'Hello mum, this is going to be hard for you to read ...'

[Eejit]

In every aspect, we live in a society that increasingly values maximum safety to the exclusion of all else. It's not healthy.

Except as I said, it's not that bad. There are lots of pretty dangerous but still popular sports.
What you're talking about is society wanting to reduce risk for those unable to protect themselves (e.g. kids) or limiting the risk one can pose to another. Personal risk to oneself is something else entirely.

 

[theotherguy]

Of course killing in war is murder.

Murder is one rational being killing another rational being with the intent of exerting its will over the others. If warfare doesn't fit this definition, I don't know what does. War is just murder on a large scale, where one large group of rational beings decides to exert its will over another large group of rational beings through the force of violence.

 

[repiV]

Except as I said, it's not that bad. There are lots of pretty dangerous but still popular sports.
What you're talking about is society wanting to reduce risk for those unable to protect themselves (e.g. kids) or limiting the risk one can pose to another. Personal risk to oneself is something else entirely.

It is that bad. It's about systematically sanitising every aspect of existence until noone is ever exposed to any risk.

Of course killing in war is murder.

Murder is one rational being killing another rational being with the intent of exerting its will over the others. If warfare doesn't fit this definition, I don't know what does. War is just murder on a large scale, where one large group of rational beings decides to exert its will over another large group of rational beings through the force of violence.

Murder is unlawful killing with intent. You are wrong.

 

[nurizeko]

It has been my belief that impiety (to one's parents) is the worst of all sins as taught by my ancestors, but I also have that belief that it is pardonable, and acceptable in the line of one's duty. A duty to your goddamn nation, a duty to the sacred State, a duty to the land that brought you into this world.

Communist.



Edit: I feel I need to state this since we tend to agree more often then not numbers, but idiot British chavs going off to shoot up some towelheads in a country that is no-where near us and is of no tangible threat to the freedom of the United Kingdom is quite different from having a raving loony hostile totalitarian regime sat across the most heavily guarded border in the world.

I can see why you feel the way you do but the operative word we are looking for is context.

If you die in war its with your cold dead hands clutching at the M16 rifle in your hand with your last fought enemy hanging off of your bayonet, having hindered his attempt to march into your homeland and rape your mother and sister and murder your father, brothers, ect ect.

The British tool who died in Afghanistan died clutching his undeveloped manhood as he was blown up by some hairy ignorant farmer during the growing season Muslim hick who wants (if albiet misguided) to protect his way of life (as primitive as it is) from invading foreign devils like us who have a habit of bombing wedding parties and schools, ect, ect.

"Blessed be the soldier who gives all ... for the common good."
-Abraham ****ing Lincoln

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
George S. Patton

But its all pointless, nice sounding quotes and sound bytes do not equal reality. In reality these men are still dead and those not fighting a war for no tangible effect but a squandering of the nation's resources are still alive savouring and enjoying the freedom our grandfathers protected and modern soldiers wish they could protect.

It wouldn't even be half as bad if there was a remote glimmer of hope in saving the Afghans from themselves but lets be honest, as nation building went South Vietnam was a more viable option. The only thing as eternal as the Afghani ability to bleed invaders dry and expel them is the fractured tribal backwards nature of the land.

But hey, Labour hasn't got long left in power, and once they are gone so will go the British publics taste for war, another footnote in the history books. An awfully expensive way to create subject material for university dissertations.

 

[Eejit]

It is that bad. It's about systematically sanitising every aspect of existence until noone is ever exposed to any risk.

You are wrong.
What has been happening has been limits placed on how one may place others at risk by ones own actions or hobbies - pretty acceptable imo. I don't want some gung-ho asswipe trying to base jump, his chute messing up and him landing on me from 60 stories up.
Risk to oneself only of ones own making is very much alive and well.

 

[theotherguy]

Murder is unlawful killing with intent. You are wrong.

Please tell me why "unlawful" is a necessary condition for murder.

 

[jet_porkins]

I don't think rationality is a necessary part of the definition of murder. People murder over something as trivial as a person who dumps someone over another, without rationally considering the consequences of murdering another human.

 

[Dog--]

Wow I stayed out of this thread for so long, then I just read it... You guys are arguing over some stupid shit lol.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Please tell me why "unlawful" is a necessary condition for murder.

