I liked that a lot; it was really deep and kind of dramatic, but really good and written really well, once again. I must admit, though: I wasn’t in love with the first sentence. Instead, I would’ve started with the 4^th sentence:

“A single soldier leans against a wall, smoking a cigarette that could very well be his last.”

But that’s just me.

“Soon the sky will be cast with blood red.”

Kind of dramatic, and I’m not sure what it means. I’ve heard of “pink mist” in the context of war, and I think “pink mist” is the remnants of a person who stepped on some kind of land mine (but I’m not sure about that either). Is “pink mist” what you mean?

“Looking at its black frame, he couldn't help but thinks about the darkness that this weapon had send so many people too.”

I wouldn’t have used the word “darkness;” it sounds a too dramatic, like something out of a vampire novel.

“…and the light from the setting sun was swallowed by it.”

I think this could be worded better, but I still like it.

“If the sky became any redder, it would start to bleed.”

This helps make it sound too dramatic to me, for some reason. There’s something about the image of a bleeding sky that seems to clash with this, and would seem more at home in a vampire story.

“A warm breeze blew dust into the air. It smelled like blood and cordite.”

I love this. You’re really good with descriptions, and there’s a lot to describe of war. To really bring the audience to the battlefield, I suggest you incorporate the 5 senses into the mix. More of what you smell, hear, feel, taste: everything. I notice that you covered only 2 senses, and I’d still like to see more because I’m still fuzzy on things, like people’s damaged homes (you’ll see later).

“Brass of all sizes lay forgotten in the dirt, glistening in the dying light like jewelry of the damned.”

I don’t understand this (but I still love it: “…jewelry of the damned”. That’s great). By brass, do you mean different kinds of guns? Clarify.

“…he thought about what this place might have looked like before. These were homes.”

I also want to see the homes. First you said buildings so I thought of like, office buildings: giant stone rectangles riddled with holes and blood. Then you said homes and had to draw a blank slate, not knowing what to think.

“Every bullet that ripped from his rifle was for them.”

I wouldn’t have used the word “ripped” (but that’s just me again). To rip is to force something, and the bullet wasn’t forced from its home. You press a button and it goes whether it wants to or not, but people instill it with the idea that the bullet also wants their enemy, so I would use the word “rush,” as if the bullet was just as willing to attack their owner’s enemy.

I was so confused in the first paragraph when I saw the word “magazine” because it seemed so random and out of place for the lone soldier to be reading Playboy or Men's Health, or something. Then I get to the bottom:

“magazine casing”

How about putting that up at the top, to minimize confusion for those of us (me) who know nothing about war and guns?

“When that bullet came for him, he would be there to greet it.”

This somehow doesn’t read right to me, either. Maybe it’s because of the word “greet;” I’m sorry, but I can’t see a guy with a family to live for willingly welcoming death. If that's not the case, please clarify.

This work has some potential and goes down an unexpected route for me.  It made me wonder if you actually have some battle experience.  (I had to view your profile to check, and it appears you're in the Navy.  So I still don't really know for sure. )

The "unexpected route" was this:

Whoever said war was an ugly things knows nothing. While the reason and need for war is a stain on humanity, war itself; the act of battle; is glorious and beautiful thing. It is in battle where the raw of the human soul is bared, where men abandon thier upbringings and faiths to commit acts in the name of protecting the very things they gave up. In battle, no one is right, and no one is wrong, because when it comes right down to it, they all fight for the same things.

The people I know who've been in Iraq and Afghanistan do not share these sentiments and I would think most would be hard pressed to find a many soldiers who do.  Then again, maybe you wanted to give a different view on war that not many people hold.  Or maybe many people do hold it and I'm out of touch.  I have never been involved with the armed forces, so perhaps I haven't a clue. 

Your explanation that follows is good.  I would argue that it romanticizes war [battle].  But to say,

In battle, no one is right, and no one is wrong, because when it comes right down to it, they all fight for the same things.

doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  I would thing that both sides think they're right, that's why they're fighting.  And right before that, I wouldn't say people abandon their faiths.  I have a Christian friend who says his faith has been strengthened after being over in the Middle East.  And it would seem that some may also fight because they  may feel their faith requires it. 

I don't mean to start a moral or political argument.  As I've said before, this paragraph caught me off guard and immediately I started asking questions.  I think you could keep the theme, but perhaps make it stronger, make it more convincing. 

The last paragraph also seemed odd.  It also seems bizarre to me that a soldier, after thinking about his family, would go and greet the bullet when it came for him.  It reminds me of the movie 300 where the warriors go and welcome death, but in out culture, I don't think we share those same mores and values. 

Again, I admit ignorance when it comes to battle and the armed forces.  I know I don't understand a lot of the mentality, so if your goal was to paint an accurate picture of the mentality of soldier, then perhaps you've done it?  I really don't know.  I like it though because it spawns thought.  It makes people consider war and battle in a way they probably haven't before. 

