At least it’s not a Windows product…
Of course we rationalised it - I didn’t kill anyone, nor was my job to kill people - that’s what pilots of the F-16s I just loaded with weapons did. I just loaded the weapons and made sure they worked.
But that’s not the same thing as saying that many military members cannot understand or refuse to understand that their job means killing people, directly or indirectly. I would argue the opposite - having to rationalize means most do understand, and need to find a coping mechanism for having to do something pretty farking horrible.
That’s basically the “I’m the driver, not the shooter” argument. It doesn’t work. The guy who loads the weapons is a killer just as much as the guy that fires them.
Even worse it could be Vista. By the time you’d have got through the permission screens you’d be dead.
Of course, which is why I said it was a rationalization. People make all sorts of excuses to themselves to make their actions easier to live with, especially if those actions are as unpleasant as killing someone.
Personal anecdote - I was a weapons loader in the Air Force from 1991-1995. I spent time in Turkey supporting aircraft flying patrols over the ‘No-Fly’ Zone in Iraq several times. We had two missions - shoot down any fixed-wing aircraft that did not have the right IFF codes, and blow up any SAM sites that engaged our planes. In the course of this second mission, the pilots would often fly low and slow over SAM sites in an attempt to get the enemy to engage; if they did, the second flight of aircraft would nail the site with HARM (high-speed anti-radiation missiles) and then scatter the sites with CBU-87 cluster bombs. At least 4 times, weapons I loaded were launched at the SAM sites - both HARMs and CBU-87s. At least twice weapons I loaded shot down aircraft, including one friendly-fire incident against UN helicopters with incorrect IFF codes. This means, in all likelyhood, that weapons I loaded killed people. I took arming loops from the spent CBUs and wore them around my neck on my dog tags so I would never forget this, but in public and to my friends and family I would say things like “I don’t fire the weapons, I just load them.” It’s nothing more than a coping mechanism.
Okay, so you tell your friends and family that there’s a difference. Do you think it possible that some recruits might actually be taken in by that claim … then change their minds once they find the reality firsthand?
I think you’re missing my point a bit - I told others that, but never could convince myself that I didn’t help kill those people. I told people I was just an enabler because it was easier to explain than the conflicting emotions that resulted in being a party to killing other people, not because I actually believed it.
As for others, perhaps they believe the rationalization. They’re not me, so I can’t say.
Maybe, but it’s pretty hard to believe that anyone could be so dense as to not understand that their actions are resulting in the deaths of others, or could join the military in a combat role and not think they were going to see combat when the country is at war.
I’ve seen a few.
Gives new meaning to “blue screen of death.”
Cervaise wins the thread.
Well, in this as in all things, YMMV. I knew of one, who I was fairly certain was actually mentally retarded and I have no idea how he got in or how he passed tech school, who might not have understood, but he was definitely in the minority.
I can recall being told in boot camp that not only would nobody come looking for you if you went AWOL, but the MPs “actively wait” for time to pass, as the penalty for a longer absence is greater than for a short one. Eventually you’ll get caught, and they’ll have the last laugh.