We expect our soldiers to retain their humanity in war

I am a former combat infantry officer who served in Vietnam and I know that the pressure of combat can lead to acts that the normal populace would consider criminal. Such acts range from disrespect, mental and physical brutality right up to unlawful killing. When they are committed in the heat of battle, the lesser of these types of offences can, and should, be dealt with within the unit and nothing more said. Unlawful killing and severe brutality must be dealt with formally and if that leads to imprisonment so be it, albeit with due — perhaps more than normal — weight placed on any extenuating circumstances such as PTSD.

These things have happened in the past and will continue to happen. We expect our soldiers to retain their humanity, but recognise that incidents will happen from time to time. They are more likely to occur as soldiers become more brutalised and callous over time as a consequence of the environment in which they are forced to live. That the number of these incidents is so high is almost certainly due to the misemployment, over a long period, of a small cadre of special forces soldiers.

Many commentators are quick to excuse the individual soldier on the basis that the battlefield is a different space in which normal rules should not apply. But it must be remembered that most, if not all, of these incidents came to light because other soldiers recognised them as wrong. That requires huge moral courage because mateship and unit morale and cohesion are paramount in the thinking of most diggers. They deserve these alleged crimes to be fully investigated.

Peter O’Brien, Kiama, NSW

As a vet of two wars, I can say when a person has returned from war they do not understand the world they return to and the world does not understand them. Many feel like refugees in their own country. They have seen horrific sights and heard the screams of the wounded and dying. This gives them anxiety, bad dreams and PTSD that they never get over.

Yes, in action bad things and unnecessary killing does occur, even to those on the same side, yet I feel the soldier, sailor and airman trained to kill and obey orders are not to blame; it is the government that sends them.

Bruce Hambour, North Haven, SA

Two to tango

Many thanks to Janet Albrechtsen (“Shoddy ABC investigation driven by political agenda”, 14-15/11) and Angela Shanahan (“ABC hatchet job a political ‘gotcha’”, 14-15/11) for their analyses of the ABC’s so-called expose of federal parliamentarians behaving badly. Probably only senior female journalists could be quite so devastating in their critique of last week’s lopsided, undergraduate Four Corners program. If a mere male may proffer an opinion, I will try the following: Why is it, in public discussions of such matters at the ABC, apparently strong, successful women are deliberately portrayed solely as weak playthings of men without any ability or, apparently, interest in taking responsibility for their own actions? As Shanahan writes, it does indeed take two to tango.

Michael Smith, Mooroolbark, Vic

Animal footage real

I challenge Geoffrey Luck’s comment that Four Corners distorts reporting of animal welfare issues by allowing itself to be used by aggrieved individuals (Letters, 14-15/11). Mr Luck may have a point about the influence of an aggrieved individual on Four Corners’ most recent foray into the private affairs of consenting politicians and their staff. However, Four Corners’ investigative reporting on the thoroughbred and greyhound racing industries as well as the live export industry — supported by incriminating footage, not aggrieved individuals — has exposed egregious cruelty that has led to some well-overdue animal welfare reforms.

Jan Kendall, Mt Marth, Vic