pyonir:
I think that its nature of a given era of warfare that defines bravery on the field.
In today's military, that guy could weasily, and very legitimately, avoided doing what he did. He would not have been a coward if he had pulled back, or done any number of maneuvers. There would have been increased risk to his men, but he would probably have been considered OK in not doing what he did.
My point is that his actions were completely voluntary, exposing himself to direct and very real danger to eliminate an enemy threat and risk to his men. That took bravery - a lot of it. The same bravery as shown by so many troops in WWII.
🙂