As far as I'm concerned, as long as they are not ordered to commit war crimes, I do not consider individual actions of soldiers to be immoral, even if I don't agree with the rationale for the war. I have no problem separating that view from the "we were just following orders" defense of Nazi death camp guards. They were not engaged against a combatitve enemy, they were killing civilians. HUGE difference. When an American soldier is fighting a member of Al Quaida in Iraq, a die-hard ex member of Sadaam's red guard, or an inidividual Iraqi citizen with a gun and a grudge, both players have agreed in principle to the implicit contract of war.
It's an ugly reality, and the very reason that, while I'm not an absolute pacifist, I believe war should be a last resort, not the first. But I don't see it as being as black-and-white as that for a soldier. Unless there are egregious, tangible violations of the "rules" of war, not just political disagreements regarding the justification, then I will not blame a soldier for doing what they signed on to do.
__________________
'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.'
-TJ
|