Print

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

[Strife26]

And soldier's take their order from politicians, who are accountable to the will of the people, who are accountable to their own free will.

Do you blame the sword for the hand that wields it, or just want that damn sword to be the most efficient killing machine available?

[MonkeyHead]

Heh, dont blame the sword for its sharpness. Blame the person who holds it.

Damn, ninja'ed

[Rose]

Also academic physics ended WWII

[MonkeyHead]

Also academic physics ended WWII

OK, fine, its a deal. I shall make the doomsday device, and Strife can wield it.

[Leafsnail]

Must've missed that new rule about only arguing with confused metaphors.

[Eagle_eye]

And soldier's take their order from politicians, who are accountable to the will of the people, who are accountable to their own free will.

Do you blame the sword for the hand that wields it, or just want that damn sword to be the most efficient killing machine available?

That's irrelevant. By being part of the military, you are complicit in what it does. If everyone refused to join or be drafted, there would be no war.

[GlyphGryph]

Academic physics doesn't cause millions of deaths.

Don't say that he's hypocritical
 Rather say that he's apolitical
 "Vunce ze rockets are up, who cares vere zey come down
 "Zats not mein department!" says Werner von Braun

[Strife26]

It's perfectly relevant, Eagle.

I damn straight complicit in what my country does and tells me to do. The point is that I'd happily drive shooting over a fair number of moral event horizons if that's what I was told to do (now, to be honest, there's obviously limits to what I'd consider a legal order, but for the purposes of this discussion, we can ignore these extreme cases because I'm, without a doubt, going to lean on the side of "shoot it to make sure," and therefore on the wrong end of morality), that's why there's civilians at the top of the chain of command. 


There exists times where naked military force is necessary
It is better for this force to be overwhelming
Overwhelming force requires the best soldiers and doctrine possible
It's impossible to be a truly good soldier without aggression and understanding
--> Effectively, loving war to some extent
Soldier's can *not* have an unbiased view, so we need to take orders from someone


So yeah, I'm complicit, and I'm perfectly okay with that. I swore to follow my lawful orders and to protect my scrap of paper. However, all that I care about is that my orders come from higher up. If I'm dammed, I dammed for it, but that's life. 

[Helgoland]

And soldier's take their order from politicians, who are accountable to the will of the people, who are accountable to their own free will.

Do you blame the sword for the hand that wields it, or just want that damn sword to be the most efficient killing machine available?

That's irrelevant. By being part of the military, you are complicit in what it does. If everyone refused to join or be drafted, there would be no war.

Well, that's the - quite frankly naive - pacifist argument: If nobody did it, there would be no problem. It's the fault that is present in Kant's ethics: Deontological ethics is fine as an approximation, but morality ultimately has to be teleological - in a widened sense, that is; if needed, I can go into more detail. The only limit to a soldier's willingness to carry out orders must be the most basic moral principle: The regard for human dignity that sometimes makes war necessary.
So yeah, we want as sharp as possible swords, we want someone sensible to have control over them, and we do not want to use them - they have to be (and are) a last resort. And, thanks to MAD, academic physics has given us a sword that is near perfect for most of the really dangerous situations.
All that's not to say that one should not care about war and peace; but one should care on the political and not on the military level.

[Heron TSG]

Evidence of fraud:

It's not exactly unheard of for Mittens to get 0% in a vote. Remember this poll?

Note that your second link says...

05 = Barack Obama/Joe Biden (DEM)             420,953   68.74
06 = Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan (REP)              184,475   30.12

...for the state. That's not exactly 100%. There were quite a few area where Romney only got a handful of votes (541 to 4 in one such area) but also quite a few areas where they only differed by a hundred votes or so. I don't know about Cleveland, but here's how my college voted, according to student polling:

(D) Barack Obama: 90%
(R) Mitt Romney: 4%
(G) Jill Stein: 4%
Other: 2%

Cleveland probably isn't as liberal in its entirety, but some districts might be.

I'm sure Pundit Press is wholly unbiased anyway.

