Regarding Shodan, I reckon it was sexist — if anything. Regarding your son, I beg you to reconsider your advice. Sneaking away from the battlefield might be more dangerous than fighting. Nevermind the prison term or the dishonorable discharge, your son is as likely as not to encounter extremely unfriendly personnel once he abandons the friends he has pledged to protect.
I was referring to his calling Demostylus racist on the previous page. His screed on this page is too contemptible to respond to.
I’m not saying to sneak away; I’d advise him not to do anything sneaky about it. And yes, he may encounter very unfriendly personnel. He might face prison time. Is it better to face prison, or to take an innocent human life?
I don’t understand what was contemptible about it.
I don’t know that it’s either-or. I don’t have a son, but I have a daughter, and if she were there, I would want her to do everything possible to protect herself from harm. I believe that she would be safer doing what she was trained to do than acting as a lone wolf and deserting. I wouldn’t want her to commit murder, certainly, but if she encountered live fire, I would want her to act on her training and instincts.
Then you’ll have to look elsewhere for clarification; it remains too contemptible to be dignified with a response.
Even if that might mean taking an innocent human life?
Not me. I’d encourage my kids ahead of time not to get in that situation, but once they’re there, their very highest priority is not to kill someone. If they’ve chosen to go that far, then I’ll dearly hope they survive; but I’ll more dearly hope they don’t kill an innocent person.
I would hold the same hope for myself in that situation.
Well, that sure provides me with a blueprint on how to beat you in a war, dunnit?
If I put my troops in civilian clothes, have them live among women and children and only stage hit and run attacks – In short, if make myself “unclear” – your fear of hurting innocents will prevent you from fighting back and I’ll inevitably win.
You’ll find very few wars that I’ll support, furt; your sarcasm is noted and dismissed.
Instead, you’ll find me saying in many cases, and especially in this case, that war is the wrong strategy to use against the enemy at hand.
bin Laden wanted a war, because he knew he could win it. Why the fuck did we satisfy him? Instead, we could’ve stolen his thunder: we could’ve worked with the international community in positive, productive ways, could’ve maintained an unfailing commitment to the human rights of ourselves and other people alike, could’ve spent $100 billion bucks building Afghanistan into a shining city on the hill, instead of spending far more on occupying a hostile country.
The fact that guerilla warfare is so effective is one of the primary reasons why I’ll support so few wars.
I’ll say I was ready to complement Shodan until I read the bride bit, tis a shame in an otherwise good (though somewhat ott) pastiche.
Oh and LonesomePollcat I’m glad you took my barb so well, after making that post I realised it was harsher than intended.
Left Hand of Dorkness do you advise your relatives to not drive since that also faces them with “the very real possibility that you’ll commit the irrevocable act of killing an innocent person” ?
Yes, because the risks posed by driving a car and the risks posed by firing off vehicle-mounted automatic weaponry are essentially the same. Good catch!
Both risks are very real. But of course not of the same magnitude. If you want to avoid the risk of shooting innocents, don’t join the military services. If you are in the military services then you need follow any legal order, and the rules of engagement. If you fail to do this you will likely endanger more than just a few innocents. As has been pointed out if the tactic of attacking from the midst of innocent people becomes unopposed then that tactic will become commonplace and lead to more deaths. This incident in discussion is unfortunate in the greatest degree, but it is a ‘sad fact of war’ type of incident, I feel it is of so many orders of magnitude less important than the disreguards for the Geneva Convention, and rules of engagement, shown by the soldiers running the Iraqi prisons that it is wrong to pay that much importance to this event.
No. My ethical system is formed before taking war into account; being in the army doesn’t give anyone an out from behaving in an ethical fashion. Killing innocent people is unethical whether or not you signed up to follow orders; if you’re given a legal order that tells you to do something unethical, then it is unethical to act legally.
Many people disagree with me on this, and I have gotten in vituperative arguments over this point, but it is fundamental to what I understand as right and wrong behavior. As I said before, no matter how far you have gone down the wrong road, turn back now.
Your compatriots in the army may be endangered in part by your choice, but they may also choose to turn back now as well. The innocent people you may kill do not have that choice. Therefore, it is the innocent people whose lives you must act to protect.
What are you saying? Armys are only meant to protect people? If that were true, there’d be no such thing as war, or armies for that matter. Was that your point? Once a war has been started, you can’t just shut it off like a spigot. The war * is now a reality*. Simply stepping away does not seem to be a viable option now.