On Killing

You dice with death when you cross the trench.
When the “rapid,” like fireflies in the dark,
Flits down the parapet spark by spark,
And you drop for cover to keep your head
With your face on the breast of the four months’ dead.

The man who ranges in No Man’s Land
Is dogged by shadows on either hand
When the star-shell’s flare, as it bursts o’erhead,
Scares the gray rats that feed on the dead,
And the bunting bomb or the bayonet-snatch
May answer the click of your safety-catch,
For the lone patrol, with his life in his hand,
Is hunting for blood in No Man’s Land.

14

For an understanding of how it was possible for Nazis and Assyrians to kill at this “extreme” end of the spectrum, see Section V, “Killing and Atrocities.”

15

Quoted from an article by R. K. Brown. These are extracts from after-action reports describing the activities of Sergeant First Class (retired) Adelbert F. Waldron who, during his tour of duty as a sniper using a starlight scope and a noise suppressor (silencer) on his match- (competition-) grade M14 rifle, was credited with 113 confirmed kills and 10 blood trails in five months in Vietnam. Waldron’s fame spread, and he was given the nom de guerre Daniel Boone. Apparently, the VC were also impressed with his skill and put a fifty-thousand-dollar price on his head. Twelve hours after Army Intelligence discovered that Waldron had been identified and a bounty offered for his scalp, he was on a plane out of Vietnam.

16

This has been mentioned elsewhere, but it bears repeating that the universal distribution of automatic weapons in Vietnam is probably responsible for much of this large number of shots fired per kill. Much of this firing was also suppressive fire and reconnaissance by fire. And much of it was by crew-served weapons (e.g., squad machine guns, helicopter door gunners, and aircraft-mounted miniguns firing thousands of rounds per minute), which, as mentioned before, almost always fire. But even when these factors are taken into consideration, the fact that so much fire occurred and that so many individual soldiers were willing to fire indicates that something different and unusual was happening in Vietnam. This subject is addressed in detail later in this book in the section “Killing in Vietnam.”

17

A detailed analysis of these stages of a kill can be found in the section entitled “The Killing Response Stages.”

18

Stewart concludes the article with this sentence. The object of his tale, the climax. The point of this lengthy article appears to be this line that communicates the extent of his empathy for his victim and gives him a little peace: “that hard look had left his eyes before he died.” The message we can take away from this is that he cared deeply what this dying VC thought of him, and what the reader thinks of him. If we look for it, over and over again in these killing narratives we will find this underlying message of (1) the writer’s empathy for his kill and (2) a deep concern for what the reader thinks of the writer. We will address these needs in much greater detail in the section “Killing in Vietnam.”

19

But the Greeks refused to use “unmanly” projectile weapons, and the uniquely designed javelins and pilums cast in volleys by Roman soldiers — combined with the Romans’ superior training in thrusting the sword, their maneuverability on the battlefield, and their use of leaders — ultimately permitted the professional Roman legions to defeat the citizen-soldiers of the Greek phalanx.

20

Yet even with all their emphasis on stabbing wounds, it appears that many Roman soldiers still slashed and hacked at the enemy, for we read constantly of enemy soldiers who suffer multiple slash wounds as a result of their encounters with the Roman legions. In his Commentaries on the Gallic War, Caesar mentions how after a battle the enemy, “at length, worn out with wounds, …began to retreat.”

21

It is interesting to note that the new U.S. Army M16 bayonet is a very wicked-looking, saw-backed device.

22

Some would claim that writing of such esoteric killing techniques in a public forum is an inappropriate act,