With me is James Turner Johnson, a professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey and the coeditor of the JOURNAL OF MILITARY ETHICS. Also Al Pierce, who teaches ethics at the National Defense University in Washington. And from Atlanta, Georgia, Lawrence Colburn, a helicopter gunner in Vietnam who saw the massacre at My Lai and helped stop it.Mr. Colburn, sometimes -- rarely -- troops go in combat, go on a rampage, and violate the rules against killing civilians. Can you explain from your experience why that happens?
LAWRENCE COLBURN (Vietnam Veteran): I think in the heat of combat, when soldiers see their brothers in arms killed before their eyes, something primal snaps inside of a person, and it's an urge to seek revenge. And that's something that's very difficult for the soldier to control. Leadership is so important at this level, in that if the leadership looses control and escalates the situation, it will only intensify.ABERNETHY: Have you yourself had that feeling?
Mr. COLBURN: Yes, I've experienced that myself. I've seen my friends wounded and killed and it's -- I think it's a normal part of the psyche that surfaces, and our unwritten rule in the gun company was if you were going out for revenge, make sure you pick a worthy opponent and try to capture a weapon.
ABERNETHY: No killing of civilians?
Mr. COLBURN: No, you cannot indiscriminately just become judge, jury, and executioner.
ABERNETHY: James Turner Johnson, what are the rules?
Professor JAMES TURNER JOHNSON (Rutgers University): Well, the most fundamental one, as we were just talking about it, is that you should distinguish between combatants and noncombatants. Noncombatants are people that are not directly, intentionally, and immediately involved in the carrying on of hostilities. It is the soldier's obligation not to do direct, intentional harm to them. This is an old rule and the moral tradition. It is part of the law of war, and it is part of the rules of engagement.ABERNETHY: But it must be so terribly difficult, as it was in Vietnam, is now in Iraq, to know who is who.
Prof. JOHNSON: Oh, it's very difficult. And the purpose of the insurgents' tactics includes blurring the line between combatants and noncombatants so as to force our people to do things that they are not supposed to be doing and know they are not supposed to be doing.
ABERNETHY: Al Pierce, you teach ethics. The commanding general in Iraq has said everybody's going to stand down. Everybody's going to go to a refresher course in what he calls the "core values." What are they?
Professor AL PIERCE (National Defense University): Well, the core values for the marines are honor, courage, and commitment. And I think that those apply in the kind of situation that the soldiers and marines find themselves in in Iraq. Honor means doing the right thing, making the distinction that Jim Johnson just referred to between combatants and noncombatants. Courage is also relevant, because it's not just physical courage. It's the moral courage to step forward if you see someone, even a brother in arms, as Larry said, violating the rules -- you are obligated to try to do something to stop that, to put the rules back into place.
Mr. COLBURN: Yes, sir. He was the decision maker that day, and he's the one who took a stand and intervened and did what he could to save the innocents.
Prof. PIERCE: I don't think breaking the rules can be excused, but I think what Jim and Larry were saying points to a phenomenon with all of the anger and the emotion and the fear and the chaos of the battlefield. There are what I call the forces of moral gravity that drag soldiers down, pull them down, away from the rules they were taught. And they do things that on one level they know they shouldn't do. But back to the point about leadership, that's what leadership is supposed to do, is to pull them back and resist those forces of gravity so they don't succumb to the emotions and the anger and the fear and the chaos.
