

Why soldiers get a kick out of killing - mcantelon
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=why-soldiers-get-a-kick-out-of-kill-2010-04-23

======
roboneal
Article is particularly light on the "why soliders get a kick out killing" and
effectively says, buried at end of the article, that studies have shown 98
percent of men don't and suffer for it.

~~~
JshWright
On top of that, the major example he references (the cockpit dialog from the
wikileaks video) doesn't really prove his point at all. My impression of their
dialog was that it was simply a way to cope with the situation. I spend a fair
amount of time in the back of ambulances and fire trucks. I've seen people die
in tragic, traumatic circumstances. I've also joked around with other
responders about some of those deaths. Making light of extreme situations
doesn't mean you enjoy it, it just means your brain is choosing not to deal
with the reality of the moment.

~~~
sokoloff
I also watched the wikileaks video, and went Army ROTC to pay for college. I'm
not particularly pro-military (though I respect them deeply and thank them
everytime I see one), nor bloodthirsty, but if I were in a situation where I
honestly believed that insurgents were carrying AK-47s and an RPG and
represented a threat to my ground troops comrades, as evidenced by actual
small arms fire minutes earlier, I would hope that I would find it within
myself to fly the chopper and/or operate the cannon or Hellfire missiles so as
to most effectively neutralize the threat to my brothers-in-arms.

I don't get the sense that the helicopter crew thinks they did something
spectacularly good overall, but rather than they did their jobs and protected
the lives of their fellow soldiers on the ground. Even the comment about
"well, that's their fault for bringing their kids to a war" has merit, IMO. If
you don't want to be shot, don't go where insurgents are openly carrying
weapons and firing on US troops...

Yes, war is tribal and brutal and messy/disturbing, but the things we ask of
our young men and women are precisely those things that we're often unwilling
to go to personally do. As a result, I believe we owe them our intellectual,
emotional and political support, and when they do something that "we wouldn't
have done" from the comfort of our climate controlled and eminently safe
offices, that we need to cut them some slack. Watch that wikileaks video; I
defy anyone to say that's a camera and not an RPG in the company of those
carrying AK-47s in an area where our troops are taking small arms fire.

I have a baby daughter and it ripped my heart out to listen to the ground
units' reports of the injured children, but that doesn't make the Apache crew
monsters. They acted reasonably (in my opinion) and consistently with the
rules of engagement. If you have a beef with those RoE, that's fine, but your
beef is not, IMO, with the heli crew. (I realize that the immediate parent
poster is not saying it's their fault.)

~~~
mcantelon
As far as I know, the rules of engagement don't allow for the killing of those
that are no threat: i.e. the minivan with the kids in it that got shot up when
trying to help the wounded. They could have fired a few warning shots and the
van would have fled, but instead they murdered the passengers.

------
kls
_propaganda that glorifies the soldier's cause and dehumanizes the enemy_

that pretty much sums it up, generally in combat both side have some grand
mission (liberate Iraqi people, repel the Great Satan). I doing so both sides
propaganda strives to dehumanize the opponent. The problem is many times this
work all too well and the end result is a nation frothing at the mouth with
blood lust and a leader that is all to willing to quench it with genocide.
History, is full of examples of such happenings.

