Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

What happens if someone invents effective energy weapons? Does that change the situation? Or automaticly operating robots? Is that negative honor, or do guns become better in retrospect?

There's a joke in Pakistan. I won't explain it.

Spoiler: NSFW Joke (click to show/hide)

A woman told her friend that she was engaged with an American, but broke the engagement off. The friend asked her why.

"He'd only fire from 20,000 feet."

Hey, I have to ask: why is it more "honorable" to kill someone in hand to hand combat rather than with a gun? While we are at it, what does "honorable"  mean to begin with?

I think it would mean that it is honorable to attack someone who has equal skills with you. For example, the United States attacking Luxemborg would not be honorable, since Luxemborg is weak and defenseless compared to the United States. If the United States, say, attack China, that would be honorable, since both have roughly equal skills.

[Strife26]

Heh. I got it.

[Earthquake Damage]

While we are at it, what does "honorable"  mean to begin with?

What culture are we talking about?  Honor is variable.

[Leafsnail]

If the United States, say, attack China, that would be honorable, since both have roughly equal skills.

I personally would call that "Retarded and Irresponsible", but there you go.

[Strife26]

If the United States, say, attack China, that would be honorable, since both have roughly equal skills.

I personally would call that "Retarded and Irresponsible", but there you go.

It'd be a slaughter. China has actual things to attack. Obviously, it'd be irresponsible in the extreme (hint: nukes), but equal skills is really stretching it. 

[Leafsnail]

If nuclear weapons got involved... respective military sizes wouldn't really matter.  Mutual destruction would be virtually guarenteed.

[Duke 2.0]

 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Honor is a moral that we use in respect to our personal opinions on fairness. We find a large guy beating up a small guy unfair. We find two equally-matched guys fighting for a common prize fair. Now the specific rules on honor and who it applies to is variable with the culture(Example, killing a cheating lying scumbag in an unfair fight is still considered honorable because the scumbag does not deserve fairness due to his actions), but generally it is an extension on our ideals of fairness. Even the nihilistic types who find no point to fairness and the universe isn't fair still hold the idea deep in their minds of what is and is not fair, despite their beliefs.

 Thus honor. There is also a beautiful little thing where you take things into the negatives: Putting ones self at a disadvantage to grant an advantage to another. Aka, soldiers fighting so that civilians won't have to. Self-sacrifice to save another. It isn't fair that somebody needs to give up their life to save another, yet it is universally considered high on the honor system.

Nevermind my strange rants, I really do not wish to get involved here despite the fact that I am leaving this material here thus suggesting that I only wish to pose my idea without opposition.

[Strife26]

If nuclear weapons got involved... respective military sizes wouldn't really matter.  Mutual destruction would be virtually guarenteed.

Eh, maybe not. China still doesn't have anywhere near the number or the accuracy of old Cold War Nukes, mind you, we still could very well hit a nuclear winter (and I'm not going to put in the easy Global Warming joke).

"I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks."

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

If nuclear weapons got involved... respective military sizes wouldn't really matter.  Mutual destruction would be virtually guarenteed.

Eh, maybe not. China still doesn't have anywhere near the number or the accuracy of old Cold War Nukes, mind you, we still could very well hit a nuclear winter (and I'm not going to put in the easy Global Warming joke).

"I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks."

Nuclear missiles don't really need precise accuracy when you can drop a fairly piddling one on a large city and then suddenly 100,000 people aren't.

[Strife26]

You'll note that I used a Strangelove quote. Nuclear war is one of the few things I'd genuinely worry about. However, China's nuke stockpiles aren't anywhere near as dangerous as the US's, and they don't have the best delivery systems.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

You'll note that I used a Strangelove quote. Nuclear war is one of the few things I'd genuinely worry about. However, China's nuke stockpiles aren't anywhere near as dangerous as the US's, and they don't have the best delivery systems.

It's still a fallout situation.

[Jude]

double post

[Jude]

childish intentional misinterpretations

which is something that 1/6 of the earth's population does on a daily basis ooooooo fanaticism

Stop that, man.

Well, the original post I was calling out implied that chanting "Allahu akbar" was somehow a sign of fanaticism as opposed to just meaning "God is great" and being an everyday phrase is Islam

Whereas qmarx's post was pointless as all he did was mis-parse my sentence to make it look like I said something dumb, and he wasn't proving any point by it

Hey, I have to ask: why is it more "honorable" to kill someone in hand to hand combat rather than with a gun? While we are at it, what does "honorable"  mean to begin with?

I'm gonna second this
I'm really not sure where honor enters into killing somebody in war; it's not like they raped your wife or insulted you or something, and even if they did, "honor" in that sense is an outdated concept from our evolutionary past. We have justice systems to handle that kind of thing now and people aren't supposed to take the law into their own hands

Also, the nice thing about nukes is they aren't there to be used, and they're the reason why world war 3 has not happened and will never happen

[Strife26]

That's the thing, I'm not sure how long the threat of MAD can keep war in check. It worked when there were two horribly powerful sides, but now we have only one side who can realistically kill anything (the US) and that side's military has dwindled horribly from her Cold War days (although there is still and edge, a fully mobilized minor power would be seriously difficult). Likewise, you have to consider that fact that finite resources continue to dwindle and certain countries (India and China) continue to grow.

[Zangi]

Hey, I have to ask: why is it more "honorable" to kill someone in hand to hand combat rather than with a gun? While we are at it, what does "honorable"  mean to begin with?

Honor is a matter of pride.  Lotta people back then put that high up their list of importance... and were fairly similar-ish in their line of thinking.

One's skill and ability were something to be prideful of. 
During feudal times, foe example... skill in combat was something along those lines.  Not everyone can just pick up a weapon and give someone trained at it a run for their money.

Introduction of crossbows, where any Jack and Jill peasant with maybe a days training can point that at a skilled fighter(knight) and kill him... would be the catalyst that put a decline to the merit of honor on the battlefield.... despite efforts otherwise.

So yea, with guns... sure, you gotta be able to aim... but it doesn't take people years of training to be able to use a gun.  (3-4 months.. at most...)
Also, with today's modern society, it does not have much to do with war/fighting.  Sure, some people/groups/not so modern societies take pride/honor with their skill in the gun/other weapons... but not so prolific.

And there are many other things other then fighting that people take pride in.  Other examples include:
Chefs and their food...
Handcrafting stuff... (Like a blacksmith and the stuff they make with their own hands... or artist/writer and their own works.)

So yea, a matter of pride.