Since getting rid of all military in the world sounds utopian at this moment, UN can take a first step in this direction by asking its member countries to change military oath in their countries. Soldiers take oath to protect their countries on their soil, but are not obligated to participate in wars in foreign lands even if it sounds by politicians as "protecting motherland"
Military Hack, Changing Oath
1–5 of 5 posts
Re: Military Hack, Changing Oath
#2From an idealistic perspective: I mistrust any "hack" that would prevent taking out Nazi Germany.
From a more cynical perspective: Who's going to have to actually change the oaths? The politicians. The same politicians who want to be able to sell the wars as protecting the motherland. That change seems to be unlikely to be implemented, because it takes power away from those who want it.
Re: Military Hack, Changing Oath
#3From an idealistic perspective: I mistrust any "hack" that would prevent taking out Nazi Germany. From a more cynical perspective: Who's going to have to actually change the oaths? The politicians. The same politicians who want to be able to sell the wars as protecting the motherland. That change seems to be unlikely to be implemented, because it takes power away from those who want it.
well, this hack would have prevented Nazi Germany from taking out other countries in WW2
From cynical perspective: ppl should demand it from their politicians, which can be hard sometimes(
Re: Military Hack, Changing Oath
#4From an idealistic perspective: I mistrust any "hack" that would prevent taking out Nazi Germany. From a more cynical perspective: Who's going to have to actually change the oaths? The politicians. The same politicians who want to be able to sell the wars as protecting the motherland. That change seems to be unlikely to be implemented, because it takes power away from those who want it.
well, this hack would have prevented Nazi Germany from taking out other countries in WW2 From cynical perspective: ppl should demand it from their politicians, which can be hard sometimes(
> well, this hack would have prevented Nazi Germany from taking out other countries in WW2
No, it wouldn't have; they just would have changed it back, as they violated lots of other terms imposed on them to prevent them from being a threat.
And if the Allies hadn't been just as eager to dump the restrictions, it would have interfered with the Allied response to Nazi Germany.
Controlling war isn't a matter of thinking up rules that will prevent it as long as no one breaks them. If it were, the Kellogg-Briand Pact in 1928 would have solved the problem.
Re: Military Hack, Changing Oath
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
well, this hack would have prevented Nazi Germany from taking out other countries in WW2 From cynical perspective: ppl should demand it from their politicians, which can be hard sometimes(
> well, this hack would have prevented Nazi Germany from taking out other countries in WW2 No, it wouldn't have; they just would have changed it back, as they violated lots of other terms imposed on them to prevent them from being a threat. And if the Allies hadn't been just as eager to dump the restrictions, it would have interfered with the Allied response to Nazi Germany. Controlling war isn't a matter of thinking…
well, in this hack there is a different vector of force...now people/soldiers are more conscious than before, even though local media can brainwash their brains...but once they get on foreign soil and see that situation is very different from what they've been told, now they could quickly chose not to participate in wrong things and if they have this hack in oath they can freely return homes and not feel as traitors or get under military tribunal. At the same time this hack protects country/politicians in case someone decides to attack their soil, it's different than terms/agreements imposed by one country to another