61 réponses à ce sujet

[God]

None of you has served in the army.Kids.No one adult here?

 

Well, 'kid', walk some talk and put your money where your mouth is.

[Liamv2]

None of you has served in the army.Kids.No one adult here?

 

Nope. I'm 19 does that count as adult? I still hold that a plan where everyone is going to die is a dumb plan. I get there are combat losses but still that's moronic.

[God]

And you have?

If so: CO, NCO? And if yes to that, why did you sleep when that issue was adressed during training so you'd have to ask us?

 

If you want a plain, military minded answer: follow your damn orders. If you can't deal with the consequences, happy PTSD, shouldn't have joined the military!

 

There you go. Satisfied?

 

Not really a military minded answer. 

 

The correct answer is 'Why is this my problem? Why am I, as a Commander, not using other resources at my disposal?'

[Fidite Nemini]

Not really a military minded answer. 

 

The correct answer is 'Why is this my problem? Why am I, as a Commander, not using other resources at my disposal?'

 

Hence why I asked the guy for more context. If what's described in the OP all the information an officer has at his/her disposal, then the smart thing would not be attacking in the first place and for example wait for reinforcements.

 

Just sending people to certain death without sufficient cause and being damn sure it works isn't just morally wrong, it's destructively stupid waste of ressources.

[God]

Hence why I asked the guy for more context. If what's described in the OP all the information an officer has at his/her disposal, then the smart thing would not be attacking in the first place and for example wait for reinforcements.

 

Just sending people to certain death without sufficient cause and being damn sure it works isn't just morally wrong, it's destructively stupid waste of ressources.

 

You don't need reinforcements. You need ass and air, and maybe a drone. Maybe you can convince the local warlord to attack for you. Maybe you can fly an Apache over them and watch them surrender.

 

Hell, if you do it right (like the U.S. military), you just send some journalists to them and watch the opfor surrender to your civilians.

[Fidite Nemini]

You don't need reinforcements. You need ass and air, and maybe a drone. Maybe you can convince the local warlord to attack for you. Maybe you can fly an Apache over them and watch them surrender.

 

Hell, if you do it right (like the U.S. military), you just send some journalists to them and watch the opfor surrender to your civilians.

 

All of which is the kind of information I had asked OP to provide in order to make an informed answer. And if such options exist, I would use those. Thene again, I'm not sure exactly how small the "small group" is and what tactical leeway said commander would have (which btw isn't a rank in the IDF, so I can't try and guess that stuff).

[God]

All of which is the kind of information I had asked OP to provide in order to make an informed answer. And if such options exist, I would use those. Thene again, I'm not sure exactly how small the "small group" is and what tactical leeway said commander would have (which btw isn't a rank in the IDF, so I can't try and guess that stuff).

 

Commander is, in the U.S. Army at least, a term for the Commanding Officer. It's more of an indication of what that officer does rather than being a formal rank (though it is no less formal). Commander is the term for the highest ranking officer of whatever post, installation, command, etc. For example, before I switched out to a staff advisory role that gets me to visit more places, I was a Company Commander, the commanding officer of a Company-sized element.

[Fast Jimmy]

Commander is, in the U.S. Army at least, a term for the Commanding Officer. It's more of an indication of what that officer does rather than being a formal rank (though it is no less formal). Commander is the term for the highest ranking officer of whatever post, installation, command, etc. For example, before I switched out to a staff advisory role that gets me to visit more places, I was a Company Commander, the commanding officer of a Company-sized element.

Exactly. And as the Cobra Commander, Cobra Commander was the commanding officer of the Cobra armed forces.

[Commander Rpg]

The question is this:Lets say you command a small group of young soldiers.

You are their commander.You must send those soldiers to certain death.

Their sacrifice is just a distraction for the attack of main force.

They have no chance of survival.

Question:will you give the order?

Since the distraction isn't said to be significantly resolving the conflict, I would never send the troops to die if there wasn't a reason that was worth their lives.

 

Also, if you reason on the order given to you, and in all conscience you find it foolish/mad/thoughtless, you have the moral obligation of disobeying.

Even more, you have the moral obligation of lifting from the command the madman, by convincing others to mutiny or using military force to avoid the death of innocent people.

 

"No one with common sense abandons the truth for the error".

[Fidite Nemini]

Commander is, in the U.S. Army at least, a term for the Commanding Officer. It's more of an indication of what that officer does rather than being a formal rank (though it is no less formal). Commander is the term for the highest ranking officer of whatever post, installation, command, etc. For example, before I switched out to a staff advisory role that gets me to visit more places, I was a Company Commander, the commanding officer of a Company-sized element.

 

I figured as much, but wasn't sure if the same handling of the term also applies to the IDF.

 

Anyway, insufficient information is still insufficient. Yet again I would ask OP exactly how small that "small group" is, why they'd need a distraction, why KIA is certain (that would imply knowing the enemy's capabilities to some extent), etc. pp.!

 

I'm not a military person, but if someone came to me and told me to send people to death as a distraction and that's all I get told, my answer would be "with all due respect, go f*ck yourself".

 

And that aside, exactly how are missions organized in the IDF? A distraction can mean a lot of things and there's lots of distracting ruckus even a handful of people can do that doesn't necessarily involve engaging in combat and dying.

[Elhanan]

Would likely give the order, and would likely inform the troops, too. But I am with Kirk on the notion of a No Win situation. Kobayashi Maru, FTW.

