Quote: (11-06-2013 06:07 PM)Vicious Wrote:
You're seriously making a case for judging someone prior to the fact? That's the most dictatorial excuse I've heard. (...) In the end the guy who is going to suffer for either choice is the grunt in the field and not the guy in the office that sent him out there and who laid down the rules. Rules meant to protect him, not the soldier.
It's not an excuse, and I am not talking about any rules.
It does not matter what the rules of engagement (ROE) are if people don't follow them. Rules can be broken at any time. Humans have that freedom. They only suffer consequences if there is evidence against them. Hard to collect forensic evidence in the middle of a war zone.
When the cost of choosing a certain course of action is extremely high (e.g., your life), you tend to go for zero probability events. Immoral? Maybe. But I am not going to be a hypocrite and claim that I would be incapable of performing such life-or-death calculations if put in a situation similar to the one those SEALs were in. Sometimes, the cost of making the wrong decision is really, really high.
The domesticated animal can go feral when cornered.
"The great secret of happiness in love is to be glad that the other fellow married her." – H.L. Mencken