Are all soldiers like the Nazis?

S.A.M. said:
Do they just mindlessly follow orders even when they are wrong?
Click to expand...
the perfect soldier will.
its the commanding officer that is wrong, not the soldier.

Do they all justify wrong behaviour with ideology?
Click to expand...
don't even try to equate military behavior with civilian behavior.
each has its own justice system.
 
S.A.M. said:
Its one ideology. Whats the difference, where the mindless killing is concerned, with any other? What makes a cluster bomb a better kind of killing? Whats good about killing like that? Why is one soldier torturing one civilian worse than if the same guy got into an aircraft and shredded thousands?
Click to expand...

But its a singular ideology like Communism. If I said something like all soldiers are communist it would sound stupid right and it would be. All nazi's were not soldiers as anyone can be a member of a party, all soldiers are not nazi's.

A cluster bomb is a large cannister which contains anything up to one thousand bomblets. The bomblets are tennis size munition. Its a weapon that can be used to carpet bomb a large area. Is designed to be dropped on large military formations. So you can take out large widespread formations quickly. Which means that if there are conveys or large troops in an area on foot or vehicles as the bomblets are anti-armament and anti-personel. They are not smart bombs and have a high failure rate which effectively turns them into a UXO.

If one goes bang it is an formidable killing mechanism.

One soldier torturing someone is not the same as using a cluster bomb to disable enemy soldiers. Anymore than a drunk driver correlates to deliberately driving over someone you intend to kill.

War means death. Death of soldiers and civilian casualties this is true in a 'justified' war as well as one that isn't justified. How this relates to nazi's is beyond me.
 
And I'm replacing nazi with "an ideology". An ideology is only as important as the people who believe in it.

I'm asking you what makes a soldier drop a cluster bomb on a village full of people he does not know and has probably no occasion to ever know or meet.

And how its different from him beating to death someone he does not know and is never likely to meet. Except for when he is beating him to death.
 
S.A.M. said:
And I'm replacing nazi with "an ideology". An ideology is only as important as the people who believe in it.
Click to expand...

And this relates to military life how?

What ideology are you speaking of because you seem all over the place on this topic which is 'are all soldiers nazis'.
 
S.A.M. said:
I'm asking you what makes a soldier drop a cluster bomb on a village full of people he does not know and has probably no occasion to ever know or meet.

And how its different from him beating to death someone he does not know and is never likely to meet.
Click to expand...

A soldier will drop a cluster bomb if there are large formations that need disabling. Its either that or allow a formation to kill your troops. Cluster bombs are not used on villages but as there are so many bomblets it can affect a village but like I said that's what happens in a war.

Its different because beating someone to death is not a military obligation, the soldiers at Gitmo were never trained in interrogation and had no business doing what they had done which was criminal.
 
Is what happened at Gitmo unusual? Unique? What if it was legalised and became the norm. Would you get used to it as you have to the bombing of civilians?

Would you say "that's what happens in a war"
 
S.A.M. said:
Is what happened at Gitmo unusual? Unique? What if it was legalised and became the norm. Would you get used to it as you have to the bombing of civilians?

Would you say "that's what happens in a war"
Click to expand...

Actually yes it is unique. Why would it become the norm or legalized? Its not an effective way of dealing with enemy combatants. The problem with the soldiers at gitmo was that many were privates doing what the hell they liked without any interrogation training whatsoever.

Civilian deaths have happened since the beginning of time.

One is unnecessary and the other unavoidable.

Here is film footage of a cluster bomb in action.

You will have to scroll down to the bottom of the page to see it:

http://en.handicapinternational.be/...n-the-human-impact-of-cluster-bombs_a467.html
 
Lucysnow said:
Actually yes it is unique.
Civilian deaths have happened since the beginning of time.

One is unnecessary and the other unavoidable.
Click to expand...

Why not consider it all "necessary"? What is "necessary" killing?
 
I'm not really interested in the advances in killing technology. I'm asking you if the same guy who dropped the cluster bombs, instead went on foot and sawed off/hacked off the arms and legs of the same people, what would you say?
 
