View Poll Results: See OP: Who is responsible for the death of the human shields?

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Side A

    41 89.13%
  • Side B

    5 10.87%
Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 185

Thread: Human shields

  1. #91
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    To learn what? That our enemy's are dirt bags who use inhumane tactics? I mean realistically we learned that already.

    Those we fight have already given up any humanity they had the moment they started hiding in mosques and using human shields. It is not shortening anything as I showed in the article, it is making them bolder.

    War itself is inhumane.

    We already know this.
    We should learn the follies of dehumanizing portions of the human population to make it easier to kill them. Instead, we should face full on the consequences of our actions and fully bear our sins.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #92
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    We should learn the follies of dehumanizing portions of the human population to make it easier to kill them. Instead, we should face full on the consequences of our actions and fully bear our sins.
    That is a bunch of moral huha. It does not work in the real world and does not work in combat with a determined enemy.

    This is reality.

    Please point out where this hypotheses of yours has worked? Just 1 time.

    Because so far as I have shown with proof, it does not work.
    Last edited by Black Dog; 03-11-10 at 05:59 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  3. #93
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    We should learn the follies of dehumanizing portions of the human population to make it easier to kill them. Instead, we should face full on the consequences of our actions and fully bear our sins.

    Ikari, could you elaborate on "face full the consequences" and "fully bear our sins".

    Let's say US troops are in a firefight with whomever.

    An enemy steps out of hiding with a toddler strapped to his chest. The enemy aims an RPG (rocket-propelled grenade launcher) at a house where three of our troops are positioned, a clear threat likely to result in three deaths if he fires the RPG.

    One of our troops shoots the RPG enemy dead. He was trying for a headshot, but he was a little low... he kills both the enemy shooter and the toddler that the enemy was using as a human shield.

    What penalty should that soldier suffer for his action?

    (My answer is, "None".)

    G.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  4. #94
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Ikari, could you elaborate on "face full the consequences" and "fully bear our sins".

    Let's say US troops are in a firefight with whomever.

    An enemy steps out of hiding with a toddler strapped to his chest. The enemy aims an RPG (rocket-propelled grenade launcher) at a house where three of our troops are positioned, a clear threat likely to result in three deaths if he fires the RPG.

    One of our troops shoots the RPG enemy dead. He was trying for a headshot, but he was a little low... he kills both the enemy shooter and the toddler that the enemy was using as a human shield.

    What penalty should that soldier suffer for his action?

    (My answer is, "None".)

    G.
    I'd agree with "none" in this instance. It's a fully justifiable action, IMO.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  5. #95
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Human shields

    I'm not talking penalties. But instead of hiding behind scenarios where we either dehumanize the enemy or remove all concept of responsibility, we accept the consequences of our actions. The soldier in your scenario killed an innocent baby. Whether justified or not, that's the end result of the actions. In instead of trying to remove blame or responsibility, we instead took up in full the consequences of our actions; aggregated over the whole you'll end up with an environment where we don't take war so casually. Where we don't just say "war is hell" and shrug our shoulders. But rather understand the human component of war and what our actions have on such.

    It's essentially what happened with nuclear weapons. While there has been plenty of threat of use, there has been no usage by countries outside of the first time the weapons were used by America. While you can say there was justification in the use of the war in that it prevented loss on our side and perhaps drove an end to the war quicker; it was still a travesty. They haven't been used since because the whole sale destruction was easy to see and people understood what it was. We have weapons which now can be as effective, if not more, but we don't see in conventional weapons the gore we collectively seem to see in nuclear weapons. By expanding on the human component, understanding the results of our actions, and acknowledging the humanity of our opponents; we can become more reluctant to be so caviler in the use of force and war. While it will never be totally avoidable, perhaps we can learn to not utilize it as some form of offense.

    We should always be weary of the consequences of our actions and we should accept in full those consequences.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #96
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I'd agree with "none" in this instance. It's a fully justifiable action, IMO.

    Yup, and he's going to have nightmares and PTSD and **** for the rest of his life anyway, most likely.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari
    I'm not talking penalties. But instead of hiding behind scenarios where we either dehumanize the enemy or remove all concept of responsibility, we accept the consequences of our actions....over the whole you'll end up with an environment where we don't take war so casually. Where we don't just say "war is hell" and shrug our shoulders. But rather understand the human component of war and what our actions have on such.

