61–70 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> It would be a shame to go through all this and then be killed in the first hour of war by some stray bullet? It would be more of a shame to not have tried, to give up, that's what I think the point of the speech is.
One could try less risky things?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This issue is more complicated than you make it sound. It's absolutely true that discipline and following orders are essential to the smooth functioning of a military force. However, that does not give soldiers an excuse to leave their conscience with their civilian clothes. The entire point of the Nuremberg trials ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials ) was that "I was just following orders" is not a defen…
And that's why there are things called ROEs: Rules of Engagement. A soldier just can't shoot anyone they see. There are very hard limits on who is considered a "combatant" and who is not. A big part of what gets soldiers and Marines on our side killed is ambiguity about who can be shot when they present a threat and who cannot. If you do anything outside of the ROE it can be considered a war crime: http://www.dailyma…
Have a read. How many soldiers ended up in jail for these?
How many commanding officers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One could try less risky things?
For how long? Weeks, months or years or even decades? Then you tell those children how long you thought it was OK for them to endure what they are going through right now.
You think the only worthwhile risks to take are the ones where you risk your life? Or do you mean you always risk your life anyway?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The enemy is always at the gate, they care not that your heart bleeds for their children; they only care about making you and your children bleed so they can take what you have and destroy who you are and what your children could have become.
Nobody is pure evil, and someone who shallowly dismisses others as pure evil, is at least slightly evil. Of course, this is my personal definition of evil. However, I stand by it. Traces of nobility, gentleness and courage persist in all people, do what we will to stamp out the trend. So, too, do those characteristics which are ugly. It is just unfortunate that in the clumsy hands of a cartoonist all traits become ri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You just took the words "sacrifice" and "pride" out of context and used them to rebut an argument I didn't make. And, obviously, I didn't make an argument that it was wrong to object to service in the military.
> our country (and yours) wouldn't need to ask people to sacrifice that part of their humanity in service to their countrymen. Sacrifice in that sentence indicates that we are asking those people to give up their humanity in our service, as if that is something that makes it heroic. Besides, I didn't ask them, and never would. > You might find that while SEALs are happy to speak proudly what they've learned in basic…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a horribly naive viewpoint. You've fallen into the trap of making a judgement of someone based on a popular understanding of a particular profession rather than any factual reality. And here are the facts: 1. There is evil in the world. 2. That evil sometimes hurts innocent people. 3. We need some way of protecting innocent people from evil. I'm reminded of the current hullabaloo about Boko Haram and the kidn…
If that is horribly naive, so was Einstein: He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism, how violently I hate all t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a computer, right now, that can beat any human alive at chess? I don't know what robotics will do. My point is larger than specifics. And, the point is.... machine like thinking will always be better done by machines. So, developing better machine like thinking in their heads isn't the way forward for humans. It's a futile battle... kind of like John Henry and the steam drill. Sure, being a big strong guy wh…
Is there a computer, right now, that can beat any human alive at Go?
There is likely one that can beat *most humans alive right now. What could a 2 billion dollar military grant and a sense of urgency produce in the 3 years?
We have driver-less cars. Exponential development. The robot army is coming... like it or not. Sure, humans will always probably make key decisions. Your point is good. There are areas humans have an advantage over machines. But, the robot army is coming and coming fast. My point is... this renders a bunch of the qualities mentioned in this article, qualities designed to turn man into a machine, obsolete. And it means other qualities become more important. Failure to recognize the future and plan for it will mean defeat on the battle field. No matter how much belt buckles are shined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought soldiers had a little more self-respect than describing themselves as dumb tools used by others. No mind of their own, just following the civilians orders?
Soldiers choose to shoot or not to shoot, and risk getting shot, getting their buddy shot, getting court martialed and/or PTSD if they choose wrong. But soldiers do not choose whether or not their country invades another country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought soldiers had a little more self-respect than describing themselves as dumb tools used by others. No mind of their own, just following the civilians orders?
Soldiers choose to shoot or not to shoot, and risk getting shot, getting their buddy shot, getting court martialed and/or PTSD if they choose wrong. But soldiers do not choose whether or not their country invades another country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The military, no military would function if each member went their own way and did their own thing. It's OK to not serve if you disagree with the leadership, just don't sign up. You can change the world by working to oust corrupt politicians, Republicans and Democrats and Libertarians. Understand though that freedom is not free, there's always someone waiting for the opportunity to take over your country and they don…
This issue is more complicated than you make it sound. It's absolutely true that discipline and following orders are essential to the smooth functioning of a military force. However, that does not give soldiers an excuse to leave their conscience with their civilian clothes. The entire point of the Nuremberg trials ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials ) was that "I was just following orders" is not a defen…
That's precisely why the relevant articles of the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice relating to "disobeying orders" explicitly requires that the orders be lawful for a crime to have been committed.
U.S. servicemembers not only have the right to disobey illegal orders, they have the explicit and positive duty to disobey illegal orders.
The catch is that ambiguous situations/"judgment calls" tend to break the tie in favor of an order being lawful. But beyond that the issue is not at all as complicated as you think.
E.g. with Lt. Calley's company, they were clearly guilty of not only crimes, but war crimes, yet there was a concerted effort in the U.S. and in the military leadership in Vietnam to cover the incident up. The issue there wasn't about "just following orders", the issue there was that the U.S. never attempted to put the criminals on trial in the first place, and that the eventual justice process that was meted out was so watered down. Even worse the Army and U.S. leadership tried to (and did) ruin the careers and lives of the 3 who actually followed their training as soldiers to put a stop to the massacre.
But you'll note that Lt. Calley was eventually court-martialed, and despite consistently claiming that he "just followed orders" was found guilty, sentenced to life, and his sentence upheld on appeal. Of course, U.S. leadership gutted that too, and effectively commuted his sentence, but "just following orders" was very much put on trial in the U.S. system and shot down again.