Resolutions

[Accname]

okay, let me rephrase. if you join the army you want people dead. just because you're not pulling the trigger, doesn't mean that you haven't got blood on your hands. if you give the order or information that will lead to someone's death, you're responsible. if you tend the wounds of a murderer in uniform, you're responsible for every life he takes from that point.

What is with a medic who just wants to keep his brothers alive?
Or those who are stationed at home for defense and all they want is to keep their country safe?

 

[Slapshot136]

okay, let me rephrase. if you join the army you want people dead.

this might hold for the U.S. army, but most countries are not in a perpetual state of war, and don't actually fight - they just keep an army for defense

 

[Zakyath]

If you save the life of a murderer, knowing this person is a murderer, you're assisting murder. It doesn't matter what he wants, what the medics in wars participate in is terrible.

I guess staying at home is okay, but that's not what Varine wanted to do a few years ago, and that's not what this is about.

 

[Zakyath]

this might hold for the U.S. army, but most countries are not in a perpetual state of war, and don't actually fight - they just keep an army for defense

see my above post

 

[Accname]

If you save the life of a murderer, knowing this person is a murderer, you're assisting murder. It doesn't matter what he wants, what the medics in wars participate in is terrible.

I guess staying at home is okay, but that's not what Varine wanted to do a few years ago, and that's not what this is about.

Keeping somebody alive is keeping somebody alive.
If you stand next to another man who gets shot and you have the chance to help him stay alive but you dont because you think he is "a murderer" then you are nothing but a murderer yourself.
Dont you think that is a messed up point of view?

 

[Slapshot136]

see my above post

that implies that there is a war/etc. going on - what if there is no war?, or if the army isn't fighting on - such as a member of the Swiss guard

 

[Zakyath]

of course it's generally a good idea to help people in need.

but say someone goes in to a school. he shoots a bunch of the kids. a bullet ricochets of something and hits him in the chest. if he came to you, asking you to save his life (assuming you could), so he could keep shooting them children, what would you do? would you be a murderer if you let him die instead?

from the logic you've presented so far, you would have to help him. you're just keeping someone alive and it doesn't matter how many children will die by his hand.

 

[Zakyath]

that implies that there is a war/etc. going on - what if there is no war?

if war was out of the question, this discussion would not be.

I might as well make it clear, that I have no problem with not killing people. what I do have is a problem is:

going somewhere to:
1. kill people
2. assist others killing people

 

[Slapshot136]

so he could keep shooting them children

help him after he is no longer an immediate threat (drops gun/etc.), but do not judge him - that is a job for calm minds, not people who are panicking in the heat of the moment

if war was out of the question, this discussion would not be.

no, you are saying that joining the army = fighting in a war = killing people (possibly indirectly), which is not the case

 

[Accname]

of course it's generally a good idea to help people in need.

but say someone goes in to a school. he shoots a bunch of the kids. a bullet ricochets of something and hits him in the chest. if he came to you, asking you to save his life (assuming you could), so he could keep shooting them children, what would you do? would you be a murderer if you let him die instead?

from the logic you've presented so far, you would have to help him. you're just keeping someone alive and it doesn't matter how many children will die by his hand.

If i could save a life i would. Your example is a pretty bad example because that really doesnt depict war at all.
But even if it happened you dont have to let him die and you dont have to let him kill.

 

[Zakyath]

help him after he is no longer an immediate threat (drops gun/etc.), but do not judge him - that is a job for calm minds, not people who are panicking in the heat of the moment

that isn't possible in the scenario I presented

no, you are saying that joining the army = fighting in a war = killing people (possibly indirectly), which is not the case

I may have used a poor choice of words earlier, but as I just tried to say that's not the point I'm trying to get across.

What I mean, and have meant since the beginning of this discussion is:
If you join the army, to go to war, you will most likely play some part in people dying. So assuming you realize this, you want people to die if you're going to war.

If i could save a life i would. Your example is a pretty bad example because that really doesnt depict war at all.
But even if it happened you dont have to let him die and you dont have to let him kill.

how does this not depict war? imagine the guy going in is the US army and the school is the middle east, and the children are non-whites.

 

[Accname]

[...]

how does this not depict war? imagine the guy going in is the US army and the school is the middle east, and the children are non-whites.

What in the name of god is wrong with you?
Do you really believe war is like one guy with a gun manically shooting down unarmed strangers because of fun?

In a war there are opposing sites which both are armed. They are shooting one another. And the majority of them does not like that. I can not imagine too many soldiers want to get into an actual fight, they hope they end up not firing a single shot and not being shot at.
Not everybody who joins the army is a lunatic mass murderer.

if people were actually like you imagine them, the world would be better off if all humans were dead.

 

[FireCat]

They are shooting one another..

