Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Fredrick-483665 said: I am with you Gerald. I am not be able to articulate very well but it seems cowardly to sit at...
(Quote) Fredrick-483665 said:

I am with you Gerald. I am not be able to articulate very well but it seems cowardly to sit at a desk drinking coffee while killing people. I don't mean to say the pilots are cowards only that this type of warfare is. There once where warrior virtues such as courage, discipline, loyalty, toughness and so forth. War is stupid and wasteful and horrible but when they must be fought we should try to do it with some sort of honor and dignity. This is not much more than murder. I guess some might argue that dropping Zyklon B into the gas chamber to kill your enemies is OK too. But I think this is not only unethical but dishonorable to ourselves and our enemies.

--hide--


Your statement about "sitting at a desk drinking coffee while killing people," made me think of a general giving his
men orders, but he stayed in a secure place. Also, it is kind of like when Obama sent the Navy Seals to get Bin Laden,
yet he (and the rest of them) was tucked away safe inside the Pentagon or the White House or wherever they were.

Dec 13th 2012 new
(Quote) John-336509 said: So what is the moral difference between a drone and a sniper?
(Quote) John-336509 said:

So what is the moral difference between a drone and a sniper?

--hide--


The difference is that one is placed on the ground while the other is in the air.

Aside of that, it is how they are used that makes the difference. Who calls them, and for what.
Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Steven-706921 said: The difference is that one is placed on the ground while the other is in the air. Asi...
(Quote) Steven-706921 said:

The difference is that one is placed on the ground while the other is in the air.

Aside of that, it is how they are used that makes the difference. Who calls them, and for what.
--hide--


He said "moral" difference, Steven. Are you saying that the sniper and drone are morally seperate?

I thought the examples of a drone and a sniper were good ones.

Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Steven-706921 said: The difference is that one is placed on the ground while the other is in the air. Asi...
(Quote) Steven-706921 said:

The difference is that one is placed on the ground while the other is in the air.

Aside of that, it is how they are used that makes the difference. Who calls them, and for what.
--hide--


Steven: When warfare developed through the ages, protection of the individual soldier in battle became
better. I can think of the tanks in WW2 vs. how the soldiers lined up face to face in long lines of battle
in the Civil War.

But then you think about the Islamic Terrorists, and their method of battle. They send out their soldiers
to kill while using their own bodies as the weapon, thereby killing themselves. That is so barbaric and midevil.
We have such a strange enemy in this day and age.

Dec 13th 2012 new
I'd have to agree with john on this issue. I don't think there is any evidence that points to the fact that drone pilots are acting more detached from the conflict, or how any detachment changes the way the sort of targets that the USG chooses. You can actually find plenty of evidence to the contrary that drone pilots are actually more attached to the conflict than you may think. They are plenty of drone pilots that experienced PTSD. Killing is killing and the average American soldier still experiences the stress and moral fracture. In a way some drone pilots have a uniquely more stressful situation (minus the risk of being killed themselves). Drone pilots can go to work in Nevada, sit in a trailer piloting a drone, carrying out a few strikes a day and then return home to their family that next day. They don't have the benefit of having brothers in arms abroad or have the benefit of "leaving the war behind", instead they bring it home with renewed stress and moral fatigue everyday and that's hard on the families as well. So I think you, Peter, may be arguing that there is a potential risk for moral degradation through drones, but the average American soldier morality is much stronger than that. The majority of evidence points to the fact that the "disconnect" from the sense of war that you initially thought was there, simply isn't...
Dec 13th 2012 new
(Quote) John-336509 said: We've been down this road before, Charles. The fact that you personally absolutely refuse t...
(Quote) John-336509 said:



We've been down this road before, Charles. The fact that you personally absolutely refuse to distinguish between the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of war does not alter the reality that they exist.



A war that is still absolutley defensive in its goals will still involve offensive actions by the defender. Just War Theory also requires that there be a serious prospect for success. Since no war has ever been won without offensive action, it goes to reason that the theory does not arbitarily ban anything that includes an offensive.

--hide--


There is a difference between offensive actions inside of a defensive war and pre-emptive war. Pre-emptive war is, by definition, not defensive. It initiates the acts of aggression against another country. Again, I'd bring up the analogy of shooting a neighbor "pre-emptively" because you think that he might be a threat to you in the future.
Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Richard-143340 said: In my opinion, no difference.
(Quote) Richard-143340 said:


In my opinion, no difference.