    .... While it will never be totally avoidable, perhaps we can learn to not utilize it as some form of offense.

    We should always be wary of the consequences of our actions and we should accept in full those consequences.
    Thank you, I think I understand better the point you were trying to make.

    Possibly we are too cavalier about the use of war as a tool of policy, or about the use of force in general... but I think you are already beginning to get your wish. The 24/7 news cycle, "imbedded reporters", people with cameras everwhere, and so on, is making war much more of a "you are there" thing than was the case in, say 1945, or even 1968. I think this has had a lot to do with why we try, very hard, to avoid civilian casualties these days... as compared to the firebombing of Dresden, the carpet-bombing of Tokyo and Berlin, etc... when we were targeting the civilian population deliberately, for reasons that (at the time and under the circumstances) we felt were adequate.

    It would be nice if war could be fought cleanly. If we could designate battlefields and require all fighting to be "in bounds" and all combatants to wear uniforms and seperate out all civvy's.

    I don't see it happening anytime soon though.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  7. #97
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Human shields

    I think we must examine this from the position of the soldier doing the deed.

    I would hope that most soldiers would have issues with killing civilians.

    Then again, after awhile they might become somewhat immune to the feeling, if only in mental self-defense.

    Or so one always hears in war movies/reads in books about wars.

    Damn all wars, anyway.

    Then again, damn all humans, who are the root cause of war.

    /sigh
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  8. #98
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    I think we must examine this from the position of the soldier doing the deed.

    I would hope that most soldiers would have issues with killing civilians.

    Then again, after awhile they might become somewhat immune to the feeling, if only in mental self-defense.

    Or so one always hears in war movies/reads in books about wars.

    Damn all wars, anyway.

    Then again, damn all humans, who are the root cause of war.

    /sigh
    War is a metaphor for life in a twisted way. There was a local hero here who passed away not too long ago that saved a vietnamese village from a rogue U.S. platoon that was just hellbent on killing anyone asian at that point, then there was one of my dad's cousins who never came to terms with a japanese soldier he killed in WWII, so I think the emotions swing all over the spectrum.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  9. #99
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,205

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    I'm not talking about required action or law. I'm saying that if you wish to avoid killing human shields, you do not shoot.
    But that statement is meaningless to the actual conflict here, that if you do not shoot while you're under attack, every moment is a risk to your life.

    Simply allowing the terrorist to kill you is of course not one of the options.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

  10. #100
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,205

    Re: Human shields

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I wouldn't say the shooter isn't at fault. Through the actions of the shooter, an innocent is killed. Rather, I would say that in some cases the taking of innocent life can be justified in some legal manner. It doesn't take away the action, because the action would have been a measurable quantity. What it would say is that it was "reasonable" or justified action to kill the other person. The shooter still carries causation as they made the decision to shoot.
    You're talking about the most literal meaning of fault.
    That the person that pulls the trigger is at fault for killing the innocent, because he has pulled the trigger.

    In both the legal and the moral world, that is of course not the assumption.
    The person who has killed the innocent is the one who has caused his death.
    By taking the person hostage while shooting at another, the humans shield user has created a situation when there is a great risk for the innocent's life, and hence, in the case when the innocent dies, the humans shield user has caused his death.

    Since we assume that a person would always try to survive, and that if he's being shot at he'll have to fire back, we do not regard to it as a move that he takes, but a move that is 'naturally' expected to be taken.
    When you're walking into fire, expect to be burned.
    When you're jumping off a building, expect to be hit by the floor.
    When you're shooting at a person, expect to be shot back at.

    When a driver who has 3 passengers in his car decides to smash his car into a wall, he is killing his passengers, because he should know that if you smash the car into the wall, there is a risk to the passengers' lives.

    From the same exact reason, when someone takes a human shield and starts shooting people in the street, he is pretty much entirely at fault for killing the innocent were he to be shot back by the expected counter-fire.

    It should have been an obvious question to begin with.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •