At what point does military action cross into murder?

[Iron Mal]

You've got me all wrong.
It's not the killing that I'm against, though I am using that because most people are.
I have nothing in my moral code that prohibits killing.

It's the putting yourself in a situation that will necessitate you take lives on the orders of others.
I understand that the world needs people who are scarcely more than tools to be used by a superior - I understand that they are necessary.
But that doesn't mean I have to like them.

Hell, death is necessary too, and I sure as hell am not looking forward to that.
I just can't respect someone who thinks they're off the hook because they were under orders to pull the trigger when they volunteered to do so.

If you're going to kill, that's absolutely fine.
But acknowledge that it was you who did so.

...It is an outside possibility that I may be a little odd.

So from what I gather your problem is largely with the idea of people killing because they are told to rather than because they themselves take the responsability to make the decision themselves?

Having a problem with authority is ok (hell, compared to most I know in person I have a somewhat 'rebelious' outlook) but you still have to acknowledge that some people need direction and instruction, put simply, they really don't have the capacity to take responsability for their own actions (we refer to some people as 'sheep' for a good reason).

Of course this doesn't make what they've done any more acceptable but it's still something we have to take into consideration before condemning someone (you cannot honestly say that you haven't had a situation where you were relieved when someone told you what to do).

 

[Anarchy In Detroit]

The question I want to know the answer to is, at what point does killing someone in an act of war change from being just that, to being murder?

I think a key point to be factored into this question is the existence of guerilla warfare (ala vietnam, iraq, etc.) where even seemingly innocent people can become lawful combatants in a moments notice with the production of a hidden weapon, and the concept of Total War, where not only those with weapons, but civilians as well, aid the war effort of a specific faction.

This was brought on by another, separate topic, something about carpet bombing ppl, and how that would make the offending country mass murderers.

Anyone who invades a country is a target. Conversely, whoever is in that country pointing a weapon at an armed soldier has just made themselves a target.

I would say in war it becomes murder when you kill someone not out of necessity or defense, but out of anger or carelessness. The cause of the war is also a factor in whether or not it is out and out murder. I would contend that an unprovoked and unjust invasion resulting in civilian death is murder. Fighting an enemy country or group that has acted violently towards is not murder, it is defense and it is necessary.

I would contend that dropping bombs in a civilian area is murder. Surgical strike or not, you're dropping a bomb. You might kill someone who wasn't a fighter. In the past many militaries do this on purpose, and that is wrong.

Total War has nothing to do with right and wrong and everything to do with fear, expediency, and absolute results. Maybe someone didn't have something to do with the war, but they are a family member of someone who is, a taxpayer, and a worker. Everyone in a country has a value to that country. You do not merely exist with no impact. Think about how the US and Britain targeted the Ruhr Valley in Germany in WW2. This was purely to destroy not only facilities, but the workers in them.

the problem with total war is that you will stand no chance of having locals collaborate with your occupation. They will solidify against you.

Psssshhhh.

Dude, we're a nation of consumers. Our allies love us economically when we buy and buy and buy their stuff.

I mean, recently China's been clamoring to be our ally, and they used to hate our guts!!!

We won't be consumers for long. We sell nothing. We have a massive import export deficit. We're getting poorer, we're losing jobs, we're losing our capability to do anything for ourselves. We owe MASSIVE debts to China and Japan.

We're being bled. It was the only way anyone could take us down.

 

[Iron Mal]

Pretty much exactly.
Also, the idea that killing someone because you've been told to is somehow not murder.

And that's my entire problem - I don't like sheep.
Nobody should just be okay with pawning the responsibility for their actions off on someone else.

And actually, I can't think of a situation where I've been relieved to be ordered around, no.
I agonize over making decisions because they're important to me - someone who takes that away is someone who I can see myself strangling to death.

To a certain extent you have a point but then does this mean that the person who told them to kill said person is not at all responsable (after all, they didn't actually kill the person, that was the pawn's job)?

As a society we need sheep because not everyone can have the will, confidence or charisma to act alone or lead others.

I also highly doubt that you're being honest when you say you've never been relieved to be able to palm off responsability onto someone else or follow direction (I forget who said it but there is the famous quote of 'the rarest thing is for one to truely act alone').

 

[Haunted Serenity]

1)The majority of people in the area at the time was catholic so when they arrested 3,000 people. Most would be catholic. And during war you can pass emergency laws to suspend trials

2)If someone is shot at close range there would be gun-shot residue

3)They were shot in the back because they were running ok. Have you ever fired and automatic weapon and tried to fire at individual targets in a crowd?

4)IRA was a terrorist group, with civlian backing. Military leaders were having a hard time on figuring out how to stop attacks because it was still new and no tactics were in place to counter it easily.

5)completley peaceful people do not demostrate, throw rocks and insult soldiers. It was a mob building up

 

[Haunted Serenity]

War and battles suck i'm not arguing that for the record. Loss of life isn't fair for any side.

