Introduction
Several studies on the behavior, ethics, and professionalism of army officers within the United States demonstrate that most lie frequently. The U.S. army officers are regular liars, and this is always done regarding both critical and simple matters. The military profession demands substantial ethical behavior, and one of these behaviors is the execution of honesty and truthfulness (Buer, 2016). However, contrary to what is expected of the forces, it has been discovered that there is a rife of deception and dishonesty. The challenge of lying is not only present among senior army officers; instead, it is also present among military members. While lying within the military is highly prohibited, lying to individuals of higher rank, such as the NCO, is not acceptable. It will be necessary to conduct a detailed analysis and offer sufficient justification for why lying to the NCO is completely inappropriate.
The general rule within the military profession is that lying is not accepted, and all officers must exercise utmost honesty, loyalty, and truthfulness (Cohen, 2020). All lies within the army are considered wrong, whether they have been committed intentionally or unintentionally. Liars are always required to apologize or remedy the situation that they have caused due to failing to tell the truth before the situation gets out of hand (Buer, 2016). However, certain lies might be extreme and cause great harm to the entire force, and therefore such lies always attract massive punishments. As simple as it may appear, lying to a Non-commission officer can make army personnel lose their work, which is why it is always necessary to avoid taking such issues lightly.
In certain instances, the top military officers or other army members can decide to lie with valid grounds; however, many questions always arise in such instances. For instance, a senior military official can decide to lie to protect the country’s security interests and counter an imminent risk. However, no officer should capitalize on such grounds to take part in unnecessary lying because even with the right intentions, they might end up attracting punishment (Cohen, 2020). The is a need to understand that ethical behavior and professionalism are important ingredients of the military profession.
Lying Results in Loss of Trust
The idea of lying to a non-commissioned officer, no matter the motive and objectives of lying, often results in the loss of trust. Trust is an essential element or instead principle within all professions, but most importantly within the military (Lu, 2021). The army officers are responsible for protecting human lives and important resources. The moment the NCO officer loses trust in the army officer; hence they might end up not considering them during important military events. Lying to the NCO can cause severe negative implications for the army officer, the members of the team, and the entire organization in general. Lying can kill the good relationship between the Non-commissioned officer and the army soldiers.
Lying to the NCO is always regarded as a traitorous act. This is because the NCOs are always responsible for training, supervising, and guiding the military personnel in the execution of their duties. Therefore, when an individual lies to them, they will consider that a betrayal (Parsons, 2021). The military profession is one of the most challenging fields since it is always filled with cases of betrayal from members. Therefore, when an individual throws caution to the wind and ends up lying to the NCO, there are possibilities that they will put such facts into consideration. The NCO will only see the need to trust the army officers partially because such cases are always regarded as building blocks for major betrayals in the future.
When the trust between the NCO and the military soldiers starts to be compromised, an extremely toxic and awkward relationship begins to crop up (Lu, 2021). For example, suppose the NCO used to assign certain responsibilities to army officers previously. In that case, they might opt to reduce the assignment of responsibility, or even they can opt to take away the privileges fully. This is something that any officer would do because no one can be willing to trust their work or lives when they are in the hands of people they already suspect might cause them major betrayals in the future (Lu, 2021).
It is important to understand that the moment trust has been compromised in the military profession, it is always difficult to earn it back. The moment the NCO discovers that someone lied to them in some instance, it is obvious that in the future, even when they are being told the truth, they will always doubt and hold a negative mindset towards the military personnel. It is, therefore, always important for anyone in the army to value building trust and telling the truth, even when they feel things might turn sour when they say it (Buer, 2016). It is better to be in a bad relationship with the NCO during one instance rather than build an environment where the army officer will never be trusted.
Saying the truth to the NCO, even when an army officer feels that it might irritate them, is more important because it always proves that you value the relationship and are willing to be accountable for your actions. Telling the truth, no matter what it conveys or implies, always demonstrates that you regard the NCO highly and respect their position within the military force (Parsons, 2021). On the other end, lying compromises respect and results in much strain on the relationship, and, in the end, it can lead to the complete severance of the relationship. It is clear that when an NCO is granted the chance to give their opinion concerning the professional conduct of the army officers and suggest the ones that need to be promoted, it is less likely that they will select a person they think would cause betrayal.