"Murder" as a word denotes killing that is against a legal code. The definition of murder in most legal systems is 'unlawful killing'. That's what differentiates the word 'murder' from the word 'killing', and what makes it important whether God said "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not murder".

You could call any killing murder, but in doing so you'd necessarily propose a universal system of law that applies across all of humanity.

 

[Ennui]

Seems like a pretty unimportant distinction. I think theotherguy's point is that killing = bad and murder sounds worse so why not run with it. I have no idea what is being argued about in here but I came in to authoritatively state that killing = bad regardless of what you call it or whether the government sanctions it.

 

[Krynn72]

Glad to see this thread has dissolved into an argument over semantics. Classic hl2.net. What difference does it make what we call the slaying of others?

'And those men afraid to go will think themselves lesser men as they hear of how we fought and died together.'

This quote implies that glory is a quality to be desired. I could not care less about glory so long as my integrity is in tact.

Fighting an unjust war for glory and adventure is completely reprehensible in my eyes.

A duty to humanity, and the common ideals that we believe in, the ideals which are fundamental to humanity, freedom, justice, and equality.

If a war were ever to be engaged over such honorable ideas, I would gladly fight to see them realized. But war is never fought for such things.


EDIT: Agreed Ennui.

 

[Absinthe]

Lets forget about the need for the army on a national and global scale for one moment. My point is that the decision by each individual to enlist in the army is inherently selfish because they are putting their families through anguish to either go get their cheap thrills, or else because of their inexplicably overwhelming sense of 'patriotism'. Isn't there a saying, something like 'charity begins at home'?

Doing what one thinks is right or fulfilling for oneself is not selfish. And considering the danger soldiers put themselves in, it is arguably one of the most selfless things you can do. Only in your ****ed up world of living according to Mommy's feelings could acting as an independent human capable of making its own decisions be construed as selfish. The sorrow of families is regrettable. But they ultimately need the maturity to accept that their children or siblings have chosen their own path.

And for the more recent turn of discussion: Killing is not inherently bad. Unfortunate, perhaps. But there are times on this planet when people need to die and the cause is both just and good.

 

[Krynn72]

Not to agree with hobostomp, but putting yourself in a position to die easily doesnt make it a selfless thing to do.

 

[Shift]

Stupid war for stupid reasons. If the soldiers have any sense whatsoever they wouldn't sign up in the first place, they are dieing for nothing and they are fighting a battle they cannot possibly win, the Russians tried and failed, and we will follow suite, costing even more lives in the process.

There is no honor or glory left in today's wars, its all about sticking noses in things that have nothing to do with us and spurring up conflicts for the retarded premise that it actually might bring stability to the area when all they are doing is escalating the problem by merely being there. They are merely fighting to survive over there in one of the most ridiculous conflicts since Vietnam.

 

[Absinthe]

So much of this rests on the intention of why you enlisted, I guess. Signing up just to shoot ragheads is a far cry from doing so out of a sense of civic duty or fighting for a just cause. But I would argue that putting your life and direction in the hands of an organized military body that services you out to do its political bidding always carries a degree of inherent selflessness, if not in the most romanticized way.

I can entertain the idea of somebody joining the military for selfish reasons. But I take issue with this nutcase concept of our military body consisting of solipsistic soldiers living only for themselves and leaving a rubbled path of emotional ruin in their wake because LAWL SELFISHNESS

 

[Shift]

No doubt its a brave and selfless act to join the military these days, but doesn't mean its not stupid. Even if you survive you are thrown out on your arse with nothing soon enough, my uncle being a prime example. Served with distinction in Northern Ireland, saw terrible things, friends killed etc, chucked out to fend for himself after a few years.

 

[Dog--]

It's brave to join the military, but selfless? It depends.

 

[Absinthe]

I don't think many people are joining the army to get rich or because the benefits are fabulous.

Are you saying that all military enlistment is an act of stupidity?

 

[Dog--]

Umm.. Actually many, many people join the military to get college in order to get a job to become rich. In Canada 6 months basic training gets you a scholarship.

 

[Krynn72]

I think that far too many people enlist for the wrong reasons. Thats as simple as I can sum up my opinion of the subject.

 

[Sheepo]

I figured he was quoting someone else, but 2pac said it better because he used less words.

This is such utter blasphemy I can't comprehend it. Shakespeare frowns upon you.

 

[Dog--]

Shakespeare is a whiny little bitch who takes too long to speak.

 

[Sheepo]

Dog is a whiny little bitch that doesn't get the most obvious jokes posted in the image dump.

