Military ethics set for examination
By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer
Symposium at USD will examine conscientious objectors and issues in Iraq war | ∞
"Is the military forcing into battle troops who should be granted conscientious objector status?"
That is just one of the military ethics questions that will be discussed and debated next week during a two-day conference at the University of San Diego.
More than 100 professors and military policy specialists from around the country are gathering at the school's Mother Rosalie Hill Hall on Jan. 24-25 for the 18th International Symposium on Military Ethics.
Retired U.S. Navy SEAL Capt. Robert Schoultz said Monday that while conscientious objectors is a theme of this year's gathering, current ethical issues such as the slayings of Iraqi civilians at the hand of Camp Pendleton troops also are expected to be discussed.
"I've been pretty appalled at the degree to which much of the American public wants to excuse these cases," Schoultz said.
Now director of the university's master's degree program in global leadership studies, Schoultz said he has talked privately with Marine Corps officers who have been disappointed in how some senior commanders in Iraq disdain taking prisoners during battle.
Schoultz said others have expressed displeasure with the service looking for what he called scapegoats when incidents such as the 2005 killing of two dozen civilians at Haditha occur. Two Camp Pendleton officers and two enlisted men face courts-martial this year in connection with that incident.
Conversely, Schoultz said others have been impressed with the degree to which midlevel officers work to instill battlefield ethics and the rules of engagement in the troops under their command.
But the conference's main theme is those who don't want to fight. A Government Accountability Office report late last year showed the Marine Corps granted conscientious objector status to only one-third of the nearly 100 active-duty troops and reservists who applied for that designation in the last four years, a rate far lower than that of the other armed services.
The report, prepared for Congress, said Marines accounted for 93 of the 425 U.S. troops who sought to leave the military as conscientious objectors between 2002 and 2006.
Conscientious objectors must show convincing evidence they oppose war on religious, ethical or moral beliefs and that those convictions are sincere and deeply held. Opposing a specific conflict, such as the war in Iraq, won't earn someone a conscientious objector discharge or a reassignment.
One of the speakers set to lecture on military ethics, Lt. Col. Sean Hannah of the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, N.Y., said Monday that a firm moral compass translates to combat effectiveness.
"It is the ethical nature of our forces that provides the internal motivation for our soldiers to keep fighting and deal with combat stresses," said Hannah, who also is associated with the Army's Center of Excellence for the Professional Military Ethic established at the academy in November. "The vast majority of soldiers will do the right thing in situations that are largely incomprehensible to people who haven't been exposed to the horrors of war."
Hannah is one of the few active-duty officers scheduled to speak at the symposium, which is open to the general public. The event also will examine use of military contractors such as Blackwater Worldwide in Iraq and use of nonlethal weaponry.
Those wishing to attend the event can register on-site for a fee of $80. For more information and the conference agenda, see the Web site http://www.usafa.edu/isme/Info08.html.
-- Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
It's simple wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:37 PM:If you don't want to fight....DON'T JOIN THE MILITARY!! Give them all a dishonorable discharge...they're not fullfilling their contract. They took an oath. Now when it comes time to live up to it...they don't wanna. Let them go home. Wouldn't want them next to the brave Marines fighting on the battelfield who could not depend on them.
Charles wrote on Jan 16, 2008 12:12 AM:I see the district is cutting higher paid staff positions and this makes sense. May I suggest anyone with assisistant in their title be eliminated, except for assistant principles, they do allot of work. Combine some head management jobs at the district level and do a serious evaluation of high paid positions, are they really needed?
Al wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:13 AM:Last time I check, we had an all-volunteer military. Furthermore, the job of the military is to fight. If you don't want to go into combat, don't join the military. There ain't no free rides. Conscientious objectors should be given a vacation equal to the balance of their enlistment contract. It would be at that infamous facility in Cuba. They would not guard the prison, rather they would get to live in it. A rotten place for some rotten apples.
Billy wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM: You can forget anything the people at this conference say. They are trying to pad their own existence on the backs of our volunteer military. They should find themselves a real job and perhaps do some hard work and keep their mouth shut, and let the peoples elected officials and military handle the ethics. It might behoove them to reconstruct their own ethics. I can not tolerate people who seek to make a profit on others mistakes.
! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:51 PM:sounds like the same clown wrote all these posts. Dude you need to mellow out
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement