So Originally today's post was going to revolve around an article a friend of mine sent me that would've focused on racism. And while I'm still going to write on that sometime soon, this was fresh in my head and I needed to get it down.
I recorded the 1992 film A Few Good Men on my DVR the other day. I've been aware of this film for a long time, mainly for the line "You can't handle the truth" by Jack Nicholson's character while on the stand. In more recent years I've become aware of it more for it's overall features as a good film, including acting and the way the story was told. I was not overly aware of it's contents.
The synopsis of the film is pretty straightforward (and if you're particulary picky about spoilers I suggest you don't read this blog).
A couple of marines at GitMo are on trial for murdering a fellow marine (who was planning on ratting out one of said marines for a transfer). In an effort to have the case finished with as quickly as possible, Tom Cruise's character is chosen to represent the defendents, as he is known for his tendency to take plea deals.
However, after some urging from Demi Moore's character, Cruise's character finds that there is more to the case than it seems. The two marines were following a direct order from their chain of command to issue a "Code Red," a sort of hazing used to acknowledge and remind marines of their status as part of a unit. When the code red ends in the marine's death, the two are blamed.
More and more is uncovered in the case and it is found that Jack Nicholson's character, the Colonol had issued an order for the marines not to harm the victim, yet supposedly had issued his transfer, and then secretly instructed for a "Code Red" with no true intention of transfering the marine.
In the end, the Colonol is arrested (as code reds are technically not allowed, and he lied and falsified documents). The two marines are cleared of the charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder, but are found guilty of conduct unbefitting a marine and dishonorably discharged. All this despite following direct orders they would've been discharged for not following.
This is a sadly accurate depiction of what would probably happen if such a case truly existed. And it's rather sad, because a marine that does his or her job and serves his or her country suffers for following a simple command that they would be penalized for not obeying as well. Meanwhile, anyone higher on the chain of command rarely faces true punishment due to varying issues from connections to the shame it would bring the branch of the military. And yet it's the common, everyday marines that face the most danger in times of trouble and are the first to suffer when something goes wrong.
The movie was indeed strong, but for differing reasons than film buffs may believe, because it brings to light a sorry bureacracy that many are ignorant of and that should not exist, especially when it comes to deciding the fate of those who choose to defend us.
1 comment:
You make a good point here. What's sad is this happens more often than people think -- Abu Ghraib is actually partially caused by people just following orders. A lot of the Nazis were just following orders. And it sucks when someone tries to step in and say they were right or wrong for following or not following orders. At that point is just up to those service people to judge whether should or not and be ready to defend themselves and possibly accept discharge. There's no pro side to the whole thing, unfortunately. It's totally lose-lose.
Post a Comment