ISIS creates sex slave jail with Yezidi women

[Brickjectivity]

Its a shame that China is so far away and doesnt give a crap. The PLA is the kind of army you need against the IS to show who's boss.

China should be invited and Russia. USA and Israel should stay out of the conflict.

ISIS is consciously fighting to distort and embarrass morality by provoking good people. The people they kill and the atrocities they commit are to goad USA (and by proxy the UN and West) into making questionable moral decisions. It is not about the territory only. The real strength of USA is concepts of morality, and these dudes have actually thought it through and contrived to undermine that.

 

[Shad]

Good point. It probably isn't. But a bomber still needs at least one actual human being to be convinced that it is acceptable to cause that destruction. It still involves making a case for another human, as opposed to simply drowning your opponent out of technological superiority alone.

You overestimate people. Half a million members of the Air Forces in WW2 had no issues carpet bombing whole cities. War creates a situation in which the enemy is demonized enough that empathy is smothered. We only see the regret after the act. We see very few people before or in the act stop and consider. While a drone may remove the human pilot there are still personnel involved. The officer(s) ordering the strike, the mechanics, the weapon specialists, etc. Anyone of these people could protest against order. Few do. Besides technology has been moving the triggers of our weapon an increasing distances from our enemies. Planes, artillery, hand-held weapons, tanks, etc. All still require a human finger pushing a button.

 

[LuisDantas]

You overestimate people. Half a million members of the Air Forces in WW2 had no issues carpet bombing whole cities. War creates a situation in which the enemy is demonized enough that empathy is smothered. We only see the regret after the act. We see very few people before or in the act stop and consider. While a drone may remove the human pilot there are still personnel involved. The officer(s) ordering the strike, the mechanics, the weapon specialists, etc. Anyone of these people could protest against order. Few do. Besides technology has been moving the triggers of our weapon an increasing distances from our enemies. Planes, artillery, hand-held weapons, tanks, etc. All still require a human finger pushing a button.

You are probably right... but I still don't think it is defensable to use drones.

 

[Flankerl]

Good point. It probably isn't. But a bomber still needs at least one actual human being to be convinced that it is acceptable to cause that destruction. It still involves making a case for another human, as opposed to simply drowning your opponent out of technological superiority alone.

Yeah uhm Drones are controlled by humans. They fire when the human says so.


Its also quite ridiculous. Drones are what Planes were in the first World War.
What Artillery was in the 15th century.
What muskets were in the 15th century.
What bows were in the... quite some time ago.
What slings were in... even far before bows.
What throwing spears were at the beginning.

The distance to you enemy changed. Thats all.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yeah uhm Drones are controlled by humans. They fire when the human says so.

Yeah, I'm actually reconsidering the ethical defensability of bombers, helicopters and fighter jets as well.

Its also quite ridiculous.

In a sense it is, but I don't think we will agree on which one.

Drones are what Planes were in the first World War.
What Artillery was in the 15th century.
What muskets were in the 15th century.
What bows were in the... quite some time ago.
What slings were in... even far before bows.
What throwing spears were at the beginning.

The distance to you enemy changed. Thats all.

And with it, the moral defensability of the weapons, particularly as they become more and more expensive and therefore make asymetrical warfare more and more defensible by comparison.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Good point. It probably isn't. But a bomber still needs at least one actual human being to be convinced that it is acceptable to cause that destruction. It still involves making a case for another human, as opposed to simply drowning your opponent out of technological superiority alone.

I was watching some documentary, and it said that the military is noticing that drone pilots experience PTSD and other combat-related psychological disorders, even though they aren't in combat. The distance has changed, and the environment has changed for some, but apparently for some the thoughts of, images of, and actions of killing another human and causing destruction weighs heavily on some.

 

[LuisDantas]

I was watching some documentary, and it said that the military is noticing that drone pilots experience PTSD and other combat-related psychological disorders, even though they aren't in combat. The distance has changed, and the environment has changed for some, but apparently for some the thoughts of, images of, and actions of killing another human and causing destruction weighs heavily on some.

Now that is something to be happy about, albeit ironically.

 

[Flankerl]

Now that is something to be happy about, albeit ironically.

It shows that its just regular warfare. Its a bow with a long range.

You really have to accept that war is. Really helps to understand history and todays world.

 

[LuisDantas]

It shows that its just regular warfare. Its a bow with a long range.

Humble people can build bows. But they can't fight drones with them. The economic reality makes the comparison preposterous, I fear.

You really have to accept that war is. Really helps to understand history and todays world.

I do accept what it is. I just don't accept it.

 

[Flankerl]

Humble people can build bows. But they can't fight drones with them. The economic reality makes the comparison preposterous, I fear.

Has always been that way.

The French knights were mowed down by the English archers.
The Turks shot the crusader knights to dust with their cannons.
The Prussians simply reloaded while lying on the ground and devastated the Austrians.

When two opposing forces use the same tactics and have the same gear all you get are long wars and lots of suffering.
See World War 1 or the Thirty Year's War.

I do accept what it is. I just don't accept it.

Well then you will cry forever because it aint changing. People kill People, such is life.

 

[LuisDantas]

Then so be it. I refuse to accept that.

 

[Father Heathen]

Heck, I might very well consider supporting ISIS if it comes to that!

So remote piloting to reduce risk to soldiers is worse than kidnapping, raping, and enslaving women?

 

[LuisDantas]

So remote piloting to reduce risk to soldiers is worse than kidnapping, raping, and enslaving women?

Promoting that certainly is. It is just slaughter under the guise of... I don't know of what, come to think it.

 

[CMike]

Humble people can build bows. But they can't fight drones with them. The economic reality makes the comparison preposterous, I fear.




I do accept what it is. I just don't accept it.

If I am in a fight for my life I don't want a fair fight.

I want to have the superior firepower.

 

[LuisDantas]

If I am in a fight for my life I don't want a fair fight.

Don't make me wish you don't get one, please.

I want to have the superior firepower.

Do you think you deserve it?

 

[CMike]

Good point. It probably isn't. But a bomber still needs at least one actual human being to be convinced that it is acceptable to cause that destruction. It still involves making a case for another human, as opposed to simply drowning your opponent out of technological superiority alone.

As was stated humans are still making those decision.

 

[CMike]

Don't make me wish you don't get one, please.




Do you think you deserve it?

What do you mean by deserve it?

If an armed attacker breaks into my house for the purpose of hurting my wife and myself, if that attacker has a pistol, I would prefer to have a shotgun.

I don't want a fair fight.

 

[LuisDantas]

As was stated humans are still making those decision.

From a vantage point where their victims lack any means of defending themselves.

That is simply abominable and shameful.

 

[LuisDantas]

What do you mean by deserve it?

You stated that you want superior firepower. Do you think you deserve it? If so, why?

If an armed attacker breaks into my house for the purpose of hurting my wife and myself, if that attacker has a pistol, I would prefer to have a shotgun.

I don't want a fair fight.

I see. Is that what you meant by "the fight of your life" previously, then?

 

[Father Heathen]

Promoting that certainly is. It is just slaughter under the guise of... I don't know of what, come to think it.

So killing to protect innocent people is worse than victimizing innocent people?