The fine line between war and murder

Too often the MSM prints or reports headlines that give no details and no context.

In this article, the CSMonitor gives it's usual thoughtful discussion on the problem, giving concrete examples, such as what do you do when your prisoner goes for the gun of your partner, and in hindsight it turns out he was merely stumbling? or what about this example?

But some also suggest that the uncertain nature of an urban insurgency has created new ethical questions. "In training, one way to clear a building is to shoot, but is that reasonable in the circumstance?" asks Mr. Fidell. "We haven't had that much experience in house-to-house fighting." The question could be central to a Haditha court-martial....

One difference between a soldier and a cop is that, to use the old joke, the military shoots first and asks questions later. Cops have to hesitate, to make sure that the target is indeed threatening them.

Even in civilian life, cops sometimes kill people with cellphones, or get killed because they hesitate.

But in war, where the threat might include several shooters with automatic weapons, the two seconds hesitating might lead to the death not only of you but your battalion.

That's why I pointed out that Murtha, who should know better, should be ashamed for
second guessing his fellow Marines by accusing them of first degree (premediated murder) without full knowledge...especially since Murtha (who I once voted for, so I figure I can criticize) has quickly followed his burst of publicity with an announcement that he plans to seek to be speaker of the House if the Democrats win the congress.

As a doctor, we have to sometimes make life and death decisions based on inadequate data, or under pressure, or very very quickly.
If something goes wrong, it might be malpractice, poor judgement, lack of full information, or an adverse event that no one could have done anything about. And in very very rare cases, it could be murder.
Bad things sometimes happen to patients of the best of docs, which is why doctors hesitate to condemn their own unless something is very egregious or obvious.

Similarly, those who have not been soldiers in war have no right to judge harshly.
(I've been in two wars but as a civilian doc...and my joke is that the only time I was shot at was not in war but by a drunk in the US...but that's another story)

We docs know that taking responsibility means that you are responsible for your mistakes. But to claim an honest mistake is murder rather than either a mistake or bad judgement before the facts are known is not the way to keep morale up among those who carry the burdens.

And this is true for doctors as well as Marines.