And they might even shot "innocent victims"! Just saying.

 

[Zakyath]

of course it isn't. do you really think that war in the middle east is on equal terms? the US military invades countries. they are never invited.

that's the difference between the defenders and the attackers. there's nothing wrong with defending. it's attackers that are the problem. the US military invades places because everyone in the military wants to. as far as I know, you don't have to go to war anymore if you're an american. everyone is there by free will. they came to kill people, when they could have chosen just to stay home, not killing people. those in the middle east has no choice. you see what I'm getting at?

 

[Fatmankev]

of course it isn't. do you really think that war in the middle east is on equal terms? the US military invades countries. they are never invited.

that's the difference between the defenders and the attackers. there's nothing wrong with defending. it's attackers that are the problem. the US military invades places because everyone in the military wants to. as far as I know, you don't have to go to war anymore if you're an american. everyone is there by free will. they came to kill people, when they could have chosen just to stay home, not killing people. those in the middle east has no choice. you see what I'm getting at?

I feel like you have a somewhat tenuous grasp on the situation. Just 'cuz that's how it seems to you does not mean that that's how it is. Although I can respect your point on invaders vs. defenders, they aren't there to kill people, they're there to enforce order how they deem fitting. The guys with the guns are just there to instill a sense of fearful respect. Now, I'm not saying they're necessarily entitled to do this; after all, it's not our country. But we didn't go to war against any particular nation, it was against 'terrorism.' You say we went over there so they had no choice in the matter of making war or not? Well guess what - they forfeited that chance when they bombed us. I mean, this is what America does - some countries start wars, some countries finish them. We're part of the latter.

EDIT: Also, I only read your post and Accname's above it, so if I'm not on track with the conversation then my bad.

 

[Accname]

of course it isn't. do you really think that war in the middle east is on equal terms? the US military invades countries. they are never invited.

that's the difference between the defenders and the attackers. there's nothing wrong with defending. it's attackers that are the problem. the US military invades places because everyone in the military wants to. as far as I know, you don't have to go to war anymore if you're an american. everyone is there by free will. they came to kill people, when they could have chosen just to stay home, not killing people. those in the middle east has no choice. you see what I'm getting at?

Your thoughts on this are seriously messed up.
The way you put people into categories and force an opinion on them just so you can condemn them is sad.
You just said that millions of humans all around the world are monsters. You dont grant any chance that they might not actually think what you believe they do. You just doom them all based on their occupation.
You slowly start to resemble some kind of nazi to me who just blindly hates everybody in the military independent on their actual characteristics, just based on the fact that they are in the military, thats it. You dont even consider a different point of view.

Is it impossible that there are people who want to join the military and not kill anybody or fight anybody but protect somebody instead?

 

[Zakyath]

text

People are dying over there. So therefore, you're okay with people dying, if you're taking a part of it. If you're not OK with people dying, you would never be a part of it. That's a very simple fact.

And are you seriously trying to justify the terrible crimes upon humanitarian rights the US have commited by saying "they started it"? Because as far as I know, the terrorists that also commited a terrible crime 12 years ago have been dead since.

 

[Zakyath]

Is it impossible that there are people who want to join the military and not kill anybody or fight anybody but protect somebody instead?

I don't think they let the mentally retarded into the military.

"Hey, I'm going to war. People aren't dying, we're just helping eachother."

 

[Accname]

I don't think they let the mentally retarded into the military.

"Hey, I'm going to war. People aren't dying, we're just helping eachother."

Nobody said nobody is dying. But that doesnt mean that you can not try to protect somebody instead. People die all the time, its a very natural thing, but there are doctors who try to fight death even though they can not win.
And so there are soldiers who do not fire guns but go there to fight the death on the battlefield and try to bring life into a place were death dictates the rules.
Not every soldier does neccessarily have to think about killing people or agree with the war they are in. But they might go nevertheless to give their best to stop unneccessary deaths and keep the losses at a minimum.

I am not saying there are no soldiers in the military who might be complete monsters, but i dont believe that all of them are.
But you just put them all together as if they arent individuals but only mindless creatures in your eyes. You sound as if they arent even human to you.

 

[Zakyath]

text

of course everyone isn't a blood crazed maniac. but war is a terrible thing, and can never be justified. you're telling me that I see these people as less than human, but all I have done in this discussion is say that I don't approve of participating in anything that will lead to people dying. is it so monstruous wanting to see people not getting shot? if no one participated (and it so happens that everyone in the US army is there by own volition), the states wouldn't be in the middle east at the moment, and wouldn't have to kill people. therefore, logic determines that if all these individuals had decided they didn't want anything to do with war, there wouldn't be a war. and that obviously means that since all these individuals chose to go to war anyway, people are dying. how can you hold anyone but them responsible?