[Il Divo]

Agreed.

 

The good of the many Banjo-Kazooie games outweighs the good of the few Banjo-Kazooie games.

 

So they should make more good Banjo-Kazooie games.

 

Currently replaying Banjo-Kazooie and Banjo-Tooie. They have both stood the test of time.

[God]

Would likely give the order, and would likely inform the troops, too. But I am with Kirk on the notion of a No Win situation. Kobayashi Maru, FTW.

 

Yeah, they weed those types out real quick in most officer training. 

 

We define 'no-wins' differently than Kirk does (mission accomplished, no casualties'

 

The more appropriate question for an officer is to ask oneself whether or not they're spending lives or wasting them. You're going to cause suffering and pain. The question is whether or not you will make that suffering and pain worthwhile or not. Does it have a purpose? Does it have an outcome that leaves you better off than before? 

 

Pain, suffering and death are not always preventable. Nor is it a good thing to always seek the immediate negation or marginalization for it. It's all about the big picture.

[Clover Rider]

Currently replaying Banjo-Kazooie and Banjo-Tooie. They have both stood the test of time.

Out of likes.

 

So let me say.

 

Your country salutes you.

[Sigma Tauri]

The more appropriate question for an officer is to ask oneself whether or not they're spending lives or wasting them. You're going to cause suffering and pain. The question is whether or not you will make that suffering and pain worthwhile or not. Does it have a purpose? Does it have an outcome that leaves you better off than before? 

 

Pain, suffering and death are not always preventable. Nor is it a good thing to always seek the immediate negation or marginalization for it. It's all about the big picture.

 

Totally true.

[Fidite Nemini]

Yeah, they weed those types out real quick in most officer training. 

 

We define 'no-wins' differently than Kirk does (mission accomplished, no casualties'

 

The more appropriate question for an officer is to ask oneself whether or not they're spending lives or wasting them. You're going to cause suffering and pain. The question is whether or not you will make that suffering and pain worthwhile or not. Does it have a purpose? Does it have an outcome that leaves you better off than before? 

 

Pain, suffering and death are not always preventable. Nor is it a good thing to always seek the immediate negation or marginalization for it. It's all about the big picture.

 

I don't know how it's in the US military, but what's the stance on rejecting orders? In the german military, people are by law obligated to refuse unlawful orders and whilst that was written primarily with WW2 and warcrimes in mind, it de facto also extends to situations like say nonsensically sending soldiers to their deaths.

 

 

And for the question directly at hand:

 

 

It's all about the big picture.

 

This, the above, that and what he wrote.

[God]

I don't know how it's in the US military, but what's the stance on rejecting orders? In the german military, people are by law obligated to refuse unlawful orders and whilst that was written primarily with WW2 and warcrimes in mind, it de facto also extends to situations like say nonsensically sending soldiers to their deaths.

 

 

And for the question directly at hand:

 

 

 

This, the above, that and what he wrote.

 

Unlawful orders are orders in which there is a criminal element or intent behind them. Technically speaking, your OPLAN isn't necessarily illegal if it causes meaningless death (unless it is essentially premeditated murder), but there are other ways besides 'immoral order' (which doesn't technically exist) that you can use to get out of carrying out an order that has questionable content behind it. In the heat of battle, a poor decision from an officer can be interpreted by an NCO to perform an action that, while not technically going against an order, does focus on undermining it if it's not a rational decision. That said, if the order comes down hard, you really have no choice but to comply. Of course, those orders are recorded by your platoon/company/battalion recorder, and in the event of contact with opposition, is generally reviewed post-mission. If you screw up, you can bet that you'll be kissing your career goodbye.

 

We're a bit more flexible with 'immorality' itself however than a lot of other Western countries are. 

[Voxr]

Exactly. And as the Cobra Commander, Cobra Commander was the commanding officer of the Cobra armed forces.

Really? Wow...

TMYK!!!!

[AventuroLegendary]

Of course. My men get a -20 morale hit but I can compensate with a Rousing Speech modifier. 

[MayCaesar]

Being the person I am now, I would never assume the role of someone who potentially can have to send someone to their certain deaths.

 

But IF I were the person that would voluntarily go to the army and assume in the end the commander's role... Then, probably, yes, I would.

[Fishy]

 I'm too ******. EDIT

[God]

Being the person I am now, I would never assume the role of someone who potentially can have to send someone to their certain deaths.

 

But IF I were the person that would voluntarily go to the army and assume in the end the commander's role... Then, probably, yes, I would.

 

I can. I know I can. I've done it. It doesn't bother me. I have a lot of responsibilities as an Army leader. Making sure everyone comes home at the end of the day isn't one of them. It's great and exemplary when it does happen, and I do my best to mitigate the possibilities of fatalities and casualties of any kind, but it happens. I've had Soldiers die, when I was a junior enlisted, an NCO, and as an officer.

 

Another question here that isn't being addressed is 'could you order somebody to knowingly kill or harm another human, even an innocent or a civilian, in the line of duty?' Collateral damage. 

 

I've had the experience of being in that position as well. It's not the greatest of thoughts for a healthy human mind, but in many ways, the job requires you to not be emotionally present, and to see people as things, bags of meat that have some abstract notion of life behind them. 

[Killdren88]

Will I be court Martialed? If no, then I give the order.

[malloc]

OP has PTSD