SAM as an ex American military person, I can tell you one of the things that stands out very clearly in my military training was to understand the difference between a legal order an and illegal order. All American military troops are put through the same training. And they are instructed not only are they not obligated to obey an illegal order, they are required not to obey illegal orders.

Any while I cannot directly speak for other western troops, I am sure they went through similar training. In a modern military, it is critical that troops understand the difference between legal and illegal orders.
 
S.A.M. said:
I'm not really interested in the advances in killing technology. I'm asking you if the same guy who dropped the cluster bombs, instead went on foot and sawed off/hacked off the arms and legs of the same people, what would you say?
Click to expand...

I would say 'Hey idiot why are you exerting so much energy?'. And then I would pick up a firearm and shoot the man in the head and say 'Now this is faster and takes less exertion on your part. Now move out!':rolleyes:
 
joepistole said:
SAM as an ex American military person, I can tell you one of the things that stands out very clearly in my military training was to understand the difference between a legal order an and illegal order. All American military troops are put through the same training. And they are instructed not only are they not obligated to obey an illegal order, they are required not to obey illegal orders.

Any while I cannot directly speak for other western troops, I am sure they went through similar training. In a modern military, it is critical that troops understand the difference between legal and illegal orders.
Click to expand...

Are there legal orders which involve killing people you don't know? What is your opinion of such legalisation?

Do you think torture if legalised would be followed the same way killing is?

Lucysnow said:
I would say 'Hey idiot why are you exerting so much energy?'. And then I would pick up a firearm and shoot the man in the head and say 'Now this is faster and takes less exertion on your part. Now move out!':rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So you admire the efficiency of killing by numbers? Why would you shoot him?
 
No I am mocking a stupid question.

Obviously if you are on the ground and killing another soldier you wouldn't take the time to cut off arms and legs. Unless of course you are a crazed muslim extremist who gets a hard-on from cutting off heads.
 
Actually chopping off arms and legs is what soldiers did before. But now we have rules against torture, so we use flechettes and cluster bombs instead to blow up body parts. I'm just wondering that if American soldiers were given axes in lieu of bombs, would it be acceptable to the people who think torture is "illegal" in war [the quotes are of course to denote my cynical view of this "legislation"- torture is de facto in all wars even if the official position is it is not de jure]
 
Oh Sam the West is much more efficient than that! We don't need to wield axes like some small minded Hutu!

I mean what are we living in some archaic end of the modern world scenario where there isn't anything left but an axe? Its a stupid question Sam.

Why don't the global jihadists use axes? Lol.
 
Exactly. They are more efficient at mass killing for mindless reasons by unquestioning foot soldiers.

And this is apparently acceptable because its "efficient". Which is what the Germans were really good at. Mass killings, efficiently.
 
S.A.M. said:
Actually chopping off arms and legs is what soldiers did before. But now we have rules against torture, so we use flechettes and cluster bombs instead to blow up body parts. I'm just wondering that if American soldiers were given axes in lieu of bombs, would it be acceptable to the people who think torture is "illegal" in war [the quotes are of course to denote my cynical view of this "legislation"- torture is de facto in all wars even if the official position is it is not de jure]
Click to expand...

Is a fight between two people who have the same opportunity to live torture to you?

If so, how is it torture?
 
S.A.M. said:
Exactly. They are more efficient at mass killing for mindless reasons by unquestioning foot soldiers.

And this is apparently acceptable because its "efficient". Which is what the Germans were really good at. Mass killings, efficiently.
Click to expand...

Survival of the fittest best and brightest.

The germans were not fighting soldiers they were interning their own citizens and killing them. What they did on the front lines is what any soldier would have done on the front lines.
 
RickyH said:
Is a fight between two people who have the same opportunity to live torture to you?

If so, how is it torture?
Click to expand...

I don't think its torture when they both have the same opportunity to live. Its torture when one is shredding the others arms and legs because he/she has more power, usually. Its why the victim is usually shown bound. Torture is inherently a power equation, much like tossing cluster bombs on people who cannot defend themselves. Its why countries who throw such bombs usually do not throw them on people with weapons that can reach them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top