That the enemy you have to defeat for the sake of your country is also human and has a family and life outside of the battlefield is something that you can only ignore for so long until it starts haunting you.

That's especially true with the USA and their tendency to glorify war effort by painting themselves as the good guys.

Yorktown's dialogue here seems like a quotable line, just imagine the impact of this in the days of war.

Yorktown's dialogue here seems like a quotable line, just imagine the impact of this in the days of war.

Isekaijin said:

That the enemy you have to defeat for the sake of your country is also human and has a family and life outside of the battlefield is something that you can only ignore for so long until it starts haunting you.

That's especially true with the USA and their tendency to glorify war effort by painting themselves as the good guys.

You say that like it is something only the US would do...

Which nations, exactly, recruit to their militaries by proudly painting themselves the bad guys, or even just taking a publicly ambivalent stance towards what they're asking their soldiers to die for? Morale is a thing, and propaganda exists for a reason. For that matter, who's willing to die for a cause they believe is wrong?

The same applies to the first sentence - modern armies specifically use psychological conditioning techniques to even get people to be willing to shoot at the enemy (this is why targets were changed from mere circles to human shapes - to condition people to aim at human-shaped targets by reflex, for example), since the overwhelming majority of people will not willingly shoot to kill against an enemy soldier who is not immediately threatening them (as in, charging directly at them wielding a weapon). According to some statistics of wars from Vietnam and earlier, as much as 98% of soldiers would deliberately avoid shooting at other people, with 1% essentially being the psychopaths that had no qualms with killing, and the other 1% being the guys that get medals because they'll take selfless actions to save the lives of their fellow soldiers, being willing to kill when their comrades are threatened. In Vietnam, 50,000 rounds were expended per enemy hit just because it was more reassuring to just lie down and spray bullets blindly rather than actively try to kill someone. (And ultimately, about two thirds of people killed in modern wars are from artillery, which is fired safely from far, far away from anywhere you could actually see who you are killing so people in artillery teams are psychologically insulated from the effects of their actions.)

Yeah Yorktowns lost it bad here. I love enterprises shirt on wanting to be friends

Funnily enough, that's also why spears were so good back in the days : it's easier to attack someone from afar with a polearm than having to look at him in the eyes as you shank him in the gonads with a shiv. Akira Kurosawa's movie "The Seven Samurais" even reference that.
I'm also thinking and trying to refer to the movie Gladiator, when Maximus Gluteus or whatever his name is has to fight a really impressive guy wearing a full helmet, and he only realizes he's fighting another human when he pulls the guy's helmet off.

Trying to deshumanize the other side isn't just propaganda, it's also mandatory, because killing isn't something normal people do naturally. It's a coping mechanism, similar to "I was following orders".

NWSiaCB said:

In Vietnam, 50,000 rounds were expended per enemy hit just because it was more reassuring to just lie down and spray bullets blindly rather than actively try to kill someone.

This simply shows how much you are unaware of the realities of war. You expend so much ammo because very rarely the enemy will give you an easy shot. Even if the enemy is out in the open the range usually means that you are shooting at a single dot instead of a clear target.

All that while ignoring suppressive fire to conceal and cover your manoeuvres.

As I understand it, US infantry, while very well trained and equipped, are generally not expected to do most of the damage to the enemy. They're to suppress and corral the enemy into a position where artillery, bombers, and gunships can initiate a coup de grace. This minimizes the danger to personnel.

Isekaijin said:

That the enemy you have to defeat for the sake of your country is also human and has a family and life outside of the battlefield is something that you can only ignore for so long until it starts haunting you.

That's especially true with the USA and their tendency to glorify war effort by painting themselves as the good guys.

"Singapore promoting the BRI is great for both countries." Right after decades of telling the people that China is not to be trusted (while facilitating China's rise to power).

It's not just the US doing it. The only difference is that the citizens of the US get to call bullshit on their government's propaganda, at least in theory.