 

[15357]

Communist.

:O

Edit: I feel I need to state this since we tend to agree more often then not numbers, but idiot British chavs going off to shoot up some towelheads in a country that is no-where near us and is of no tangible threat to the freedom of the United Kingdom is quite different from having a raving loony hostile totalitarian regime sat across the most heavily guarded border in the world.

Then.... why did the UK enngage in the war? Makes no sense to me. :/

I can see why you feel the way you do but the operative word we are looking for is context.

If you die in war its with your cold dead hands clutching at the M16 rifle in your hand with your last fought enemy hanging off of your bayonet, having hindered his attempt to march into your homeland and rape your mother and sister and murder your father, brothers, ect ect.

The British tool who died in Afghanistan died clutching his undeveloped manhood as he was blown up by some hairy ignorant farmer during the growing season Muslim hick who wants (if albiet misguided) to protect his way of life (as primitive as it is) from invading foreign devils like us who have a habit of bombing wedding parties and schools, ect, ect.

That, I understand.

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
George S. Patton

But its all pointless, nice sounding quotes and sound bytes do not equal reality. In reality these men are still dead and those not fighting a war for no tangible effect but a squandering of the nation's resources are still alive savouring and enjoying the freedom our grandfathers protected and modern soldiers wish they could protect.

It wouldn't even be half as bad if there was a remote glimmer of hope in saving the Afghans from themselves but lets be honest, as nation building went South Vietnam was a more viable option. The only thing as eternal as the Afghani ability to bleed invaders dry and expel them is the fractured tribal backwards nature of the land.

But hey, Labour hasn't got long left in power, and once they are gone so will go the British publics taste for war, another footnote in the history books. An awfully expensive way to create subject material for university dissertations.

Ignorat as I am over the issues of Afghanistan, I still believe it wrong to give up all hope of spreading free democracy in their lands. In all lands. Still, I get your point.

If a war were ever to be engaged over such honorable ideas, I would gladly fight to see them realized. But war is never fought for such things.

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Umm.. Actually many, many people join the military to get college in order to get a job to become rich. In Canada 6 months basic training gets you a scholarship.

Jesus effing christ. Mandatory 2~3 years of frontline duty here gets you nothing but a well-developed physique and a nice tan. Of course, the vast majority of soldiers here are University students....

 

[Dog--]

Jesus effing christ. Mandatory 2~3 years of frontline duty here gets you nothing but a well-developed physique and a nice tan. Of course, the vast majority of soldiers here are University students....

Well I didn't personally research it, but we had this trade fair at my school (go around asking members of the trades (machining, carpentry, etc) about what they do), and I was talking to the army guy and he said all it takes is 6 months basic training and they pay for like half your college or something like that. You can also be paid to train as an apprentice in army trades, like navigation, weapons maintenance and those kinda of things. Pretty cool if you ask me.

 

[Shift]

I don't think many people are joining the army to get rich or because the benefits are fabulous.

Are you saying that all military enlistment is an act of stupidity?

As Krynn said, I think too many of them join for all the wrong reasons or join without fully understanding what its like or what will happen, until they pay the price. But generally yes, I would say its a very bad time to join the military, I don't see any sense in it at all.

 

[repiV]

You are wrong.
What has been happening has been limits placed on how one may place others at risk by ones own actions or hobbies - pretty acceptable imo. I don't want some gung-ho asswipe trying to base jump, his chute messing up and him landing on me from 60 stories up.
Risk to oneself only of ones own making is very much alive and well.

Our whole culture has become chronically risk-averse to the point of paranoia. It's reflected in all walks of life, from parents wrapping their children in cotton wool and stifling their development through overprotectiveness, through health and safety in the workplace, to our attitudes to risk-taking behaviour in others.

I think that far too many people enlist for the wrong reasons. Thats as simple as I can sum up my opinion of the subject.

People make all kinds of life choices for the wrong reasons, I've lost count of the number of people I've known in the workplace with high-flying careers who are miserable and depressed, mostly because of their high-flying careers. I don't see how that's the fault of the military.

 

[Sulkdodds]

repiV, do you honestly think you're the only person on the planet who believes in "a life well lived"? It's a constant and common idea that one must take risks in order to truly live. And swaddling has been around forever, as have neuroses about how to raise children. We have become more conscious of or preoccupied with risk, and are as a society more detached from the 'essentials' (if we want to be essentialist) of life. But it is not an apocalypse.

