|
||
 |
zenmonk says | |||
| I was thinking about BS:G's treatment of torture and other non-traditional tactics usually associated w/ terrorists/freedom-fighters. In our culture, we disdain suicide attacks, roadside bombs, hiding in mosques, etc. But isn't that just because we've always been the strongest force? We've never had to fight a superior enemy. Faced with a superior enemy, shouldn't we (mustn't we) do everything in our power to succeed? Would our morality change to reflect the new state of reality? How long would it take? Could we become the enemy? |
||||
| Total Topic Karma: 15 | - More by this Author | |||
 |
poss says |
|
|||
| If we were truly faced with a superior enemy, their power would be so devastating as to make a full scale war an unacceptable option. Our armaments are so horrific, that anything that exceeds our own capabilities, is.. armegedon. Full scale war between two powers as great as the US can not be allowed. I point to the cold war and mutually assured destruction as evidence of this. | |||||
| - Author's History - 23 September, 2007 | |||||
 |
Ati says |
|
|||
| Well Poss, it's also possible that we might be forces to shrink our armaments, until another power is capable of superseding us. In which case, yes. Our generals are not fools, and I think they would use whatever tactics were necessary. However, in my personal philosophy, harming the innocent is unacceptable, and torture is abominable. I would never knowing consent to my government's use of torture regardless of the circumstances. |
|||||
| - Author's History - 24 September, 2007 | |||||
|
|
| plutonium11 says |
|
||||
| I do agree that torture and harming the innocent is wrong but I still don't see the way we fight right now as any more humane. Killing someone is the name of war is just an act of murder, I see no difference. Most of the enemy soldiers killed, like in most if not all wars, were innocent people. I find the way we fight now as pathetic and stupid. We made up stupid rules like no biological and chemical weapons that we MUST agree on but why not just agree not to use anything at all? Killing someone with chemical or biological weapons is no difference to blowing them up with a tonne of TNT. That's why I absolutely hate conscription; I equate it with slavery. I would rather go to jail or be tortured to death by my own government then be drafted. |
|||||
| - Author's History - 24 September, 2007 | |||||
|
Ati says |
|
|||
| Well, the thing is that if you get blown up by a tonne of TNT, the damage radius is relatively small, and if you get hit by it, odds are you die fast. With biological or chemical weapons, the area affected is huge. Not only will the soldiers that you attack die, but the granny a hundred miles down wind will die too. And if you get hit with chlorine gas, white phosphor, or bioweapons, you die slowly and painfully. I agree with you that war is horrible, but there IS a difference between bio/chemical weapons and conventional ones. |
|||||
| - Author's History - 24 September, 2007 | |||||
|
poss says |
|
|||
| just as there is a difference between fists and swords, and between swords and bullets, and between bullets and bombs. So why choose biochem weapons as the cut off point? why not draw the line at the difference between words and fists? |
|||||
| - Author's History - 25 September, 2007 | |||||
|
zenmonk says |
|
|||
| If you didn't have more karma than anyone in existence, I'd hack Shuzak to give you 1,000 more, just for that one comment. | |||||
| - Author's History - 26 September, 2007 | |||||
|
poss says |
|
|||
| aw shucks! thanks Zenmonk! | |||||
| - Author's History - 26 September, 2007 | |||||
|
poss says |
|
|||
you know, that is actually part of the reason i have so much karma, Josh hacked shuzak and gave himself, lacey and I about 500 karma each  I told Jawad, but he never did anything about it. So by all rights, Ati should be about 250 ahead of me  |
|||||
| - Author's History - 26 September, 2007 | |||||
|
|
