An officer in the military will listen to the officers ranking higher than him more readily than someone of a lower rank. It does not matter whether the rank is by a title such as in a military situation or in the way someone is perceived to be, like in Zimbardo and Milgram’s experiments. In the film A Few Good Men there is one puzzling statement near the end of the movie said by Private Louden Downey. After the sentencing Downey loudly questions Lieutenant Commanders Galloway and Kaffee as to why Dawson and Downey were still found guilty of “conduct unbecoming of United States marines”. He said “what did we do wrong? We did nothing wrong!” Private Downey was referring to the fact that he is a marine, he gets an order and he follows it, with no questions asked. The puzzling idea that those following orders because it was an order given by someone of a higher rank means that Dawson and Downey are not responsible for their actions. Is anyone responsible for their actions and the consequences of those actions if they were “just following orders?” The ability to tell someone what to do and to have them listen to your command is determined by your status relative to theirs. In A Few Good Men, “The Perils of Obedience,” and in “The Stanford Prison …show more content…
In the film A Few Good Men this is found in the way that Lieutenant Corporal Harold W. Dawson did not salute Lieutenant Commander Kaffee as he left the room. This is a sign of disrespect and defiance toward Kaffee. Dawson also defied orders when he brought food to a fellow comrade when he was restricted to barracks only. He could not leave the barracks at all, including getting food. Dawson defied the orders and brought him food anyway. Does that mean that not all orders given need to be followed? Are the officers orders only followed to a point? If that is true why did Dawson and Downey administer the “code red” to
And I followed it.” (A Few…) From which Downey explains that Dawson told him about their order to perform the code red, and Downey willingly followed Dawson with no hesitation as he worships Dawson for his actions. Dawson however, does not feel this way about Kendrick as Dawson has had the unlucky displeasure to experience Kendrick’s leadership Kendrick, after learning about the incident, ordered a code red to be set for barracks restriction, and the denial of food for a week. Dawson, after personally questioning the morality of the order, disobeyed and tried to assist Lt. Barnes by sneaking him food, an action that displeased Kendrick.
Accountability is a subject that ranges through every spectrum of life. From simply knowing your food supply by opening the refrigerator, to knowing the exact amount of ammunition a military convoy has at its disposal, down to each individual round. When we know what the situation is, and hold each person responsible for they're actions in the situation, that is the concept of accountability at its root. If we are not to hold each other responsible for each of our own actions and choices then we will never be able to correct problems and concerns, which will make us fail as a whole because the smallest individual action can account for the gravest of concequences. In this essay I'm going to show how important accountability is in the everyday life of a United States Marine. I will do this by presenting the textbook definition of accountability then dissecting it and defining it in my own words. I will then show you how the military practices accountability with everything it does; by applying a system that is similiar to that of checks and balances. I will tie into this the Incident that occurd in 29 Palms, CA on August 31, 1988, where the failure to have accountability of all the marines on Base ultimately resulted in the negligent death of one Marine, and the ruined careers of those who were in charge of him. Lastly I will go down to the basic level of the Marine Corps: the life of the individual Marine and how he can, and naturally does to a point, apply accountability to his every action, be it on or off duty.
When looking at the Special Operations (SO) Imperatives, one can gain an understanding of how to change their way of looking at problems that they are faced with in any scenario. By applying these imperatives, Special Forces Soldiers can set the conditions to succeed in any situation that they find themselves in. When reading The Ugly American by William J. Lederer and Eugene Burdick, there are several examples of the correct application and the lack of application of the imperatives throughout the book. Taking a look at the Office of Strategic Service (OSS) linking up with John Colvin during the war, Father Finian and how he operated with and through others, and how Louis Krupitzyn and his wife understood their operational environment and Colonel Hillendale also mastered this skill and was the right man for the job. I will explain how the SO imperatives were applied correctly. Joe Bing and his inability to recognize the political implications while in Setkya and Tom Knox’s return trip from Cambodia serve as great examples of how the imperatives need to be applied correctly.
