TOPIC: Family at War
BACKGROUND INFO: There is no such act or law prohibiting family members from serving in the same combat unit in a time of war. However, after the five Sullivan brothers were killed on the same boat during WWII, there were several bills introduced in Congress that related to family members serving in a military unit together. None of these bills were enacted into law. However, there are military policies and directives to discourage immediate family members from serving together.
TOPIC QUESTION: Should family members serving in the armed forces be allowed to serve in combat zones together? Are there any detriments? What are some possible benefits? Should a law be enacted to prohibit/allow such a thing from occurring/to occur?
FORUM RULES: Use real examples and examples from the article to bolster your views. NO RANTS…use FACTS to support your response. If you assert a political, secular or non-secular view…you must SUPPORT with FACTS!!! Keep your response to under 50 words.
POINT VALUE: A WELL WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THIS FORUM TOPIC IS WORTH 25 POINTS. YOU MUST PUBLISH YOUR RESPONSE ON THIS SITE IN THE CORRECT FORMAT.
FORUM RESPONSE FORMAT: This is the appropriate format for a response to a question in this forum...
Your response.....remember it should be under 50 words......and it should be specific and contain some facts.
First name and last name initial (i.e. Larry K.)
DUE DATE: All posts must be submitted on or before 8/27/07
14 comments:
Family members should be able to be in combat together. I know that the Sullivan Brothers have died together, but an advantage could be that, if you’re in combat with a family member, that you know that someone will back you up. Of course, there are some disadvantages, like losing a family member, as well as a partner in combat. I don’t think that a law should prohibit something like this, because it is up to the family members whether they join the military or not; and it’s up to whoever is in charge (commander, etc) to choose whether they should be in combat together. In conclusion, I think this act of family members in military combat together shouldn’t be banned; even if there are disadvantages to it.
Nicole D.
I have neither given nor received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment.
Despite the risks of having several family members in the same combat unit there is no need to ban it. Some familys may want to fight together so they can look out for eachother and help eachother. Obviously the sullivan case was a horrible tragedy but every family who enters the service knows the risk. Therefore I think that family members should have every opprotunity to make the decision to fight with eachother or not. If several relatives were assigned together then they should have the choice to change units.
Matt S.
Though there are many risks as to having multiple family memebers serving along side each other, I do not think it should be banned.There are risks such as that they may be too worried about there family than whats going on, but its there choice. The law shouldn't ban them from serving.
Michael M.
I have neither given nor received any unauthorized information on this assignment.
I believe it is a good idea to ban family members from serving in the same combat units. How the Sullivan brothers died was a tragic loss to there family, that shouldn't happen again. The Navy now has a law that doesn't permit family members to serve together, only relatives. This is how all military forces laws should be. For mothers and fathers, losing one child is hard enough that they shouldn't have to go through the ordeal of losing all their children.
Caroline Strandes 2nd period
In my opinion family members shouldn't be allowed to serve in combat zones together, because another incident like the Sullivan brothers case could occur. Yes, there are detriments, such as losing a family member or a close friend. on the other hand there are also benefits such working together, having a friend, helping each other out in certain circumstances, and knowing you have someone there to care for you. I don't think a law should be enacted to prohibited this, because it's their choice, if they want to risk losing a family member, then it's up to them. They have the opportunity to choose what they want.
In my opinion family members shouldn't be allowed to serve in combat zones together, because another incident like the Sullivan brothers case could occur. Yes, there are detriments, such as losing a family member or a close friend. on the other hand there are also benefits such working together, having a friend, helping each other out in certain circumstances, and knowing you have someone there to care for you. I don't think a law should be enacted to prohibited this, because it's their choice, if they want to risk losing a family member, then it's up to them. They have the opportunity to choose what they want.
Amba N.
I really don't think that family members serving together should be banned. As others have said, family just wants to look out for each other. Yes, there is a risk to losing more than one family member as the, Sullivan family did. The family however, should be able to make that decision themselves. There really shouldn't be a law deciding issues like this for people.
I really don't think that family members serving together should be banned. As others have said, family just wants to look out for each other. Yes, there is a risk to losing more than one family member as the, Sullivan family did. The family however, should be able to make that decision themselves. There really shouldn't be a law deciding issues like this for people.
Family members should not be allowed to serve in combat zones together at the same time. I watched a movie called Saving Private Ryan some time ago, and after viewing the movie, I definitely realized how tragic it can be to have multiple family members serving in the same area. A family would be devastated to lose even one family member in a war, not to mention multiple children of their own. I can't imagine the grief I would have to get one of those letters of apology..."We are sorry to inform you, but all of your kids are dead." That's basically how they approach you with it, and I personally couldn't handle that situation. Personally, I believe that if multiple family members are serving, if one of the members is killed in combat, the rest of the family members should be allowed to leave the armed services permanently. No one should be forced to continue to fight after losing a sibling.
- Lauren F.
I have neither given nor received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment.
Family members should definitely be allowed to serve together because that means no matter what the situation you know you have support. Obviously fighting overseas for your country isn't an easy thing to do, but knowing you have a relative right behind you makes the situation that much easier. The Sullivan case was an awful ordeal, but the positives outweigh the negatives in this case.
Emily R.
I have neither given nor received unauthorized assistance on this assignment
Even though there is a risk to loosing more family members, letting them in the same combat together would be a benefit to them. An advantage would be having someone look out for you, and even not feeling as home sick since you have some family with you. There are advantages and disadvantages to everything, but in this case I think the advantages overpower. Having family members in military combat together shouldn't be banned.
Cayla T.
I think family members should be allowed to be in combat together. This is because if you have more than one family member in the service and you are in combat together then it will make it easier for each mmber of the family. Yes this may be hard and something could happen just like it did in WWII, but this way family members won't be stressing out and wondering if their family member or members are okay. They will also have somebody to depend on and know they will be there for them if something goes wrong. If a law prohibits family members being in combat together then that isn't right because they should have the right to choose the path they want to take. Something may go wrong and they may have to go through a tough situation but at least they could be there and know exactly what is going on.
Taylor S.
I personally believe that family members should be able to go into combat together. During war, i can imagine that the number one thing you think about are the people you love such as your family, and the worst feeling in the world is not knowing what there doing, or in this case even alive. I dont think this law should be authorized, especially because i can imagine that fighting with your family can keep reminding you in trouble times that you actually have something to fight for.
Sophia Venditti
I have neither given nor received any unauthorized info on this assignment.
Family members should be allowed to join together in the arm forces. What is the difference that will come to it? If a person goes into the arm forces, they are likely to come with close bonds with someone else, a tight friendship. These friendship will seem like a family to them, and losing such will be the same. I understand that being together increases the chances of all the family members dying, but sometimes its better to die with those you love, rather than die alone. Sometimes it comes to the fact of the big brother and big sister relationship, the need to look out for your younger siblings, I am the oldest and im compelled to this need. Siblings should know the risk when serving in the same service. Overall, serving in the force together should not be banned.
-Isacc Yi
I have neither given nor received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment.
Post a Comment