![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
||
![]() |
Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
|
I am not arguing against that unit cohesion plays a "critical" role (interpret as trust in your comrades), but it is not the sole reason that men fight. IMO men fight for a confluence of reasons, not just because their comrades are there next to them.
The soldier of today joins an army that could be deployed to any number of places in the world in the service of any number of causes. The causes we fight for today may not be the causes we fight for tomorrow... beyond generalities like "fighting for your country", western armies fight for whatever cause their government decides to send them to fight for, causes that may at sometimes be less than obvious or less than compelling to the individual soldier. This would have a fairly obvious impact on cause identification in a western army, it seems to me. Unit cohesion is a key issue in motivating soldiers to fight. Soldiers are taught the safety of the group depends on him and he can prevent harm to his unit, therefore the same applies to others in the group and it creates the feeling that they are each other´s protector but surprisingly, many soldiers in Iraq were motivated by patriotic ideals. Liberating the people and bringing freedom were common themes in describing combat motivation. Notions of freedom, democracy, and liberty are also voiced by soldiers today as key factors in combat motivation and today's soldiers are sophisticated enough to grasp the moral concepts of war. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
1.The conventional concept of a soldier is a person in uniform pledged to fight for his nation obeying orders of those set over him. In modern times often a soldier may not be in uniform and may not have taken any formal pledge. Warfare today is total involving everyone.
2. Many qualities / qualifications of a soldiers have been enumerated above, but the two most important are robustness of the mind and the body. |
![]() |
||
![]() |
Quote:
|
![]() |