I've gotten really numb and frustrated since 2013. I don't feel as much as I did back then.
Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465
Rage for Order...great album
Developing a cynical sense of humor helps.
BTW Good bumps tonight, KC.
There is a distinction between collateral damage and intentional murder of civilians.
A soldier who accidentally shoots a civilian or who is forced to shoot a civilian who is perceived as a legitimate threat is still a good and moral person.
A soldier who randomly kills civilians for fun is a truly evil person.
I just hope RPF recognizes this.
Does this loophole cover you and me too?
What do you mean by that?
It's the same for everyone. Accidental deaths in war or even everyday life are regrettable, but don't make you an immoral person.
Or do you want to shoot me?
My stomach turns around at this roller-coaster of sadness."I remember one woman walking by," said Jason Washburn, a corporal in the US Marines who served three tours in Iraq. He told the audience at the Winter Soldier hearings that took place March 13-16, 2008, in Silver Spring, Maryland, "She was carrying a huge bag, and she looked like she was heading toward us, so we lit her up with the Mark 19, which is an automatic grenade launcher, and when the dust settled, we realized that the bag was full of groceries. She had been trying to bring us food and we blew her to pieces."
With civilians, murder doesn't require intention:
Depraved-heart murder
Depraved-heart murder, also known as depraved-indifference murder, is an American legal term for an action that demonstrates a "callous disregard for human life" and results in death. In most states, depraved heart killings constitute second-degree murder.[1]
Common law background
The common law punishes unintentional homicide as murder if the defendant commits an act of gross recklessness....
Under the Model Penal Code
Depraved-heart murder is recognized in the Model Penal Code § 210.2(1)(b).[3] The Model Penal Code considers unintentional killing to constitute murder when the conduct of the defendant manifests "extreme indifference to the value of human life".
Last edited by robert68; 09-18-2014 at 03:12 PM.
This is news for me.
So, say you're a hunter, and you hear some rustling over in some bushes nearby, and you shoot at it in case its a deer, but it turns out to be a person. You haven't done anything immoral?
That's different. If you can't see what you are firing at, you are irresponsible and morally responsible for the death.
You wake up in the middle of the night to find a man in your home. He walks toward you. You shoot him, but it turns out the guy came home drunk and walked into the wrong house. You are not morally responsible for the death, it was a perceived threat.
What if I'm the one in his home and perceive him as a threat?
I was tail end of Nam, stationed at the Navy hospital dealing with the $#@!ed up Marines and sailors that were there..
Their stories were enough to completely turn me against government....
I think the immorality lies more with those that send these people to war, they are responsible for putting soldiers trained according to their specifications into harms way, into a stressful environment. Stress hormones can do weird things with people, sleep deprivation and extreme exhaustion can make people take all the wrong decisions. Of course these people chose to go to war but the main source of immorality lies with those that sent them. Most signed up with good intentions.
I don't completely disagree.
But that's one of the big problems with democracy. It spreads the blame around for government evils in a way that makes it hard to blame anyone specific. There's a sense in which those who join the military are victims. But part of putting an end to all this has to include getting recruits to see that they are morally culpable for their choice to enlist and be sent off to do evil.
There is nothing wrong with enlisting to serve and defend your country. If you accidentally kill a civilian while in the service you are not morally culpable. If you go around murdering civilians for no reason, then you are.
If you join the military, it's not to serve your country. It's to serve corrupt politicians. It's pretty much a guarantee that your country will be made worse off on account of the things they will commission you to do. We need to get everybody to see that. Part of the method of passing the buck is the use of that kind of propaganda to recruit people so that we can take solace in the fact that the people pulling the triggers at least had the right motives.
We can't just write off so-called "collateral damage" as an accident. We go into wars with the intent of doing collateral damage, and we use methods of killing people and destroying things that we know will result in it. Imagine if I threw a hand grenade at someone I thought was going to mug me and thought I wouldn't be culpable for innocent lives I might take along with his.
Last edited by erowe1; 09-18-2014 at 05:02 PM.
erowe1 is 100% correct.
So the millions who joined the US military after the US was attacked in WW2 were morally wrong?
They were defending their country after an attack in a justified declared war and caused more collateral damage than will ever be caused in Iraq.
Are you freaking kidding me with this?
THIS is the point by which most "minarchists" actually prove themselves to be haters of liberty and peace. Its not their support for minimal government functions. It is THIS issue.
Anyone who thinks any US war post 1812 was actually fought in a justified way is anything but a freedom supporter.
And, by your definitions, the civilian deaths in WWII were not "collateral damage", they were deliberate murders.
I don't really care if I can be called one of your labels.
American involvement WW2 was justified. Some civilian deaths were collateral damage. Some were intentional. It was a different time and total warfare, the distinction between civil and military got blurred at the end of it. It's hard for somebody of my generation to comprehend total war, I imagine it's impossible for someone of yours to, all you've experienced is limited undeclared engagements.
It was definitely not a justified war.
Those who were drafted were definitely victims of an egregious wrong and put in an impossible position. Those who enlisted voluntarily are less excusable. But they too were so stewed in propaganda that I can't help feeling sympathy for them.
But no, all that collateral damage can't just be written off as the unfortunate and unavoidable consequences of moral actions. The innocent lives taken by American forces in all those bombings amount to hundreds of thousands of murders.
Total war is unbiblical, immoral, and evil. I fail to see how any Christian can disagree with that (I don't know if 69360 even claims to be Christian or not, but this is a basic moral issue on the same level as abortion or slavery being morally wrong.)
I can't imagine you find much popular support in this country for your opposition to WW2.
Have you ever spoken to the generation that fought the war? I have never come across a single person of that generation who was opposed. Our country was attacked and war was declared against us. Men lined up to enlist and there was no opposition to the draft that I have ever heard of.
If it matters to you I was baptized Catholic, but don't attend a church regularly and oppose abortion.
Japan bombed a strictly military target for 2 hours, around 2,500 miles from the US, killing around 2000 soldiers, and left. They were never a threat to the US, and any limited threat they were to the navy was put down at the Battle of Midway, 6 months after the Pearl Harbor bombing. The US responded by firebombing over 60 Japanese cities and nuking 2 of them, killing millions of Japanese; that's far from a justified response.
Last edited by robert68; 09-19-2014 at 12:31 AM.
Spot. On. Exactly, oyarde.
Your rifle.
Your bullet.
Your responsibility.
Oh, the moral loop-de-loops people do to try to excuse soldiers for their actions. We need to start standing up for what's right. Calling spades spades. Using euphemisms for sick and wanton crimes against humanity is itself sick. "Collateral Damage." Sick.
Maybe no opposition among men, but the Bible still spoke as loudly and clearly as it always has:
http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=13
Most people think WWII was right. So what?
Meh, you and everyone else. The sad thing is that there are so many evangelicals who agree with you on those issues, and at least 50% of whom would be outright offended by the Biblical position.
If it matters to you I was baptized Catholic, but don't attend a church regularly and oppose abortion.
The hard thing is actually telling this to people who are in the military or who have family members who were. I'm downright frustrated that this is even considered debatable here. What we should be talking about is how to defend the truth in real life. (Unless I'm the only one who has difficulty doing so.)
Same morality for everyone, period, 69360. Anything else is unacceptable.
Accidentally killing someone is different than intentionally killing them. Sure. I think you've made a reasonable case on that matter. Your motive for intentionally killing them (thought he was a legitimate threat, etc.) may also matter to you. It's not my job to go around condemning people. But whether you are a "soldier" or not changes nothing. Nothing real.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Someone +rep erowe for me, plz. ~hugs~
Connect With Us