Lying can lead to Non-Judicial Punishment.
Making the mistake of lying to the NCO should be avoided in all instances and at all costs because it can lead to serious non-judicial punishment. Non-judicial punishment is a type of punishment that is provided under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Non-Judicial punishment is a provision that allows the commanders and leaders within the military to subject the troops to punishment instead of taking them to the court-martial for punishment (Martin, 2021). Military personnel can be subjected to different forms of punishment for lying to the NCO. Among them are the reduction in rank, loss of pay, correctional custody, extra duty, and restrictions.
The aspect of non-judicial punishment does not comprise a criminal conviction, but it is always put in records of everything that has been decided. Therefore, the NCO can decide to report the matter to the relevant authority within the military force to deliberate on the matter. Depending on the nature and effects of the lies that the army officer might have told the NCO, the authority will decide on the kind of punishment the party should suffer. Suppose the army officer has a higher rank within the organization. In that case, there are possibilities that the rank will be taken away or reduced because good leaders are always required to comply with and respect the codes and ethics (Weber, 2019). On the other end, if it is discovered that the lies that the army officer told the NCO resulted in massive financial loss, the military officer might end up losing their pay or being subjected to a fine.
Similarly, in the proceedings, a decision can be made for the lying party to be put under custodial correction. The party might be confined for a certain period for this to serve as a deterrence to them and other persons that might intend to tell lies in the future. The Non-judicial punishment process is always serious and conducted with much seriousness because lying about important events such as rescue missions and emergency disaster management might lead to loss of lives and property. Consequently, a decision can be made that the army officer culpable of lying should be committed to extra services or restrictions (Martin, 2021). The party might be assigned more responsibility within the military as punishment, or they might be limited from accessing certain important resources and participating in serious military expeditions such as rescue operations.
Lying Affects the Relationship with other Army Officers
Lying to the Non-commission officer affects not only the relationship with them but also compromises the good relationship with the other army members. Military officers, who are frequent liars, whether on simple or complex matters, often end up having bad relationships with the other members of the team. One thing about military officers is that they value unity, teamwork, and good relationships with one another (Pitt, 2021). It is because the profession places them at risk of meeting or coming in contact with many challenges that might put their lives at risk. Therefore, they always depend on teamwork and live as brothers to offer protection and safety to one another. In the spirit of this statement, it is then obvious that military officers rarely tend to build an environment of bad relationships with each other.
However, when it comes to the issue of frequent lying, there are minimal possibilities that the officers will give such an individual the opportunity to be part of the team. When military officers learn that an individual frequently lies to the NCO, they will develop the mentality that at a particular point in their lives, such a person might turn against them. The army officers always sense betrayal from all possible minor red flags when they start to smell from afar. This is not a bad thing to do because what if, during a military expedition, a frequent liar might end up striking a deal with the enemy to compromise the lives of his fellow officers to get paid? Therefore, there are always higher possibilities that relationships between a lying officer and the other army personnel will be affected, and eventually, it may end.
The other army officers will always find the best possible way that they can use to avoid the members who lie to the NCO. The individuals will always live with the mentality that after lying to the NCO, they will be the next victims. One important fact that should be understood regarding the aspect of lies within the military profession is that the moment an individual lies, it demonstrates that they are placing their or interests ahead of other people’s interests. It is always a rare incident to come across an individual who is telling lies to protect the NCO or the army members. The fact that an army officer can be willing to compromise the good relationship with the NCO and other personnel within the military by telling lies makes them a complete red flag, and it raises eyebrows.