[GlyphGryph]

That's irrelevant. By being part of the military, you are complicit in what it does. If everyone refused to join or be drafted, there would be no war.

War is not the worst outcome though. In fact, sometimes war is preferable.

To paraphrase RvB
"I don't kill people for fun, it's my job."
"But you like killing people!"
"Well, I think it's important to enjoy what you do."

[Strife26]

And soldier's take their order from politicians, who are accountable to the will of the people, who are accountable to their own free will.

Do you blame the sword for the hand that wields it, or just want that damn sword to be the most efficient killing machine available?

That's irrelevant. By being part of the military, you are complicit in what it does. If everyone refused to join or be drafted, there would be no war.

Thing is, what if you are deceived, or believe so much in something, you believe it's worth killing for?

Well, that's a religious question, isn't it? I put my trust in the United States, and until I find reason to change it, that's where it is.

Myself, I'd fully expect to be giving a reckoning for those sins at the pearly gates, assuming that I don't end up in Fiddler's Green.

And soldier's take their order from politicians, who are accountable to the will of the people, who are accountable to their own free will.

Do you blame the sword for the hand that wields it, or just want that damn sword to be the most efficient killing machine available?

That's irrelevant. By being part of the military, you are complicit in what it does. If everyone refused to join or be drafted, there would be no war.

Well, that's the - quite frankly naive - pacifist argument: If nobody did it, there would be no problem. It's the fault that is present in Kant's ethics: Deontological ethics is fine as an approximation, but morality ultimately has to be teleological - in a widened sense, that is; if needed, I can go into more detail. The only limit to a soldier's willingness to carry out orders must be the most basic moral principle: The regard for human dignity that sometimes makes war necessary.
So yeah, we want as sharp as possible swords, we want someone sensible to have control over them, and we do not want to use them - they have to be (and are) a last resort. And, thanks to MAD, academic physics has given us a sword that is near perfect for most of the really dangerous situations.
All that's not to say that one should not care about war and peace; but one should care on the political and not on the military level.

Yeah, that's putting it pretty elegantly. Of course, I don't really know if I can buy it completely, considering how much fucked up shit happens all over the world by poorly led, poorly trained, generally evil, types being the preeminent military force, but my judgement's certainly flawed.

[Reelya]

Evidence of fraud:

It's not exactly unheard of for Mittens to get 0% in a vote. Remember this poll?

Note that your second link says...

05 = Barack Obama/Joe Biden (DEM)             420,953   68.74
06 = Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan (REP)              184,475   30.12

...for the state. That's not exactly 100%. There were quite a few area where Romney only got a handful of votes (541 to 4 in one such area) but also quite a few areas where they only differed by a hundred votes or so. I don't know about Cleveland, but here's how my college voted, according to student polling:

(D) Barack Obama: 90%
(R) Mitt Romney: 4%
(G) Jill Stein: 4%
Other: 2%

Cleveland probably isn't as liberal in its entirety, but some districts might be.

I'm sure Pundit Press is wholly unbiased anyway.

I was mocking them actually, for highlighting the "precinct" where Obama got 100% of the votes with 100% turnout, and neglecting to mention that only 2 people voted there. So their bias is pretty clear. One "precinct" had zero voters. I'm guessing it actually is a table of voting places?

Both the cities they're claiming fraud in (Cleveland and Philadelphia) have an exceptionally high black population, so is it that hard to believe? XD

[Strife26]

Must've missed that new rule about only arguing with confused metaphors.

Well yeah, let's be honest here, I doubt more than one or two of us has done the kind of research necessary to debate anything we've said as an expert party. Everything else is just word games, fun, and philosophy.

[Nadaka]

* Nadaka Raises hand.

Degree in computer science with a heavy emphasis on chemistry and geology.

Petrochem industry was a backup plan considering how big it is in southern Louisiana/Mississippi.

Right now I write software managing hazmat and hazwaste along with reports, forecasts, and such for the USAF.

I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I can and have done the basic math on the energy issues we were discussing.