More evidence we are all becoming less civilized by the day: (1 Viewer)

redneckgeek

New member
Local time
Today, 07:22
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
464
Now we're talking total casualties and not those from collatoral damage
(e.g. we accidentally dropped a bomb on a school). I don't buy that the US has killed anywhere near 150,000 people. But, I will concede that none of the people would have likely been killed had we not started the war.
 

Alisa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:22
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
1,931
Now we're talking total casualties and not those from collatoral damage
(e.g. we accidentally dropped a bomb on a school). I don't buy that the US has killed anywhere near 150,000 people. But, I will concede that none of the people would have likely been killed had we not started the war.

What number do you "buy"?
 

Brianwarnock

Retired
Local time
Today, 11:22
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
12,701
This thread seems to be judging the state of our civilisation by the weapons used in war, with a diversion into civilian casualties.

War is barbaric, is there need to say more, would you rather be nuked in a nano second or die slowly from a sword wound?

Civilian casulties of war have always existed, and sometimes the deaths, or worse, have been more cold blooded than that of collateral damage.

I agree with Rednecks assessment of the weapons that seem to have sparked the debate.

Brian
 

Sum Guy

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 04:22
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
310
Who invented the term:

"collatoral damage"

Remember. these are the people you KILLED while trying to kill someone else (who you probably missed).

With all the high tech weaponry floating around, it's amazing the number of times one trained soldier with a rifle can get the job done best.
 

redneckgeek

New member
Local time
Today, 07:22
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
464
What number do you "buy"?

*grabs a number out of thin air*

ummm... 12,000 total non-combatant deaths

120,000 enemy combatant deaths

Now that I've had a full night to think about it, I've realized the numbers don't matter to me - even if they are 500,000. I KNOW the US doesn't have a policy of indiscriminately killing civilians, but those casualties do, unfortunately, occur.
 
Last edited:

Alisa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:22
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
1,931
*grabs a number out of thin air*

ummm... 12,000 total non-combatant deaths

120,000 enemy combatant deaths

Now that I've had a full night to think about it, I've realized the numbers don't matter to me - even if they are 500,000. I KNOW the US doesn't have a policy of indiscriminately killing civilians, but those casualties do, unfortunately, occur.

Hold on a minute. You were trying to make the argument that the use of these weapons is MORE civilized because they result in less collateral damage, yes?

The only reason I brought up the numbers is because there is no evidence to back up your argument. Nobody knows how many total casualties have occured on their side, much less how many of them were "civilian" vs. "military". I just don't see how you can make the claim that these bombs are somehow a step forward in lessening collateral damage, when, by design, they kill everything indiscriminately within a certain distance of the bomb.
 

FoFa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 06:22
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
3,672
Actually more or less civilized by the weapon you use does not seem to have a true correlation. There seems to be less collateral damage with the newer weapons than say WWII with the blanket bombing, V2 rockets and such. Just because you can kill your intended target more efficiently, does not correspond to civilized more or less.
Civilized would be we as a human race would not be killing each other. But history has proved different. Seems to be in our blood.
 

redneckgeek

New member
Local time
Today, 07:22
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
464
5 years ago:
10 "bad guys" are in a fortified building. We drop a 500 lb bomb on the building, leveling it and 3 other buildings near it. Killing 5 innocent bystanders in the process.

Today:
10 "bad guys" are in a fortified building. We launch a Hellfire missle through a window, killing everyone inside, but nobody outside. The building may even be left standing and structurally sound.

While killing people may not be the "civilized" thing to do, the "Today" version is clearly the lesser of 2 evils. Therefore, we are becoming more civilized. ;)
 

redneckgeek

New member
Local time
Today, 07:22
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
464
Nobody knows how many total casualties have occured on their side, much less how many of them were "civilian" vs. "military".

Exactly. The difference is that I believe most (>75%) of the casualties are "military", while you seem to believe that most of them are civilian. There is insufficeint evidence for either of us to prove our viewpoint. That's why I didn't even want to go into the subject.
 

Banana

split with a cherry atop.
Local time
Today, 04:22
Joined
Sep 1, 2005
Messages
6,318
That's it!

The title is really getting on my nerves.

Are we less civilized than then? Hell yes!

We're way less civilized than the old days when people gathered around gallows for a good hanging or two (and if it was a Sunday, throw rotten fruits and vegetables at the petty criminals)!

We've thrown away all our sensibilities now that we no longer dunk witches in water and burn them at the stake!

We're way more barbaric than Romans who didn't mind crucifixing their victims to a tree and leaving them for ravens to eat! And our silly right to a jury? Romans certainly knew better- the Prefect took care of all that boring mundane duties!

We've moved backward since we no longer sacrifice our babies and maiden virgins to appease idols for a good year's harvest!



Okay, I'm done. I'll just let the door hit my butt on the way out. Kthkxbye.
 
Local time
Today, 06:22
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
3,856
That's it!

The title is really getting on my nerves.

Are we less civilized than then? Hell yes!

We're way less civilized than the old days when people gathered around gallows for a good hanging or two (and if it was a Sunday, throw rotten fruits and vegetables at the petty criminals)!

We've thrown away all our sensibilities now that we no longer dunk witches in water and burn them at the stake!

We're way more barbaric than Romans who didn't mind crucifixing their victims to a tree and leaving them for ravens to eat! And our silly right to a jury? Romans certainly knew better- the Prefect took care of all that boring mundane duties!

We've moved backward since we no longer sacrifice our babies and maiden virgins to appease idols for a good year's harvest!



Okay, I'm done. I'll just let the door hit my butt on the way out. Kthkxbye.

It just won't let me give you more rep...sorry.
 

FoFa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 06:22
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
3,672
Depending on far back you to go, a big stick or a rock also....
 
Local time
Today, 06:22
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
3,856
Wow, maybe all weapons are brutal!

OMG, now that we've solved that I feel much better. Now let's go fight about God on the Atheist thread.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom