# On Killing-The Psychologcal Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society



## Adjective Ocean (Feb 9, 2008)

Has anyone read this? I'm coming to its end and I must say, it's very interesting and helps provide some backing for my beliefs. Basically, it focuses on the negative effects of killing (in war or in general) as well as the conditioning used to train soldiers to kill. It is composed of numerous accounts from war vets. and their experiences as well as excerpts from various books/studies concerning the matter. One of most alarming things mentioned in the book is the vastly increased fire rate of soldiers, the increase being attributed to modern conditioning practices. It stated that in  WW1 and WW2 the firing rates were around 15-20% while the Vietnam firing rate was around 90%. That, if true (the info is based off of another study conducted by historians Marshal and Glenn), is quite alarming. The writer was a Lt. and though he never killed anyone himself, he does share some interesting experiences. The book is fascinating and I'd like to hear some opinions on it.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Feb 10, 2008)

The author is Dave Grossman, a google search reveals.

I'm glad you brought this to my attention.  I'll definitely try to find it at the library or online.  This is a very important question that I think about too much.  On one hand, it seems like killing is a natural, human thing to do that dates back to, well, probably the earliest humans.  On the other hand, unless you're a psychopath or a sociopath, most of us now would feel bad about it (although psychopaths CAN feel bad about it sometimes).  Yet somehow, in many cases, this does not apply to warfare.  So is that conditioning, some kind of skewed perspective, or the natural human condition being revealed?  That's the kind of shit I ask myself in the shower.  I'll definitely try to check this out, again, thanks for sharing it.

The firing rate statistics are alarming, although I can see with all the constant, never quite in battle but never safe always jittery and nervous, mentality of Vietnam how it could be justified.

I just wish the guy had killed someone.  It seems like that would validate him MUCH MUCH more.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Feb 10, 2008)

It's a good title.   

The costs of becoming a killer are enormous. And it's hard to stop once you start.

Fire rates are meaningless.  The American Civil war was the biggest bloodbath in US history and that was black powder.  Being able to hose down the brush doesn't mean more people die.  It just cost more per death.

What's wicked is the impersonalization of it.   You touch a lever and guy dies a mile away.   You hit a button and a village dies but you're already past it.  

What's really fucked up is when you can look somebody right in the eye, feel their breath, touch them, and get a kick out of killing them.   Where do you go with that?

Sounds like an interesting book.


----------



## Adjective Ocean (Feb 10, 2008)

It is very interesting and makes a pretty solid case that men are not natural born killers. The first half of the book focuses on man's innate resistance to killing, and it tells of the ways people avoided to kill during war. It also gives multiple cases of troops on opposing sides actually sparing one another in some situations. The book also points out that, in the past at least, the majority of the kills were were eased by distance. Many kills in war come from snipers, artillery, air strikes, etc. Most of the reason is because it's incredibly difficult to kill someone up close without serious conditioning. I highly recommend this to all interested in the subject as the book is a real eye opener. Oh and lin, the book directly addresses the *Civil War* and confronts the problems it _*seems *_to put up against his theory. I'd give you some more info., but he'll explain it better than I can.


----------



## Tangent_string (Feb 10, 2008)

sounds like a great read. I'm enlisting into the military now, and will probably deploy for basic in about 7 or 8 months. I don't hate all wars, and say they are all pointless, because that isn't true. But I don't think they are all necessary either. Sometimes people have to kill in order to preserve something important. It will be interesting to read something that might contradict my beliefs, so I'll try and find this book.


----------

