What should we be teaching our soldiers about the conduct of war?

They are not, but they're a starting point.

SOCOM has been at the center of some very contentious incidents, which seems to be the result of their greater utilization in conflicts that revolve around insurgency rather than "standard" warfare. Standard formations have had their own incidents, but the greater incidence appears centered around the very small community that is seeing what some see as overutilization. They seem to be the "canary in the coal mine."

Are we failing to properly train our soldiers in the "rules of war" or is the leadership telling themselves (and the rank and file) that the ends justify the means? Are we allowing "bad apples" to spoil the barrel?

As a junior enlisted, I was instructed rather heavily in the Articles of the Geneva Convention, what constitutes a Lawful Order and to refuse Unlawful Orders. I understand that "this is war" and bad things happen, and, thankfully, I have never had to really put my training to the test, but do you feel that we've strayed too far from the path?

SPC John Tacetta - When you say "we've", do you mean you and I, USSOCOM, the military and DoD as a whole, or the entire nation? Too many convoluting factors to tell. Are we talking about actual or perception? Are there more incidents in USSOCOM, or are they just scrutinized more? Is it just a few "bad apples" or institutionalized?

At some level I feel you must think we have - strayed that is - which became the motive to ask the question. So for arguments sake, lets say "we" have. What do you suggest be done about it? What does proper "law of war" training look like? How often? How do you evaluate the lessons have been learned prior to deployment into an actual combat theater? How much time and money will additional training cost, and is the juice ultimately worth the squeeze? Is it a problem of ignorance, culture, or morality? If it is the latter, you are not going to get much out of additional training.

It is a question and problem similar, and potentially related to, the question of how to prevent or reduce veteran suicides. A couple of training standdowns just isn't going to cut it. It is a much deeper and engrained issue, and I don't feel the DoD is properly equipped or structured to address it without seriously detracting from the primary defense and warfighting mission.

Yes. All of the above.
Dark sites, extraordinary renditions, denying irregulars captured in arms combatant status, stress positions, and enhanced interrogations, as examples. During my enlistment these were all held out as illegal acts punishable under the UCMJ. Now they seem "acceptable" even if morally questionable. The end justifying the means. Which course should we be teaching our warriors?

I hadn't thought of the suicide aspect, but, as Major Fishback argued, perhaps our soldiers' participation in actions that they find morally antithetical to their upbringing, but that might be tolerated or encouraged in Theatre., has produced a "psychic trauma" that our returning Vets are failing to reconcile. I'm not talking about killing in the line of duty, but the dissonance between dehumanizing the enemy and seeing their actual humanity. Many may pass through this gauntlet unscathed, but clearly there's a wreckage of broken bodies and minds to contend with. Having lived through the Vietnam era I don't remember suicides outnumbering combat casualties in the aftermath of that conflict. As some have crudely pointed out elsewhere on this site, there seems to be no shortage of blue cords in the homeless shelters MSgt Steve Sweeney .

SPC John Tacetta - Suicide is sometimes a slow process... But at the core of both issues is morality and culture.

I cannot vote you up more than once, and that's a shame.

Having served numerous combat tours, it seems to me that both men can speak knowledgably about field operations.

Gallagher was the "tough guy" kicking ass and taking names and only ran into trouble has his travails bled, so to speak, outside his community. The brass, belatedly tried to rein him in, but the highest power lauded him and gave him a pass. Now he's strutting about.

Fishback wrestled with the psychic trauma he felt his men suffered by engaging in acts that he saw as counter to the ideals embodied in the Geneva Convention. He passed in relative obscurity.

Who has more to teach us about the ethics of warfare, if one can ask such a question?

I must have served an IPA.

my point is tgat you can not develop trainjng and development including operational techniques based on the experiences of an individual or even a small group from the same mindsets. I to served a few days in the Army, I respect and value the contributions of all, I have led and supported conventional, and joint, including multinational service members, as well as Special Forces in sector. They all had various operational playbook, none like the other, and all effective for their specialty’s. We all had one thing in common, the Theatre Commands rules of engagement.

In closing I have a great respect for your service as well. Thank you, SPC John Tacetta

i fully respect your service, I too have been around the the battlefield a bit. My point was not that these men/Warriors do not have value in operational tactics, it is simply a fact that no one man can design operational tactics for the services. They both had operational experience and value to this operations. My experience comes from being the Soldier in the field of operation, up to the Senior Enlisted Leader for many organizations having conventional, joint, and multinational experience.

On the field of battle each organization had standing operational order tgat are inferred by the senior leaders concept of the enemy and how they need to be treated in any environment. It takes a team of experienced strategists to do see t all aspects of the mission at hand to determine the glide path for operations within the scope of the rules of engagement. The Warriors identified certainly have extremely valuable input, but neither can derive tactical responses to any given situation.

I respect these men and the challenges I mourn for any loss of life of any citizen let alone a brother at arms. These men both e soured sone very challenging situations and deserve our full respect where appropriate. Thank you for your very valuable insights. SPC John Tacetta