"JenTravis on Trial
Is the argument Travis uses at his trial it a 'far more sophisticated' version of Par's 'only obeying orders' or is it something else? His justification and the response could be used in a discussion of political theory/military studies.
The relevant parts of the exchange are (I have removed 'non-relevant' text)
PAR: [Travis] gave the order. We just did the shooting.
TRAVIS: A field officer, like myself, is frequently required to make fast, unconsidered decisions. You were all field officers, you know that's true. Time to think is a luxury battle seldom affords you. You react instinctively. Your actions, your decisions, all instinct, nothing more. But, an officer's instincts are the product of his training. The more thorough the training, the more predictable the instinct, the better the officer. And I am a good officer. I have been in the service all my adult life. I'm totally dedicated to my duty and highly trained in how to perform it. On Serkasta I, I reacted as I was trained to react. I was an instrument of the service. So if I'm guilty of murder, of mass murder, then so are all of you!
SAMOR: [in reply] Space Commander, we have considered your sentence at some length. Your contention that what happened on Serkasta was a direct result of your training concerned us greatly. We accept that you are trained to kill. As are we all. What we cannot accept is that this training leads inevitably to the murder of innocents. Your behaviour was not that of a Federation officer, but rather that of a savage, unthinking, animal. We cannot find it in our hearts to absolve you in any way of the responsibility for these murders.
__________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/