The Things They Carried
War presents a very complex moral dilemma. While it is necessary to fight for freedom, a better world, and what is right, war contradicts itself. The very same soldiers that fight in defense of these values have them taken away because of their experiences at war. The negative effects are just as big as the positive effects of war. A nation can never really win in war because of this. Instead war just stays a neutral thing.
There are many people who instead of staying in the middle, gravitate to either end of the spectrum. Some who fall on the far right believe that war is extremely necessary and disregard the negative aspects all together. Pacifists say that war understand the cons of war but fail to realize the good that can come from the …show more content…
The very act of killing someone for the common good of the world contradicts itself. The emotions that come with the experience of war can be so confusing to the brave soldiers fighting for the greater good of the world. The emotional burden that the soldiers carry on their shoulders is enormous. In the novel, The Things They Carried, written from the perspective of former soldier, Tim O'brien uses an extended symbol of the things the soldiers carried. He writes about the weights of things that the soldiers carried, “standard M-16 gas-operated assault rifle...weighed 7.5 pounds unloaded.” (5) and then goes on to talk about how they carried, “each other, the wounded or weak.” (14) and “shared the weight of memory.”(14) . O'brien describes the emotional and physical burden that the war had on each individual by the weight of the object. In this way he shows how in comparison to the emotional burden the physical burden was simple. The gun only weighed 7.5 pounds but the weight of fellow soldiers and the experience was so much more. The weight of the emotional burdens was not stated by O'brien because it was always changing, continually getting bigger and harder to carry. O'brien illustrates how eventually the burdens will become to much to bear and the soldier has the great struggle of relieving themselves of the burden. This emotional burden is such a huge problem that war places on the shoulders of our young soldiers and many crumble …show more content…
In the face of evil a country can not just run away and hide while they watch the evil take over. It is crucial to stand up for your values and freedoms which everyone deserves. War in defense of the values of freedom is justified. On the 40th anniversary of D-day, President Ronald Reagan addressed this saying, “It is better to be here ready to protect the peace than to take blind shelter across the sea...rushing to respond only when freedom is lost.” (2) It is human nature to run away and deny something rather than face the reality that something bad is happening. However in order to keep liberty one must gather the courage to confront the problem. Reagan talked about protecting the peace. This is ironic because war is everything but peace. To get to the peace and liberty war often must be endured. Patrick Henry, an American revolutionary in the fight for independence from Britain made a call for action saying, “give me liberty or give me death.” (2) He also called liberty a holy cause. The value that Henry places on liberty mirrors that of most people. Liberty is worth death for it is not worth living a life that is constantly restrained by government. The liberty that war can bring to society is worth the sacrifice that war demands. By calling liberty a holy cause he shows how all people were created equal people under God and deserve the liberty they fight so hard to attain.
There are many people who instead of staying in the middle, gravitate to either end of the spectrum. Some who fall on the far right believe that war is extremely necessary and disregard the negative aspects all together. Pacifists say that war understand the cons of war but fail to realize the good that can come from the …show more content…
The very act of killing someone for the common good of the world contradicts itself. The emotions that come with the experience of war can be so confusing to the brave soldiers fighting for the greater good of the world. The emotional burden that the soldiers carry on their shoulders is enormous. In the novel, The Things They Carried, written from the perspective of former soldier, Tim O'brien uses an extended symbol of the things the soldiers carried. He writes about the weights of things that the soldiers carried, “standard M-16 gas-operated assault rifle...weighed 7.5 pounds unloaded.” (5) and then goes on to talk about how they carried, “each other, the wounded or weak.” (14) and “shared the weight of memory.”(14) . O'brien describes the emotional and physical burden that the war had on each individual by the weight of the object. In this way he shows how in comparison to the emotional burden the physical burden was simple. The gun only weighed 7.5 pounds but the weight of fellow soldiers and the experience was so much more. The weight of the emotional burdens was not stated by O'brien because it was always changing, continually getting bigger and harder to carry. O'brien illustrates how eventually the burdens will become to much to bear and the soldier has the great struggle of relieving themselves of the burden. This emotional burden is such a huge problem that war places on the shoulders of our young soldiers and many crumble …show more content…
In the face of evil a country can not just run away and hide while they watch the evil take over. It is crucial to stand up for your values and freedoms which everyone deserves. War in defense of the values of freedom is justified. On the 40th anniversary of D-day, President Ronald Reagan addressed this saying, “It is better to be here ready to protect the peace than to take blind shelter across the sea...rushing to respond only when freedom is lost.” (2) It is human nature to run away and deny something rather than face the reality that something bad is happening. However in order to keep liberty one must gather the courage to confront the problem. Reagan talked about protecting the peace. This is ironic because war is everything but peace. To get to the peace and liberty war often must be endured. Patrick Henry, an American revolutionary in the fight for independence from Britain made a call for action saying, “give me liberty or give me death.” (2) He also called liberty a holy cause. The value that Henry places on liberty mirrors that of most people. Liberty is worth death for it is not worth living a life that is constantly restrained by government. The liberty that war can bring to society is worth the sacrifice that war demands. By calling liberty a holy cause he shows how all people were created equal people under God and deserve the liberty they fight so hard to attain.