--hide--

I agree with you. Since I don't have a problem with snipers, I likewise don't have one with drones.

Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Fredrick-483665 said: I am with you Gerald. I am not be able to articulate very well but it seems cowardly to sit at...
(Quote) Fredrick-483665 said:

I am with you Gerald. I am not be able to articulate very well but it seems cowardly to sit at a desk drinking coffee while killing people. I don't mean to say the pilots are cowards only that this type of warfare is. There once where warrior virtues such as courage, discipline, loyalty, toughness and so forth. War is stupid and wasteful and horrible but when they must be fought we should try to do it with some sort of honor and dignity. This is not much more than murder. I guess some might argue that dropping Zyklon B into the gas chamber to kill your enemies is OK too. But I think this is not only unethical but dishonorable to ourselves and our enemies.

--hide--

They say there is a fine line between bravery and stupidity.

Is it actually cowardly to sit a desk and run a drone, or would it be stupid to refuse to do so?

The consensus here, and I agree with it, seems to be that there certainly is nothing brave or heroic about sending in a drone. Where I'm parting company with a lot of people is that it doesn't bother me.

The point of a just war is not to prove how tough, manly, or brave you are. It's to stop something even worse from happening. If that can be done faster, easier, and with less risk than by pushing a button, so be it.

I think it is important to wage war with honor and dignity (to the extent that that is not oxymoronic), but the big picture is to bring the conflict to an end with the fewest dead bodies possible, not with the most possible medals for valor being earned. (That last comment should be taken figuratively, not literally; I don't think anybody is advocating being a medal chaser.)

So while I agree that it would be braver and more courageous to go stick a bayonet into the bad guy than to blow him up safely from a distance, is that really more ethical? Is it more just to risk a whole platoon (or whatever) going behind the lines to get a high value target just to boast that we did it face to face?

I'm perfectly willing to respect the person who would rather go hand-to-hand, but I disagree that it is more ethical. Brave? Certainly. Just? I don't see the difference.

Dec 13th 2012 new
Why is it that we as human beings spend our time and energy on fruitless argument? When I say we I include me. In my experience argument is the least successful way to change minds and hearts. Each side has a view and both are convinced of their correctness. It's been said that weapons destroy what is outside but man destroys what's inside through evil. That's the true enemy---evil. Only weeks ago I was full force in the political discussions being tough on people who made the mistake of not agreeing with me. What did that accomplish? Nothing. In fact the opposite of what I wanted happened. I don't see joy or hope in these discussions. Only Christ can provide joy, hope and true peace. He and Our Lady are the ones to help us to victory. They are what we need. Mary Queen of Peace, pray for us.
Dec 13th 2012 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: I read this article about two men who are political activists, building small wooden replicas ...
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:

I read this article about two men who are political activists, building small wooden replicas of drones.

When I read this, I thought to myself, Drones are the new warfare. They are Americas response
to using 747's to blow up National Landmarks. They are the military's response to unconventional
weapons, since we are not fighting armies anymore, but individual terrorists.

Of course, there are always unintended consequences, like collateral damage. In conventional
warfare though, the damages are much greater.

There always are detractors. What do others think of drones?














www.lohud.com

--hide--
I don't really give a rat's patoot about all the expertise here defending new and creative ways of killing people. Eisenhower warned us about the "military industrial complex," but no one listened. This defense industry monster we created is now too massive to be controlled- a great beast that must constantly be fed. Bought Congresspersons are fighting for jobs in defense industry locations in their district. We've all read the stories of planes being pushed on our military that they don't need or want. You won't get an argument from me that we require a powerful military without equal, but that strong military does not require the 234 golf courses it maintains throughout the world: www.salon.com

Afghanistan is arguably the last necessary war we fought since World War II, and there's serious domestic and foreign pressure to get us into the next one in 2013. Do we need to hunt down those bent on our destruction? You bet. But along the way we don't need to demonize an entire people to accomplish that goal. We should eliminate our ineffective State Department and replace it with the National Geographic Society. They have been interacting famously with people in some of the most inhospitable places on earth for 125 years.

That's it from me- over and out. Dove

Posts 61 - 70 of 98