Poetry Forum

Full Version: war!
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
when does war become a necessity, does it ever become a necessity?
is a soldier an individual with the right to say i shall not kill or is the soldier merely a robot? when can the soldier choose free will?

the thread is about war including all it's niche points like one of the few i made about soldiers choice. so stray off topic but keep it connected to war if you can.
When a group of people grow beyond a known community and become identified by a governmental system in the form of an ideology, the idea of self defense no longer can be applied, therefore there ceases to be any moral justification for killing. Practical justification is another thing entirely. A soldier by definition has no free will accept as given to his discretion in the articles of war followed by the system for whom he is a soldier. Generally this involves the role of non-combatants and the humane treatment of prisoners, and the soldier is not absolved of committing "war crimes" (seems a bit oxymoronic) by the justification of "following orders". For examples and discussion of this topic see "The Holocaust", and "The Vietnam Conflict".

Just as I had been trained, I didn't think,
I killed him, I didn't even blink,
because my Sergent told me to.
It keeps a soldier from the brink,
this having not to ever think,
what am I fighting for?
Cause that's no way to run a war!

Dale
I know fighting against the nazis was a necessity... technically ideologies shouldn't justify wars, but by and large human beings aren't as rational or decent as we'd like to hope and it is reflected in the society we ultimately have. Bad ideas and philosophies spread like cancer, corrupting our actions.

(01-27-2012, 12:24 AM)Erthona Wrote: [ -> ]the soldier is not absolved of committing "war crimes" (seems a bit oxymoronic) by the justification of "following orders".

Yeah, the hypocrisy is astounding in a lot of cases. Soldiers are tools of the political mechanism, ordered to abandon their humanity then left to pick up the pieces in the aftermath.
yes,while the ones who ordered the atrocities go scot free[when they're on the winning side]
soldiers give up their free will when they become soldiers,that's part of the deal,and oh yeah,get killed
.
"when does war become a necessity, does it ever become a necessity?"

Moral necessity, or rational necessity, or practical necessity, or ?

A necessity to arms manufacturers, or rulers, or used car sales, or poets?

If there's such a thing as free will (doubtful), then soldiers are
always free to choose. (Though their mileage will vary a whole lot
depending on that choice.)

War poem:


         After Our War
                           -John Balaban

After our war, the dismembered bits
-- all those pierced eyes, ear slivers, jaw splinters,
gouged lips, odd tibias, skin flaps, and toes --
came squinting, wobbling, jabbering back.
The genitals, of course, were the most bizarre,
inching along roads like glowworms and slugs.
The living wanted them back but good as new.
The dead, of course, had no use for them.
And the ghosts, the tens of thousands of abandoned souls
who had appeared like swamp fog in the city streets,
on the evening altars, and on doorsills of cratered homes,
also had no use for the scraps and bits
because, in their opinion, they looked good without them.
Since all things naturally return to their source,
these snags and tatters arrived, with immigrant uncertainty,
in the United States. It was almost home.
So, now, one can sometimes see a friend or a famous man talking
with an extra pair of lips glued and yammering on his cheek,
and this is why handshakes are often unpleasant,
why it is better, sometimes, not to look another in the eye,
why, at your daughter's breast thickens a hard keloidal scar.
After the war, with such Cheshire cats grinning in our trees,
will the ancient tales still tell us new truths?
Will the myriad world surrender new metaphor?
After our war, how will love speak?

isn't there something in the articles of war that a soldier can or should go against an order if the soldier deems it morally wrong. i don't know the actual wording though.
and yes, arms surplus seeming create a need fro war. but what if the armed forces en masse said...NO! it won't happen but it would be a site to see.
(01-27-2012, 07:21 PM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]isn't there something in the articles of war that a soldier can or should go against an order if the soldier deems it morally wrong. i don't know the actual wording though.
and yes, arms surplus seeming create a need fro war. but what if the armed forces en masse said...NO! it won't happen but it would be a site to see.

There have been many famous rebellions/mutinies in various military
organizations. They usually end badly for the rebels, but not always.
I remember the Battleship Potemkin mutiny because of the famous Eisenstein
movie inspired by it. There's a major rebellion happening in the Syrian
Army as we type. They call themselves the 'Free Syrian Army' and
have become fairly well-organized in the last few months.




i know the army often rebels when ordered to fire on it's own nationals.
and that many are too scared not to keep firing on them because of retaliations should they be deposed.
i think for the larger powers was has become impersonal. the guy on the pc guiding missiles onto soft targets. or hard ones.
i'm not sure i could do it were i a soldier.