Telling lies to the NCO makes the other team members have a bad relationship with the lying officer because the Non-commissioned officer might start thinking that a high number of the army officers are liars. There are possibilities that the NCO might end up being more strict and tough on the members that he or she is required to supervise (Martin, 2021). Therefore, the other members can end up suffering the punishment they did not deserve and were not responsible for. Such situations in the event lead to bad or compromised relationships between the lying military officer and other team members because they will always have the mentality that the person put them in a tough and strict situation due to the urge to meet individual interests.
Punishment by the court martial
The court-martial is charged with the duty of punishing and correcting military officers who have conducted gross violations of the military codes (Pitt, 2021). Lying can amount to a gross violation of military laws depending on the lies’ nature, complexity, and effects. In case a military officer lies to the NCO regarding a crucial aspect during humanitarian relief or conducting the rescue of civilians, and in the event the NCO fails to take the necessary actions to save the persons, the officer will be sent to the court martial for trial. The court martial therefore deliberates on matters that involve gross negligence and misconduct within the army.
The court-martial can decide that the army officer should be confined or sentenced to prison due to lying to the NCO. It is important to understand that the terms and conditions of an army officer’s penalty depend on the nature and level of the court’s proceedings. In most instances, the lying army officer can be confined for one year. The court-martial can decide that the party should forfeit their pay together with the allowances because of committing the dishonesty and unprofessional act of lying to the NCO (Borchers, 2017). The court can decide that the monthly payment of the military officer should be capped at up to 2/3 each month for one year.
Similarly, lying to the NCO can attract the punishment of being subjected to hard labor. The military officer accused of lying can be directed to conduct hard labor within certain military facilities for a particular period. Consequently, due to lying, the court martial can rule that the responsible party should be demoted from rank. In most instances, enlisted military officers convicted in court might lose rank to the least enlisted level (Martin, 2021). However, the commissioned officers within the military cannot be demoted. Finally, the court martial can decide that the party responsible for lying to the NCO should be discharged from the force.
Lying to the NCO also Amounts to Lying to Oneself.
One thing that most people do not generally understand in life is that when you start telling lies, you will equally be lying to yourself (Barno & Benshahel, 2015). This is a true and justified fact within all professions and not just the military profession. Telling lies to the NCO often starts as a one-time event, where the army can tell simple lies to save themselves from a certain situation. However, as time goes by, the army officers might end up telling more and more lies, especially after observing that the initial lies were successful. One must understand that when an individual embraces such a culture, they will eventually fall victim to their own doing.
For example, the army officers might decide to lie to the NCO that they will not be attending morning exercise training because they are on certain medications that do not require straining. This evasion of training and fitness programs might go on for one month to the extent that the military officer is not fit again. Eventually, things might down to them when they are assigned to undertake a military operation on a mountain, and the officer finds challenges to get on top of the mountain.
Additionally, lying to the NCO will eventually catch up with the lying military officer. It is because when an army officer conceals the truth, and in the long run, the reality unfolds, there are higher chances that the present good relationship will continue existing. In most instances, the lying army officers often convince themselves that when they lie, nothing will be unfolded, and they will live with such secrets to the end of their profession. However, it is important to understand that no matter how long it might take, reality and facts always catch up with all of us (Barno & Benshahel, 2015). No single person can survive to conceal the truth or keep lying without suffering the consequences of the same.
It suffices to mention that army officers need not lie to the NCOs and further lie to themselves that they are formidable. They cannot suffer the consequences of their unethical and dishonest practices. Certain army officers are habitual liars to the extent that whenever they tell lies, they never see any wrong whatsoever in the evil acts they commit (Barno & Benshahel, 2015). While lying can cause massive damage to the good relationship between the army officers and the NCO, there are certain instances where the lies might be extreme to the point that they can cause the entire relationship to fall apart. Within any work environment, lies tend to bring splitting among members and the absence of desired commitment.
End of career and damage to good relationships with the leaders
Lying is more complex and non-essential than some individuals might perceive it. A lie regarded as minor can result in the loss of employment opportunities. There is a need to understand that lying to the NCO might lead to termination of employment or immense harm to the relationship with the leaders. No military department might be interested in staying with a lying army officer, especially when it is discovered that the individual is a frequent liar. Whereas some lies might attract minor penalties like suspension from the place of work or reduction of payment during a certain month, other lies can result in permanent loss of employment.