 

[repiV]

repiV, do you honestly think you're the only person on the planet who believes in "a life well lived"? It's a constant and common idea that one must take risks in order to truly live. And swaddling has been around forever, as have neuroses about how to raise children. We have become more conscious of or preoccupied with risk, and are as a society more detached from the 'essentials' (if we want to be essentialist) of life. But it is not an apocalypse.

I'm far from the only one. If anything, I'd say that I'm in the majority. But for some reason the risk-averse camp is pulling all the strings these days.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I'm far from the only one. If anything, I'd say that I'm in the majority. But for some reason the risk-averse camp is pulling all the strings these days.

I guess that's why the current government's policy on anthropocentric global warming can be summed up as "dangerously accelerate it while falsifying statistics", or why large companies were allowed, nay encouraged, to play dice with vast quantities of risk.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

But what do we do with the risk? All of our containment budget is spent on the SCIENCE!

 

[Hobostomp]

Doing what one thinks is right or fulfilling for oneself is not selfish. And considering the danger soldiers put themselves in, it is arguably one of the most selfless things you can do. Only in your ****ed up world of living according to Mommy's feelings could acting as an independent human capable of making its own decisions be construed as selfish. The sorrow of families is regrettable. But they ultimately need the maturity to accept that their children or siblings have chosen their own path.

People seem to think that by "family" I mean exclusively parents. In Cyrus's case, this was true, however some soldiers are leaving spouses and children behind. To do what they "think is right" and "fulfill themselves". Well boys, it's time to stop playing with guns and grow the f*** up.

 

[Ennui]

Shakespeare is a whiny little bitch who takes too long to speak.

Learn to read.

Alternately, accept the fact that Shakespeare was a goddamn lyrical baller and the fact that you think he's a "whiny little bitch who takes too long to speak" is a reflection on your inability to appreciate beautiful language, not an indication of the fact that the rest of humanity is misguided in thinking he's an excellent writer.

 

[Dog--]

No I'm right your wrong. He could've easily said things the way they were, I'm not being pulled in by all this lyrical ballin shit.

When that guy can write a song as good as Neil Peart, then he's a lyrical baller, until then he gets lyrically raped by Mr. Peart.

 

[VirusType2]

You can't think like that. Heck, when I drive my truck I know it could kill me. Going outside I know I could be struck down by a lightning bolt or kidnapped by aliens. Life is inherently dangerous and anything could kill you, but that doesn't mean the actions you take are selfish. If we all lived under the thought that "I don't want to do this action because it could kill me and put my family in worry" nothing would ever get done. People wouldn't drive/walk to work because these can kill you just as easily as being at war.

When you are a soldier in a war, people are trying to kill you. In fact, they have the ultimate incentive in that their life depends on killing you.

So, no, it's not equally dangerous as driving your truck to work, but I did lol. I used to joke that my car was trying to kill me.

I get what you mean, like anyone can die any minute [from any stupid shit, like choking on a pretzel.]

 

[repiV]

People seem to think that by "family" I mean exclusively parents. In Cyrus's case, this was true, however some soldiers are leaving spouses and children behind. To do what they "think is right" and "fulfill themselves". Well boys, it's time to stop playing with guns and grow the f*** up.

So people who join the military are just immature children now?

Damn, I gave you the benefit of the doubt but you really are a conceited and judgemental douche.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Hobostomp it is okay if you had a bad personal experience with your dad dying in Vietnam or something that has prejudiced your beliefs you can tell us.

 

[Hobostomp]

Hobostomp it is okay if you had a bad personal experience with your dad dying in Vietnam or something that has prejudiced your beliefs you can tell us.

lol nope, I just dare to have opinions that differ from repiV.

 

[repiV]

I think you'll find the problem is that your "opinions" are unfounded prejudicial nonsense. And that you have a very high-and-mighty, judgemental attitude when you haven't even begun to earn the right to look down on these people. You're 18 ****ing years old, which I guessed before I went to check. And you're talking shit about people years older than you who have actually accomplished something significant with their lives, whereas you have yet to really begin yours. You are in absolutely no position to be so arrogant. Much as you think you have an answer for everything, you actually know **** all.

Last time I checked my opinions were not sacred on these forums, so I don't know where the hell you got THAT idea from.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

a conceited and judgemental douche.

L O L