There is a pervasive idea in today’s American society that regardless of political
philosophy or party affiliation, one must never criticize the members of the
United States military. Conventional wisdom holds that we must appreciate the
sacrifice soldiers have made to “fight for our freedom,” and even if one is
against the war, they must always “support the troops.” This line of thinking
is not coming solely from the pro-war crowd; many of those who consider themselves
antiwar (or at least oppose a specific war or conflict) have the utmost regard
for those who fight in them. But is this canonization of those who take up arms
in the name of the United States government truly just? Or is it a falsehood
based on propaganda, emotion, and a lack of critical thinking?
The first myth that must be debunked is the previously-mentioned
idea that the job of a soldier is to protect “our freedom.” This assertion is
unequivocally untrue. The role of U.S. soldiers, first and foremost, is to obey
the orders of their government and commanders, whether these orders support
or infringe upon the freedoms of Americans and those in other countries. A soldier
is not beholden to the average American, but instead to a small group of people
in authority. His job is not to keep us free, but to do what he is told, even
if that includes participating in the deaths of innocent people. Propaganda
slogans aside (“a government for the people, by the people”), governments are
not the people of a country. A soldier is not accountable to us, but to them.
Many troop supporters would also point out that the job of a soldier includes
disobeying illegal orders. In theory, this seems like an appropriate safeguard.
But in practice, this rarely happens. Take the 2003 Iraq War, for instance,
which was viewed by many in the US as an unconstitutional war. The war was also
viewed by United
Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a violation of international law.
In theory, one would have expected a sizable contingent of soldiers to disobey
the orders of President George W. Bush and refuse to step foot on Iraqi soil.
Instead, a full-fledged invasion was launched. There are numerous other instances
of soldiers breaking the law to do what they are told, whether it be the torture
of detainees at Abu Ghraib or the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War. Even
for soldiers who refuse to break the law, the legality of a war or order is
fairly irrelevant in practice; those who are in power are able to bend the law
to their liking, as the Bush administration did when it argued
that “enhanced interrogation” (otherwise known as torture) was not in violation
of the Geneva Convention. It is entirely possible that an individual soldier
could at least attempt to opt out of performing illegal actions. But, there’s
a…