanize the enemy, I am not denying that fact. What I am arguing is that this demonization/dehumanization is something we should strive to combat.
I am not teaching principles that espouse befriending the enemy. What I am trying to address is that the unnecessary demonization is 1) Unproductive, 2) Serves no other purpose professionnaly other than self-gratification and 3) Leads to creating a toxic environment whereby the attitudes of the members involved can be given justifications towards human rights violations.
Directly talking about 3) I wish to bring up a good example. The active demonization and dehumanization of, not only the Vietnamese people as a whole but also of Vietnamese insurgents during the United States' operations in Vietnam lead to, while maybe not directly (as one could argue poor discipline, leadership and the use of non-volunteer personnel were very potent in providing the catalysts for massacres) certainly poisoned the minds of those involved. My Lai for example, where an American infantry company massacred 300-500 innocent civilians in the course of their military operations. One quote that strikes to mind, for example is from the BBC News:
"I would say that most people in our company didn't consider the Vietnamese human"
This is very important I believe. When one starts actively desensitize oneself to the humanity of the enemy, in effect you are stripping away the enemy's human rights by denying them the very definition of being "human". Now I wish to make this point clear, in no way do I see the Canadian Forces on any road to any sort of massacre along the lines of My Lai. Even with these faults in mind, I have no hesitation to say that the Canadian Forces is probably the most progressive and humane military in the world at this time. That being said though, the reasons we are at that stage is because we have discussions and professional development regarding values and ethos. So, am I saying that for Pte. Bloggins calling the enemy a "raghead" (Which I would like to bring in adds in serious racist issues aswell, for now I will not address) he can easily succumb to torturing a Taliban insurgent? No. However, by allowing it to go on it creates the environment where human rights violations very well could happen in the future if these attitudes are let to foster and grow.
-C/D
