Intimate History of Killing
Throughout Johanna Bourke’s, Intimate History of Killing, she dissects secrets and events through some of history’s most notable wars and uses correspondents from troops, documents, and events to help reinforce her thesis. In exploring her book, we are confronted with many stories how the military uses priests, psychologists and comrades to help strength the soldiers willingness to kill. These key individuals help create an effective soldier that has a reason and a want to kill his enemy. This essay argues the premise that in war, the military employs strategic psychological plans to help soldiers perform their jobs as killers. These plans give emotional support to soldiers when coming face to face with killing an
…show more content…
This particular asset is the brotherhood soldiers’ forged during battle. This, band of brother, creates a strong connecting between the soldiers, much like those of a tightly knit family. This connection allows the soldiers to watch out for one another, just as brothers do. She depicts that while men are at war, they use each other as support and motivation to help encourage their comrades to perform as instructed. She discusses the value of comradeship in the opening of the chapter, Love and Hate, “The power of love and friendship in enticing men to kill has been widely commented upon… combatants reported they were able to kill because of the love they felt for their comrades” (130). This proves that during times of war, soldiers look towards one another for encouragement and to achieve recognition to boost their psyche. This, in turn, helps the military keep the troop’s moral high and also helps creates a more affective killing machine. This helps the military’s objective and reduces down time caused by soldiers who are unwilling to fight in …show more content…
She discovers that priests and other religious figures have an empowering effect on soldier during times of war. Her research proves that when a priest or religious figure deems actions of killing acceptable, the soldiers become more aggressive towards their enemies and the country’s civilians without having remorse. Bourke proves that the military uses religious figures in these ways from the writings of a radio operator in World War 2. The radio operator’s note states, “Why, Padre John, do the churches not tell us we are doing an evil job? Why do chaplains persist in telling us that we are preforming a noble task in defense of Christian Civilization? Don’t let anyone tell us what we are doing is noble. What we are doing is evil” (292). This explains how the religious figures tell the soldiers that they are doing noble actions during the course of war just to help them cope with the horrifying tragedies they inflict. The military encourage this so the soldiers can perform actions of murder without having regret and thinking wrong of it. The religious figures are an essential role for the military do to the psychological encouragement they put upon the
G.K.Chesterton once quoted, “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.” The novel Three Day Road by Joseph Boyden, recounts the struggles of a Canadian soldier through his tedious and terrible experiences fighting for his country against the Germans. Throughout the novel, the protagonist was disgusted by the blood and trauma war brings, however, he knew that it was imperative to kill, or else he would not have survived. In war, it is kill or be killed, someone who is wise will kill to survive and protect his country, as well as avenge his family or comrades.
“We did not break down, but adapted ourselves” These soldiers know that modern warfare is extremely complicated and demands knowledge and experience. They learn how the differentiate shell sounds, when to take cover, when it’s safe to take off your gas mask, how to tell shrapnel from high explosives. It is shown through the naive and inexperienced recruits that not knowing and applying this knowledge is fatal. Some soldiers call on their innermost animal instincts to allow them to kill mercilessly on the field, using the assistance of a metaphor Remarque writes “We are dead men with no feelings, who are able by some trick to keep on running and keep on killing.” Granted war is a barbaric affair, ironically sometimes the worst of conditions can bring out the best in people. This is through the form of comrade and mate ship. On the field fellow soldiers would provide mutual support for each other and create extremely tight bonds. This is shown in All Quiet on the Western Front through Paul and his tight nit platoon. Paul’s unique experience with mate ship is how especially close he is with his friend Kat. This is expressed in the recounting of when they stole and cooked a goose together. Remarque writes “We don't talk much, but I believe we have a more complete communion with one another than even lovers have.” This shows how mate ship was
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.
In The things they carried we see men that are together fighting the same war, however, every one of them are fighting an emotional burden creating loneliness and isolation not unification. For example we see this in Jimmy Cross as he holds onto the picture of Martha. It shows the love and thoughts he has for her, and with him holding unto it gives the sense of isolation he is carrying. His feelings of always wanting to touch her really show the lonely feelings that he is all alone and far away from every reaching Martha. Loneliness is presence in the men even after the war. We see this in “Speaking of Courage” where Norman Bowker is aimlessly driving around a lake near his hometown, thinking
Clashing swords, miraculous survivals, pain of loss, and heroic sacrifice are all terrifying yet thrilling moments in a battle. The strong possibility of death and the frailty of human life add into the suspense of battle. Yet the reasons behind the wars, death, and suspense can be overlooked. The stories behind the warriors who have died will not be told again, but the stories of warriors still alive are what give the men strength to continue fighting against impossible odds. Ultimately, the reason of why a man would risk his life in battle is for someone, or something, he loves.
Ordinary Men Christopher Browning describes how the Reserve Police Battalion 101, like the rest of German society, was immersed in a flood of racist and anti-Semitic propaganda. Browning describes how the Order Police provided indoctrination both in basic training and as an ongoing practice within each unit. Many of the members were not prepared for the killing of Jews. The author examines the reasons some of the police officers did not shoot. The physiological effect of isolation, rejection, and ostracism is examined in the context of being assigned to a foreign land with a hostile population.
