Michael, pacifists need courage. They suffer not only the attacks of the enemy, but of the violent people who they live among too. There were not many benefits for this pacifist, contrary to your quote: dnzb.govt.nz
Did you see this? channelnewsasia.com
<Israel is reeling from the shock refusal of 27 air force pilots to carry out missions against Palestinian militants.
The pilots declared they were against carrying out "illegal and immoral" orders, citing concerns that innocent civilians could be killed in the line of fire.
Advertisement
One Blackhawk helicopter captain, whose name was given as Alon, told the Yediot Aharonot daily that he was "ashamed."
"This is an organisation that carries out actions that in my eyes are immoral and patently illegal. It is an organisation that has no qualms about dropping bombs -- it doesn't matter if they are 250, 500 or 1,000 kilos -- on the densest neighbourhoods in the world, causing massive killing of civilians."
Because of their stand, the men -- mostly reserve or retired personnel -- have been suspended.
According to a military source, air force commander Dan Halutz accused them of having "shoved a knife in the back of combatants and of Israeli democracy."
The 27 pilots have also been lambasted by the media, which accused them of undermining Israeli security.
The pilot's protest marks the highest profile act of defiance by members of the armed forces in decades.
>
Notice how Dan Halutz is unable to understand that a refusenik position is not a violent one. He likens it to shoving a knife in the back. What a freak he is! It shows his mentality. A person refusing to take an action is not doing harm. They are absolutely NOT shoving a knife. Of course if they were hired to guard a nuclear reactor then turn a blind eye to sabotage, then they are doing harm. They have deceived others and by deceit caused disaster. That is fraud and fraud is not pacifist. It is theft by another name. And theft is not pacifism or ethical. It's cowardly.
It's hilarious how the military mindset claims to defend freedom but is ironically about the total suppression of the individual mind and ethical framework. Obey orders is the mantra. Which is old-time chimpoid culture of alpha male dominance hierarchy. Humans are a different species, but unfortunately, we are not far removed, as shown by umpty million episodes of such attitudes and behaviour. Tribalistic murderous mindsets are still a big deal.
The Nuremberg trials were partly about the idea that "I was just following orders" isn't good enough as an excuse for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and criminal behaviour. The pilots have obviously decided that what they were asked to do was unacceptable.
So Dan Halutz confirms the pilots are probably right by accusing them of doing knifing in the back.
Give me pacifists over the militaristic, aggressive and violent any day. At least they'll do no harm. Of course I don't call a pacifist a person who interferes with a soldier by breaking his weapons or hindering him in other ways. That's a participant in the battle and a soldier could understandably kill the bastard! A pacifist in my book is a person who refuses to take part in, or contribute to, aggression and violence.
Which isn't to defend their ideas as being sensible.
Those who would attack pacifists or gaol them are the cowards and the enemy. Those who would conscript, draft, or press-gang people against their will are the enemies of freedom and humanity. Those who would bludge off the lives of conscripts are the thieving cowards who should be shot.
Freedom means application of one's free will in individual choice about what one does or does not do. It seems such a difficult concept for people to understand. Dan Halutz is obviously clueless about what freedom means. Freedom is much talked about but understood so little.
Mqurice |
