Trustworthy, Loyal, Brave

[Knot Head 10]

I'll be bringing this to the next campfire for a discussion about what these words mean.

 

---------

 

When the chopper lifted off moments later with three wounded soldiers, it left behind others who were wounded but *refused to be MEDEVACED out of the combat* zone so they could return to fight with their buddies.

 

---------

Not surprised that they did this, but that does not make it any less worthy of my respect.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wounded-us-soldiers-refused-leave-taliban-fight/story?id=8754347(This message has been edited by knot head)

[John-in-KC 311]

I don't know the nature of the wounds.

 

I know the ratio of other people taken out of the role of using weapons when there's a wounded man, vice when there's a dead man on the battlefield. Frankly, enemies prefer to wound rather than kill... it takes more enemy guys out of the firefight.

 

A good commander orders his wounded troopers evac'd. Get them recovered, get them returned to action.

 

OBEDIENCE has to be part of this conversation as well, as does HELPFUL. Are you contributing or detracting from the mission with your bravery?

 

The only ethic which matters in battle is mission accomplishment. The only limits to the ethic are those in the Law of Armed Conflict.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[bacchus 10]

"The only ethic which matters in battle is mission accomplishment. The only limits to the ethic are those in the Law of Armed Conflict."

 

If I remember my training correctly, theoretically those laws of land warfare are limits that are imposed because they cause unnecessary harm or damage and will not really help your position in the battle, i.e. torture, execution, Bataan death marches, etc. Assuming that to be a true statement, then those laws are not a limit of the abilities to accomplish the mission.

 

Yes, those are very good points and I think I will bring it at the next opportunity as well. Thanks for the post.