...test, it is hard not to draw some parallels. Milgram noticed that if people did not have direct contact with the people they were inflicting pain on, two-thirds of the subjects inflicted what was considered extreme pain. If they had visual and voice feedback, only forty percent obeyed orders. The number fell to thirty percent if they were in direct contact with the person they were shocking. Browning also points out that the social pressures of conformity were quite apparent. "Within virtually every social collective, the peer group exerts tremendous pressures on behavior and sets the moral norms. If the men of Reserve Police Battalion 101 could become killers under such circumstances, what group of men cannot?" (Browning, 189) In closing, these men, who appeared to be quite ordinary, became extraordinary in their brutality and killing, no matter what the reason. Decidedly, their contribution to the genocide was quite significant. It is a shame that many received little, or no punishment for the slaughter they participated in.
War has a definite effect on the mentality of a soldier, so much so that many result in insanity during or after the leave of combat. Timothy Findley’s The Wars, portrays the “stupidity, futility and the horror of the terrible losses of the First World War, describing war as an image of the worst that can be within a man” (Anne Nothof Interview). Findley portrays mental aspects as well as physical, that lead to Robert Ross’ demises, specifically, the conditions of war, overall aspect of war taking someone’s life and the feeling of loneliness and silence.
When Kiowa died, the soldiers spent all their time looking for their friend’s body, even though he already died, they would not just let him be buried in the mud and people stepping on him. This shows ta they all cared about each other. Also, the young soldier’s reaction to Kiowa’s death,” He pictured Kiowa’s face. They’d been close buddies, the tightest..” (In the field,163). The soldiers built friendships at war, they became a
Having no brothers and growing up in a household full of women, I often sought out brotherhood in any possible way, whether that is in the form of schoolhouse friends, teammates, or fellow soldiers...
Comradeship has been a way to escape many problems for people all throughout history. It has proven to be a shelter during war time. In All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remaruqe, camaraderie is the only haven Paul and the other have. Comradeship is a refuge for the soldiers on the front lines. For soldiers during World War 1, it gave them close relationships. The close relationships are unique because of the experiences they go through together. Comradeship provided soldiers with sanity. Seeing friends and enemies dying every day is enough to make a person go mad, but with the refuge of comradeship, it helps their minds. Camaraderie gave soldiers a desire to be alive. The terrors of war made many soldiers want to give up and die, but comradeship gave the men a reason to live. For Paul and many soldiers, comradeship is a haven because it provides them with relationships closer than what they had with their family members, keeps them from going insane,
The mannerisms, attitudes, and background of the American and British soldiers contrasted greatly. The values held by the individual soldiers of the two armies differed. American soldiers had a tendency to think on their own accord and often with liberty in mind (143). In contrast, the British soldiers held the values that their army held (144). American soldiers often fought with the same men from their town or village (142). The British soldiers, however, were pulled from society and isolated from it (144). During the time of the British soldiers’ isolation, they were tightly disciplined and rigorously trained (144). This too shows a contrast between the British and American soldiers. British soldiers underwent a stricter regimen of training while the training Americans had was more informal. The commanding men of the armies, the officers, were different as well. The British officers held themselves aloof from war and quite distant from their men (145). British officers were also much harsher on their men and trained them more effectively (136). The American officer sought to achieve the refinement of the British officers but often failed in achieving it. (145). The training American officers gave to their men was also not as cohesive like the
War has been a constant part of human history. It has greatly affected the lives of people around the world. These effects, however, are extremely detrimental. Soldiers must shoulder extreme stress on the battlefield. Those that cannot mentally overcome these challenges may develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Sadly, some resort to suicide to escape their insecurities. Soldiers, however, are not the only ones affected by wars; family members also experience mental hardships when their loved ones are sent to war. Timothy Findley accurately portrays the detrimental effects wars have on individuals in his masterpiece The Wars.
The friendships and bonds that formed in the jungles of Vietnam between the members of Alpha Company help them to survive on a day to day basis. Not only while they were in Vietnam, but also in dealing with their lives back in the United States. Without the bonds of friendship none of the men of Alpha Company would have survived mentally or physically the strains and trauma of the Vietnam War. In the end it is realized that the men not only carried their gear and weapons, but they carried with them bonds, friendship and a connection that only the men of Alpha Company will ever really understand.
Usually when someone is murdered, people expect the murderer to feel culpable. This though, is not the case in war. When in war, a soldier is taught that the enemy deserves to die, for no other reason than that they are the nation’s enemy. When Tim O’Brien kills a man during the Vietnam War, he is shocked that the man is not the buff, wicked, and terrifying enemy he was expecting. This realization overwhelms him in guilt. O’Brien’s guilt has him so fixated on the life of his victim that his own presence in the story—as protagonist and narrator—fades to the black. Since he doesn’t use the first person to explain his guilt and confusion, he negotiates his feelings by operating in fantasy—by imagining an entire life for his victim, from his boyhood and his family to his feeling about the war and about the Americans. In The Man I Killed, Tim O’Brien explores the truth of The Vietnam War by vividly describing the dead body and the imagined life of the man he has killed to question the morality of killing in a war that seems to have no point to him.