Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: nihil who wrote (65227)	12/5/1999 10:27:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) of 108807

nihil, you are mixing up different kinds of casualties: 1) those among our own forces; 2) those among enemy forces, and 3)those among "enemy" civilians (and other fortuitous bystanders). Of course, loss of life is loss of life, however and by whomever incurred. But it has generally been assumed that the public at home judges military operations solely by (1) -- the level of casualties suffered by one's own forces. If that assumption is mistaken, then perhaps the military might rethink the strategy that has increasingly been adopted in recent wars: i.e., preserving the lives of one's servicemen at the expense of the lives of civilians "on the other side." Why is expecting a professional soldier (we are not talking draftees -- we don't have them now) to die for something more hypocritical than asking an "enemy infant" to die for it? Nobody forced these guys to enter military service. Along with the perks go the special risks. Seems to me that if you use civilian bodies to shield them from these risks, they become, as I said before, no better than "technicians of death."

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next