Having the rank of Sergeant or above they earn that right of respect, because that rank is not given to them. They literally have to earn it by going to Basic Leaders Course and go and standing in front of board members between the ranks of Sergeant First Class, Sergeant Majors, and Command Sergeant Majors to get there promotable status. As a Non Commissioned Officer they are trusted with the power to be able to lead, train and develop soldiers, so disrespect is one thing they shouldn’t have to deal with. Also being in the Army showing disrespect you will get counseled with the title “Disrespect to a Non Commissioned Officer”. It really only takes one DA form 4856 with disrespect to get pushed up for Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) if written correctly. If it’s not written correct, it usually takes two or three to get pushed for UCMJ
Downey’s reliance on Dawson exploits his readiness to blindly obey superiors’ orders due to Downey’s incapability to compose a rational decision for himself. Fromm logically analyzes the way in which the characteristic of trust influences a person’s actions when unjust orders are demanded of them (Fromm 127). Moreover, Fromm discusses his belief that in order for one to disobey, one must possess the boldness to individually err from what is demanded; however, boldness is a quality that Downey appears to lack (127). Utilizing personal examples, Fromm’s work also displays how Downey’s trust stems from the sensation of safety provided by Dawson. Dawson is perceived as a role model to Downey, which Fromm would effectively support due to his idea that a dependent individual feels “safe and protected” under an authority, even though Dawson’s commands are unjust (Fromm 127).
The motion picture A Few Good Men challenges the question of why Marines obey their superiors’ orders without hesitation. The film illustrates a story about two Marines, Lance Corporal Harold W. Dawson and Private First Class Louden Downey charged for the murder of Private First Class William T. Santiago. Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, who is known to be lackadaisical and originally considers offering a plea bargain in order to curtail Dawson’s and Downey’s sentence, finds himself fighting for the freedom of the Marines; their argument: they simply followed the orders given for a “Code Red”. The question of why people follow any order given has attracted much speculation from the world of psychology. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, conducted an experiment in which randomly selected students were asked to deliver “shocks” to an unknown subject when he or she answered a question wrong. In his article, “The Perils of Obedience”, Milgram concludes anyone will follow an order with the proviso that it is given by an authoritative figure. Two more psychologists that have been attracted to the question of obedience are Herbert C. Kelman, a professor at Harvard University, and V. Lee Hamilton, a professor at the University of Maryland. In their piece, Kelman and Hamilton discuss the possibilities of why the soldiers of Charlie Company slaughtered innocent old men, women, and children. The Marines from the film obeyed the ordered “Code Red” because of how they were trained, the circumstances that were presented in Guantanamo Bay, and they were simply performing their job.
Milgram complies with a follow-up questionnaire of a subject. In the follow-up, the man was appalled by the way he was able to be obedient throughout the experiment and states that his wife referred to him as Eichmann, a WWII Nazi official who maintained an alibi of merely following orders (Milgram 84). Complying with Szegedy-Maszak and Milgram, Robert Hoyk, a doctor of psychology, found similar results in the work office. In his article “Roots of Unethical Behavior,” he found that bosses can direct employees to do unethical actions which the employees morally question. But due to fear of losing their job, the employees perform these acts (Hoyk). Milgram would agree with Hoyk and add that for his experiment, the “experimenter” was simply a man in a lab coat and did not threaten with any form of consequence. How does that relate to Szegedy-Maszak and the Abu Ghraib scandal? In the article “Military Orders: To Obey or Not to Obey?” written by Rod Powers, the oath in which all military personnel must swear to is written. The oath states, “. . . and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice” (Powers). As mentioned by Powers, these recruits are instilled with the practice of obeying immediately and without question (Powers). In fact, if military personnel do not obey their superior officers, it is considered a crime by Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to the same site, such acts are punishable by death (www.usmilitary.about.com). Szegedy-Maszak might conclude that this could be a possible reason as to why those American troops found that they were
In Scales of Justice it is shown that there is a certain hierarchy and those in higher positions often dominate and control those in positions that are below them. A classic example of this is Sergeant O’Rourke and Probationary Constable Webber. O’Rourke is basically a bully in his position.
Professional Military Education schools teach the Army Ethic and evaluation reports for leaders affirm this ethic. The Army punishes individuals, especially leaders, who violate this code. The Army administratively punishes Soldiers who do not adhere to this code, and the severity of punishment increases with rank. One recent and highly visible example of this is former General Petraeus’s adultery and the subsequent professional sanctions he experienced. The Army grows its own ethical code and maintains it through the American people.