 

[Eldarion]

But what if someone is just defending themselves? What if, due to this other person's malicious intent and drive to commit bad acts, you have to kill him to prevent the invasion of your home? Or to prevent harm to come of other innocents? Is that not justified?

I think it is 100%

Its sad, but no matter how noble or peaceful your country is you need a strong military because someone else isn't peaceful.

 

[Haunted Serenity]

so you believe that the british planted bombs on a body to make it look like a terrorist? All crowds of people can be a threat. If bricks were being thrown, how long do you think it would have taken before they threw fire bombs or actual explosives? And no offence but i'm pretty sure i can spin it that both parties were at fault for the loss of life.

The crowd were civil rights demonstrators, completely peaceful. The only reason they were angry in the first place was that the British army had already shot 2 people that day already. The reason they were protesting was that 4 months previous the British Army had killed 13 people during a massive raid and interned 3,000 people without trial, almost 96 percent of which were Catholic. The detainees were later tortured.
Only 50 or so were found to have any connections to terrorist activity and those were minor at best. 10 months previous to THAT, the British army had entered the nationalist Falls Road area and killed 7 civilians and wounded almost 100 and fired more tear gas in a single operation than had ever been fired up to that point by them.
Independent reports have found that on Bloody Sunday, the soldiers never came under fire from IRA gunmen as they claimed, and that the soldiers were perfectly equipped to deal with the threat with rubber bullets, tear gas and batons, which they had in spades. The protesters were not affiliated with the IRA and had no explosives or fire bombs, it was a spontaneous protest.
In addition, none of the dead or wounded had any trace of gunshot residue or weapon casings near them, and many were shot in the back, running away. Some were shot at close range to finish them off. Believe me, conservatives have been trying to defend the actions of that day for many years, and not one has succeeded.
A black day for Northern Ireland and an operational failure for those military forces supposed to protect the populace, their recklessness that day cost many British military and British civilian lives as the IRA escalated their campaign and began bombing England.

see above arguements. I managed to screw up the quote ability somehow.

 

[TheHitcher]

Anything I post would be a repeat of what's already been posted. But I agree with what most have already said. Killing is always murder. How wrong it is depends on the intensity.

 

[Vegetarian Barbarian]

as soon as you sign up!

 

[McClaud]

Pretty much exactly.
Also, the idea that killing someone because you've been told to is somehow not murder.

Oh, I've never considered my killing someone while I was in Bosnia as anyone's fault but mine. He was going to kill me and the civilians behind me, and I just happened to kill him first. Even when I fired on incoming hostiles in Iraq because my commander ordered me to, I wasn't blaming the commander for making me pull the trigger. I pulled the trigger because I believed I had to. And I could have just stood there and got shot, letting the hostiles penetrate my position and kill the rest of my squad. But I didn't, because I was thinking about protecting the rest of my squad, who consisted of 18 to 20 year-old people who were barely out of boot camp.

I take responsibility for joining and doing my duty in the military. Everyone who signs up should realize that they are ultimately responsible for their actions in the military, regardless of orders. They volunteered, after all.

Does having killed someone make me feel bad? Somewhat, but I also realize that in combat, you do what you have to do. Kill or be killed. I didn't enjoy it, but I didn't exactly hate myself for it afterward. I protected people in some instances, and in others, it was just to protect myself.

I still have PTSD, btw, and I still wake up in a pool of sweat on some nights. I also have a hard time with loud concussive noises. Having someone trying to kill me had a bigger impact on me than killing someone.

 

[Haunted Serenity]

see above arguements. I managed to screw up the quote ability somehow.

I don't quite get it. What do you want me to do?

1)The majority of people in the area at the time was catholic so when they arrested 3,000 people. Most would be catholic. And during war you can pass emergency laws to suspend trials

2)If someone is shot at close range there would be gun-shot residue

3)They were shot in the back because they were running ok. Have you ever fired and automatic weapon and tried to fire at individual targets in a crowd?

4)IRA was a terrorist group, with civlian backing. Military leaders were having a hard time on figuring out how to stop attacks because it was still new and no tactics were in place to counter it easily.

5)completley peaceful people do not demostrate, throw rocks and insult soldiers. It was a mob building up

here this should simplfy it.

 

[Trilby]

As has been pointed out, not all killing is murder. Murder is the premeditated wilful killing of another human being (this also applies if you were just intending to cause GBH and killed them by accident). Thus statements such as "all killing is murder" are complete and utter bollocks.

 

[TacticalAssassin1]

Murder is killing for "personal" reasons (Revenge, Sex, Psychosis, Money, ect.). In war, two soldiers on opposite sides of a fight have no personal connection, and nothing to gain from killing a specific person. Therefore, it is not murder to kill someone in a war or war-like context.

Especially since if you don't kill him, he's going to kill you. Honestly if me and my mates were in the army and people were shooting at us and people were dying everywhere around me, I wouldn't give a stuff about shooting the bad guy over there right between the eyes. But when that bad guy isn't a threat, then it's murder.