When research is conducted, and it is observed that the frequent lying or single-occasion lying from a member of the military team to the NCO resulted in the loss of valuable assets of the organization or placed other members at risk, there are higher chances that the employment will be terminated (Cruces et al., 2020). No military organization will be willing to remain with an army officer who will put the lives of the other members, leaders, and the people within the community in danger due to frequent lying. The Non-commissioned Officer may suggest that such an employee should be sacked or subjected to an indefinite suspension and only allowed within the department upon confirmation that they have changed their ways. They are willing to work with compliance to utmost honesty (Minyard, 2017).
Lying makes an army officer regarded as unreliable and untrustworthy in the execution of important functions within the department (Lu, 2021). An NCO must refrain from supervising or operating with an army officer who is considered a full-time liar because such an individual might affect the efforts of the team to realize safety and security objectives. Similarly, since the other soldiers will probably decline to work with a lying team member with the perception that they will be dragged down and affect their team performance, the chances of getting sacked will become high. An army officer is only complete and effective if they can operate with others.
The military profession demands much teamwork, and there is no instance where a team member might be asked to go on a mission on their own. Therefore, the moment the military force members demonstrate that they are not interested in the services of a certain individual on their team, the officer will automatically lack relevance (Cruces et al., 2020). The only option in such an instance will be to transfer the officer to another location, and if such an alternative fails to work, then the officer will be terminated. It is therefore important to understand that lying might look like a simple thing that does not have any impact, but in true sense, it might trigger the loss of a vital chance within the forces.
Even when an army officer is highly committed, hardworking, and helps realize the mission of the army department, the moment untrustworthiness shifts in, they will be regarded as unreliable (Lu, 2021). There are fewer possibilities that a hardworking and committed army officer might take part in lying to the NCO. Most hardworking and dedicated officers who begin lying to the NCO often lose their focus, become clumsy, and engage in other unnecessary activities. It is because lying compromises work ethics and makes the officers feel that they can find an alternative that is simple for them to survive in the force.
Negative Effects on the Liar
Lying to the Non-commissioned officer affects the officer and the department and poses a negative implication of the army officer making the lies. What most military personnel do not understand when they lie to the NCO is that it places on them the liability of supporting the lies for the longest time of their career. Most lies are always successive such that the moment one commences to lie, they are required to carry on with the lies so that the truth cannot be discovered (Minyard, 2017). The process of lying is just like digging a trench that one will fall into, and the more one continues to lie, the trench becomes much deeper to the point that one will not have the ability to dig themselves out.
If military officer is found lying, there are higher possibilities that they will get into more negative actions than the ones they would have dealt with initially had they shared the truth. The main problem with army officers who tell lies to the NCOs is that they always consider the short-term results of the lies, such as the escape from punishment and responsibility. It is always important to consider all the future outcomes of the results and make the right decision on whether, to tell the truth.
Another fact about lying among army officers is that it always demonstrates that they do not have the courage and the guts to deal with the consequences of their conduct. For example, an army officer can miss a training program controlled by the NCO due to oversleeping. However, instead of telling the truth that they were fatigued and could not show up for training, they might lie that they were held in a traffic jam or were involved in an accident. When the truth comes to be unveiled later, there are always possibilities that the army officer will receive the punishment they could have managed to escape by having the courage, to tell the truth.
Additionally, lying to the NCO s wrong because it always implies that such persons do not have confidence or strong self-esteem. Most army officers who prefer telling the truth to the NCO always have confidence and a strong belief that all things will turn out the way they expected or that they will have the ability to deal with the outcomes of telling the truth (Minyard, 2017). On the other end, the liars, who are often afraid of the outcomes of their actions, are often compelled to continue with the lies to avoid being caught. In most instances, lying officers always end up overthinking about situations, and they are always filled with fear regarding the worst scenario.