Besides, his actions continued to be abusive when Claudio’s sister, Isabella, comes to beg for her brother’s life. He proposes Isabella to sleep with him and only then he would agree not to sentence Claudio to death. In this case, he also uses his authority to gain what he wants, which is obviously an abuse of power. Another example of the abuse of power is in “A Few Good Men.” In the movie two U.S. Marines, Dawson, and Downey, are judged in a court-martial for killing their colleague, Private Santiago and are defended by LT Kaffee with the assistance of Cmdr. Galloway. The defenders are suspicious about the details of the murder and the storyline about Santiago. According to it, Santiago was not respecting commands, requiring to be transferred and his fellow Marines decided to train him into a better Marine. They suspect that the “Code Red,” which is an extrajudicial punishment, was ordered and carried out by two Marines. De facto, “Code Red” was ordered by Colonel Jessep, and LT Kaffee can make him confess it under pressure in the court-martial. Thus, Colonel’s example also shows abusive behavior as he used his power to achieve what he wanted bearing in mind the fact that U.S. Marines could not disobey orders. Therefore, it could be seen that law enforcement does not always mean applying the letter of the law and following the rule
Flannery O’Connor is known for her grotesque tales, and “A Good Man Is Hard to Find” is no exception. The story follows a family’s journey to Florida and their encounter with a wanted criminal, the Misfit. While the family drives through the woods, the Grandmother startles Bailey, the driver, which causes him to wreck the car. A car stops by the accident, but unfortunately it is the Misfit and his henchmen. The family is quickly killed off by the Misfit’s henchmen, leaving the Grandmother alone trying to persuade the Misfit to not kill her. Following the Grandmother’s epiphany, the Misfit shoots her after she tries to touch him. O’Connor presents the ending in an ambiguous way, asking readers if the Misfit will remain the same criminal he was
Now for the Army, it becomes an obligation more than“willingness” while you have to be willing to do it as well. Those that are unable to be accountable are the ones that jeopardize the combat readiness of any unit. Basically it is the understanding that from the bottom up. Top down and laterally everyone is going to do and is willing to do the right thing even when no one else is looking. This is practiced at your home base where everyone is assigned tasks and details not only including your own job that you are expected to do and do right but hold others accountable as well as a system of “check yourself, then check your buddy.” Doing the job correctly and ensuring others do it as well and do it safely are all part of accountability in the military as one does not have to experience combat to understand that just being in the military is inherently dangerous given the types of equipment and weapons that are used to train and deploy with. As an example any live weapons range you go to part of the safety brief is “everyone here is a range safety” meaning anyone can call a cease fire if they observe dangerous behavior or a situation regardless of rank and it can be a Colonel or a brand new private, does not matter. As such in that event everyone becomes accountable not only for the operation of the range, the mission objective to have everyone qualify but do it in a safe
The same idea of an unwavering hierarchy that extends beyond title and into the deep roots of merit are inherent in both concepts. Even dealing with other branches of service, there are certain expectations to be upheld when dealing with an officer, a senior enlisted, and even with your peers. Officers are saluted by enlisted members, just as junior enlisted members stand at parade rest when addressing Non-Commissioned Officers (NCO). This level of respect would continue on into a civilian environment, although no saluting would be present in civilian attire. For example, a lower enlisted member could be at a restaurant or a bar over the weekend and happen to see his Company Commander. Even out of the work environment and military setting, the should still subtly take each other’s rank into account with everything said, such as a “Sir” every now and then from the enlisted member as well as avoiding certain comments that could get a soldier in trouble when dealing with his Chain of Command. This same level of military bearing will also carry on into encounters with civilians as military members and prior service member can almost always be spotted in a crowd with relative ease. Bearing can be taught at a basic level, but one must have the initiative to follow the guidance set before them and behave a certain
The soldiers at My Lai were in an environment conducive to obeying orders. They have been trained to follow the orders of their commanders; respect for authority is weighed heavily upon. It is hard for them to disobey because they have been integrated into the social structure of the military and when in the middle of a war they would have nowhere to turn if they choose to disobey the orders of their commanders. The consequences of disobedience for them could be sent to death. A classic example of the power of authoritative factors is provided by Stanley Milgram’s
First, there is respect, just because you have the rank and status of an officer doesn’t mean those below you in your command are going to respect you. A lot of people are going into the army as officers thinking everyone owes them something and that they have to do what they say. All I can say to that is, you’re in for a rude awakening. As officers we should respect those below us and talk to them as a leader should not a boss especially our NCOS and PSG. I believe that they are the best asset a young officer has at his disposal due to their knowledge and