It seems that you're entirely too willing to throw out morals for expediency. If you really believed that the killing is bad, you ought to not enlist, or if you're conscripted, get conscientious objector status to avoid being in a place where you'd need to kill. And the same goes for anyone else who has moral qualms about what's going on there.
If you go there willingly, knowing what's going on, you can't use the exigencies of the situation as an excuse, as they're perfectly foreseeable.
>If you really believed that the killing is bad, you ought to not enlist
I really do believe that. I even donated thousands of dollars to a POTUS candidate that would have gotten us out of Iraq as soon as he took office. Sadly, 98.5% of Americans still wanted this war, since they voted for Obama or McCain.
>It seems that you're entirely too willing to throw out morals for expediency
If the expediency should mean the difference between my life or death, than yes. I'm just being honest here. In war, I'd kill anyone who I thought was a danger to me, but then I wouldn't go to war unless it was for self defense.
>If you go there willingly, knowing what's going on, you can't use the exigencies of the situation as an excuse, as they're perfectly foreseeable.
That's a good point, but why apply it to just the soldier, why not our Presidents? Wasn't it entirely foreseeable that innocent people would die by going into or staying in Iraq. Isn't it entirely foreseeable that the money we send the government is going to pay for all this to happen?
The reason I defend these heli pilots is 1) because the situation they were in was far more complicated than most people here will admit, 2) they probably didn't sign up to kill innocent people, just like I didn't pay my taxes to pay for the bullets.
Blatantly wrong. You are throwing away the rest of your point with this garbage.
You must think I'm wrong in some other way...please explain. Getting out of Iraq wasn't part of either candidate's platform. So, how was I blatantly wrong?
At the same time, your life in a gunship as the operator of a 30mm cannon is also rather more secure than that of of wounded individual reduced to crawling on the ground, or of unwounded people who choose to assist the wounded individual rather than first trying to secure the area (eg taking a shot at the helicopter). Of course it is difficult to weigh such subjective factors in an objectively dangerous situation but that is part of the training for a professional rather than conscripted military force, IMO.
Did not vote on your comment - don't agree with your perspective but it seems like a sincere effort to further rather than stifle debate.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying if both of us had to go to Iraq, I'd probably come home alive (having killed a lot of people, probably some innocent people in the confusion) and you'd come home in a box because you assumed everyone was nice and wanted to buy you a beer...until they shot you.
In other words, in a war, my life means more to me than a civilian's who has a 50/50 chance of being a combatant. Again, this is why we shouldn't be there.