On certain occasions, army officers can opt to lie to avoid embarrassment or due to the absence of the guts to face the opinions and condemnations of others. However, army officers always need to understand that when they lie, they make the views of others around them worse. The blame one gets for telling the truth cannot be compared to the condemnation that comes with telling lies and eventually getting caught (Wong & Gerras, 2022). The forces members often regard liars as low persons and are always reluctant to help them. Because of this, it is advisable for army officers to always focus on telling the truth no matter the outcomes that might follow.
Stress and Poor Performance at work
The other negative effect of lying that faces army officers who lie to the NCOs are that they always end up suffering from much stress. The stress of telling lies is always witnessed before and after the lies are known. When army officer lies to the NCOs, they always end up being afraid that the truth might be known with time, and at the same time, they are always suspicious and unsettled. At the same time, stress and depression can get the better part of the army officers when the truth is unfolded because they are never always aware of what will be awaiting them Wong, L., & Gerras, S. (2022). Besides, even when they are forgiven, the individuals who tell lies will have a fear of facing other members of the team and the NCO. They will always have the mentality that the NCO might be thinking ill about them and that the team members are avoiding them even when this is not the case.
In most instances, the liars remember the lies that they told the NCO, and they are always thinking of what they might say to save themselves from embarrassment and liability when everything comes to light. When the truth is found, the individuals will probably be overwhelmed with guilt and stress, and at the same time, they will fear that they created a bad image for themselves (Minyard, 2017). Therefore, the challenges that come with uncovering the truth concerning a certain lie make the whole thing of lying toxic and unworthy. Research demonstrates that the stress one suffers after their lie is discovered or in the attempt to conceal the lie supersedes the stress that might come with telling the truth and facing the consequences at once.
The lack of trust among the army officers results in limited efficiency, commitment, and productivity for the army officer who lied. The team members are more likely to keep checking on an army officer who is deemed to be a frequent liar to ensure that they are doing the right thing. Lies are always associated with laziness, and because of this, most members of the military force will lack trust in working with a lying party (Reed, 2018). This gives much work to the NCO, who will be compelled to try and demonstrate and convince the team that the individuals should be allowed the opportunity to prove themselves. Similarly, the leaders will frequently question the individual since they will never be satisfied with whether the individual is sharing the truth.
Negativity from the Army Officers
Telling lies to the NCO is inappropriate aspect because it will make the other army officers always view the individual in a bad light (Reed, 2018). It is always hard for an individual to think positively about a liar, especially when the lies were motivated by individual interests instead of group interests. A lying party will always be regarded as self-centered and evil. Army officers always feel safe and entitled when engaging in a conversation with someone who speaks the truth. Conversely, when an individual is a liar, the team members will have minimal confidence in their ideas, even when they are valid and worth considering.
One major fact about liars is that they are never selective, and they will lie to any individual at any time. This then means that an individual who lies to the Non-commissioned Officer without a justifiable course is more likely to lie to other leaders and army officers. Therefore, the members often find it appropriate to avoid these individuals like the plague because of the higher probability of getting lied to when you interact with an individual who tells lies to the NCO. This is valid and worth doing because no individual would like to fall victim to lies.
A group can decide to ostracize an individual due to the absence of honesty fully, and no individual will feel safe when conversing or interacting with such persons (Reed, 2018). Negativity from the army officers toward a liar often triggers seclusion and depression in the person. The moment one is avoided on the ground that they lied to the NCO, and it happens that the matter is serious, they will run into the challenge of having to spend their time alone. Since army officers often operate in groups and teams, the moment news comes out that an individual lied to the NCO, it will spread faster. Most individuals within the department will have key details regarding the event.
Spread of information concerning an individual on their behavior, even when it is true information, will harm their work performance and the ability to take care of themselves. The stress that comes from finding out that the truth about the matter has been known, and it is not only in the hands of the NCO but also the army officers could make an individual extremely devastated. Such information can affect the ability of the individual to eat, execute responsibilities, interact with friends, and take part in fitness programs. Therefore, whereas lying can attract punishment from superiors, it can as well cause mental health challenges to the individuals behind the lies.