As Alyssa said, there were some areas of melodrama that might need to be cleaned up.  But you do well with imagery and feeling.  This is my favorite line:

Brass of all sizes lay forgotten in the dirt, glistening in the dying light like jewelry of the damned.

I thought this was great and vivid.  Great job with that!

Overall, I think this work has a lot to improve upon, but also has a lot to work with.  Flash fiction is, I think, one of the most difficult things to write because you want to cover so much with so few words.  If you get the chance, check out Amy Hempel.  She has built a career on short stories, many of which are only a page or two.  Thanks for sharing it with is.  I really did enjoy it!

 I really liked this work. And since it seems to developed on the fly I is pretty damn good. And as a matter of fact I have been experimenting with war fiction for quite some time. Nevertheless, I just wanted to offer a few suggestions for this work.

"The sun sets over the side of a desolate building. Soon the sky will be cast with blood red. But that's okay; it will match the ground."

This is a really good sentence, and I like the imagery. However, I think you can make things flow a little smoothly here and more image intensive. Try this for your first sentence.

"The sun sets behind the edifice of a dilapidated building."

Since this is a war story, and since the rest of the work describes a war-zone, describing the building as destroyed would make it a better fit for the rest of the work.

The sentence after this one can also be reworked a bit. Instead of saying "Soon the sky will be cast with blood red." Why not instead try this:

"It is evening now, and soon, the sky will give way to the color of blood."

Again, this is supposed to be soldier's musings on warfare. The main focus of this sentence is after the first comma, "and soon, the sky will give way to the color of blood." This type of imagery would probably best capture the mood of warfare, since in war, blood is ultimately spilled. Using the words "color of blood" can just as easily capture the reader's imagination as "blood red". In other words, "the color of blood" makes the imagery seem more believable. Though I have never been in a war myself and seen people bleed before, my guess would be that "blood red" seems a bit cliched and a little too hollywood. That is however, my relative opinion. You are free to use it at your own discretion.

"But that's okay; it will match the ground"

Your last sentence is perfect I believe, blending the color of the sky with the ground. And this is my interpretation of the passage. I felt that this is your way of saying that no matter where the soldier looks, stands, sit, etc, he will never be able to escape the images of war. My suggestion, keep it as is.

But this battlefield was a hallowed place. It was not just the setting of the play that was human ignorance. It was not just a place of death and misery, of lives lost and dreams gone with them. It was a place where men and women had stood thier ground and died for what they had believed was right. They had paid the ultimate sacrifice here, given it all away. They left behind families, plans, dreams; all in the name for belief. Whether that belief was of God, freedom, culture, or whatever, none of that matter. All that was important was that it was a belief, and it was held dearly enough to die for.

This paragraph is great, but I'm trying to draw the connection between the word "hallowed" in your first sentence with the other sentences and descriptions you give. As you probably know "hallowed" is a synonym for holy. If I were you, I would try and describe how the battlefield is a "hallowed" place by drawing some unique references or metaphors for how the battlefield can be considered a holy place. This is a really complicated allusion, but i will try to provide an alternate take.

"But this battlefield was hallowed ground."

While it really doesn't matter if the battlefield is a hallowed place or hallow ground, most times I have seen hallowed and ground in tandem as opposed to hallowed and place. Ground I think is a better choice of words, since it is the ground over which dead bodies lie. Reminds me a burials, six-feet-under, and most other things associated with funerary practices. In war there is death, and using "hallowed ground" fleshes out this idea much better. Once again, this is only a suggestion and it is up to you if you choose to use it.

"It was not just the setting of the play that was human ignorance."

In trying to stay consistent with this theme of "holiness" you bring up in your first sentence, this sentence seems a little strange. I find the words "setting of the play" confusing. If the ground is hallowed then it is something people perceive as real. A play is imaginative, a fantasy if you will. "Human ignorance" is also a confusing choice of words. Is the battlefield reminiscent of a stage play, a play in which ignorance is a primary character? This is just my relative interpretation and you may have meant something entirely different. But if you use this sentence, you run the risk of confusing your readers with differing metaphors. Don't worry about trying to draw a parallel between a holy battlefield and a stage play. It is much too complicated and you run the risk of confusing your readers. Stay in step with the "hallowed"/holiness theme you began with. To counter this, I would instead write:

"It was a holy place, where countless men and women died for what they believed in."

This sentence I think continues the theme of "hallowed". Holy, at least from my point of view implies a set of belief's, something that is inherently religious to people. In saying that the battlefield is a "holy place" where people died for what they "believed in" implies something sacred and revered. This is very consistent with the idea of a battlefield being "hallowed ground". Everything else in the paragraph seems to be okay. But just as a general tip, try and keep your metaphors consistent. Doing too much always confuses the reader. Other than that, I think this was a great and original work.