In June of 2005 a team of four Navy Seals were tasked with a mission of locating a local taliban leader in the Hindu Kush mountains of Afghanistan. The four Seals were observing the village the taliban leader was believed to be hiding in when they were detected by three goat herders. The soldier in charge Lieutenant Murphy put it to a conference of his men whether to kill them to keep their cover or to let them go, Lieutenant Luttrell was the deciding vote of the group which determined the group would let them go. The decision resulted in ¾ of the Seals being killed and additional 16 american servicemen losing their lives due to a taliban ambush about an hour later(Operation Red Wings) . The moral decision although not obvious can be broken down into Kant’s Categorical imperative versus Consequentialism. Upon analyzation of the moral dilemma it is apparent that in times of warfare and deadly conflicts, those in power must favor Consequentialism over Kant's Categorical Imperative. …show more content…
This states that for an action one must find the maxim or action, make it Universal, imagine it practically carried out universally, and one must will it to be a universal law. When applied to the scenario the maxim would be: one shouldn't kill innocent civilians regardless of militaristic advantages, which passes all four tests of the categorical Imperative. The Categorical Imperative when applied here is not concerned with the actions of the three goat herders regarding alarming the taliban or any harm they could cause the Seals post