Conclusion
In conclusion, regardless of whether they were told intentionally or not, all lies are wrong in the army. Liars must always express regret or take steps to fix the problem they have created by lying before it becomes out of control. There are, however, some lies that could be extremely harmful to the entire force and as a result, always draw harsh penalties by the court martial and Non-judicial punishment (Weber, 2019). As simple as it may seem, lying to a non-commission officer can actually cause army troops to lose their jobs, thus it is always important to avoid taking such matters lightly. The execution of honesty and integrity is one of the significant ethical behaviors that the military profession requires. Contrary to expectations, it has been found that there is a lot of lying and dishonesty within the forces (Borchers, 2017).
Lying has negative implications for the army officer lying and the Non-commissioned Officers. It results in a lot of trust issues on the end of the NCOs and it often makes them not get convinced even when the truth is being told. The reason behind the trust issues among the NCOs on the army officers is that they have observed and discovered that a substantial number of the officers are perennial liars (Walker, 2022). Research demonstrates that most U.S. army officers are frequent liars, and they do it in both serious and non-serious situations. The problem of lying is present among military personnel as well and not just among senior army officials. While lying to people of higher rank within the profession, such as the NCO, is strictly forbidden in the military, doing so to them is completely unacceptable.
It has been proven that lying causes stress on the lying party, the party being lied to, and the other members of the military force. The lying army officer is most likely to suffer from the stress of the possible outcomes of the lies. On the other end, the NCO being lied to is likely to suffer from the challenge of failing to trust other members of the team and being forced to be much more analytical in order to strike a difference between the army officers that tell the truth and those that are perennial liars (Cohen, 2020). Finally, the other army officers are likely to suffer from the stress that they might fall victim to liars in the future. Similarly, they can be faced with the stress of having to handle more work in case the employment of the lying party is terminated.
References
Barno, D. & Benshahel, N. (2015). Lying to Ourselves: The Demise of Military Integrity.
Buer, J. (2016). The Virtue of Truthfulness in the Military Profession.
Borchers, J. L. (2017). The (Honest) Truth about Dishonesty, How We Lie to Everyone-Especially Ourselves.
Cohen, J. B. (2020). Advising the Ethical Playing Field: The Confluence of Profession, Ethics, and Principled Counsel. Army Law., 26.
Cruces, G. A., Rossi, M., & Schargrodsky, E. (2020). Dishonesty and Public Employment. In LV Reunión Anual de la Asociación Argentina de Economía Política (Modalidad virtual, 18 al 20 de noviembre de 2020).
Lu, Y. (2021). Trust, Truthfulness and Distrust: The Phenomenology of Xin. In Confucianism and Phenomenology (pp. 203-231). Brill.
Minyard, S. (2017). Dishonest Evaluations: An Ethics-Based Analysis. ARMY SERGEANTS MAJOR ACADEMY FORT BLISS TX.
Martin, C. E. (2021). Judge-Alone Special Courts-Martial: A Tool and and Opportunity. Army Law., 24.
Parsons, D. S. (2021). Virtuous soldiers: is the current ethical training sufficient for the United States Army or is a character development programme what soldiers and officers need? (Doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham).
Pitt, C. H. (2021). The Case for Standing Courts-Martial. Naval L. Rev, 67, 111.
Reed, D. S. (2018). Book Review: Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession.
Wong, L., & Gerras, S. (2022). Still Lying to Ourselves: A Retrospective Look at Dishonesty in the Army Profession. Journal of Character and Leadership Development, 9(1).
Wong, L., & Gerras, S. J. (2015). Lying to ourselves: Part Three.
Weber, J. S. (2019). The Curious Court-Martial of Henry Howe. Tulsa L. Rev., 55, 109.
Walker, D. I. (2022). Learning to own professional practice through character–The case of the junior British Army officer. Journal of Moral Education, 51(4), 554-572.
write