12-01-2005, 07:01 PM #1
Canada: Military ethics and the war on terror: Assasination Tactics ethical?
Intresting issue released by official military website
Last edited by GQ-Bouncer; 12-01-2005 at 07:03 PM.
12-01-2005, 08:53 PM #2
Canada nor the United States have no base to ground ethics in objectivity. Nothing is right or wrong if we take secularism to its logical conclusion.
12-01-2005, 09:20 PM #3Originally Posted by boots555
12-01-2005, 09:32 PM #4Originally Posted by GQ-Bouncer
The ethics provided are subjective and hold no objective basis. The ethics are purely personal, therfore societies ethics are no better than Hitlers ethics. Its purely subjective, this is the problem secularism runs into. It claims no objective (unchanging) truth exists, except for the statemente "objective truth does not exist" (a objective statement, which the secularist believes is objectively true)
Truth does not exist except for my statement "truth does not exist". Its circular.
12-01-2005, 09:40 PM #5
I'm talking about combating asymmetrical warfare - the question is posed right in the article
(copied frome the article)
" Can Canada, as a democratic state, accept the moral justification for preemptive targeting and the assassination of terrorists in the war on terror? "
You gotta lay down the crackpipe brotha
12-01-2005, 10:18 PM #6
ethic and military are oxymorons
12-02-2005, 12:05 AM #7Originally Posted by GQ-Bouncer
12-02-2005, 02:01 AM #8
Vandoo - Dude, their bringing back the Airborne Regiment! only calling it a diff name
Assasination has been used for centuries, hell, even Sun Tzu realized the importance of Assasination - I'm talking ethics in how it concerns warfighting
12-02-2005, 05:12 AM #9
Isnt this kind of like the question would you kill one to save a thousand.
I have no beef with assasinations of known terrorists. By killing civilians in those manners they have rejected there right to live.
If sniping out some assholes would prevent a new Beslan or a new 9/11 who can say its unethical?
12-02-2005, 08:52 AM #10
12-02-2005, 08:53 AM #11Originally Posted by johan
12-02-2005, 08:59 AM #12Originally Posted by CAUSASIAN
I dont think I would have a problem with it. Some of them are even worse then terrorists. Offcourse a assasination of a head of state is different since someone worse might take his place. It would have to be considered very carefully.
A assasination of a world leader should only be done if there is high odds that a democratic movement grabs power after the assasination.
Just imagine if Hitler would have been assasinated and someone with more sense of military strategy had replaced him. Maby germany would have won ww2.
12-02-2005, 09:03 AM #13
True, but if it is ethical for one nation to assassinate another nations leader, it should be ethical for all of them to do it.
12-02-2005, 09:09 AM #14
Its only ethical if its done to save a buttload of lifes.
Lets imagine a chechen assasinates putin. That would only be a good move if Putins replacer would bring peace betwen russia and chechenia(I hope I spelled it right). Otherwise it would be bloody stupid.
Think like the star trek Vulcan's Logic should decide not ethics.
12-02-2005, 09:10 AM #15Originally Posted by johan
12-02-2005, 09:47 AM #16Originally Posted by CAUSASIAN
Ethics is like AIZ said very relative.
12-03-2005, 09:08 AM #17
Would you people consider a politician a non-combatant?
12-03-2005, 09:25 AM #18Retired Vet
Originally Posted by GQ-Bouncer
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
Only in the strictest sense of the word. But in truth he's the instrument which sends soldiers to war.
12-04-2005, 08:24 PM #19Originally Posted by GQ-Bouncer
12-04-2005, 08:56 PM #20Originally Posted by AIZ
If we are talking about ethics then we need to find a way to ground our statement in objectivity.
What canada is doing is making judgements on ethics and morality even though neigther exist in a secularistic society where God is off limits. If God is off limits, then truth as a objective category no longer exist. AND THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE.
If God is dead then so is all meaning, truth, love. No God means there is no point to life. All you are is a bunch of chemicals that is going to go back to ground soon.
Falling in love with a woman isnt really love. It was merely a bunch of chemicals in your brain playing tricks on you. The same is true for children.
What Hitler did wasnt actually wrong, He was merely bringing to pass the logical outworking of his philosophy. (woops I forgot, if TRUTH does not exist neigther does LOGIC)
Dont thank your mother for your existence, thank Chance, you got lucky I will end with this.
Steve Turner, the English journalist, was right when he said:
"If chance be
the Father of all flesh,
disaster is his rainbow in the sky,
and when you hear
State of Emergency!
Sniper Kills Ten!
Troops on Rampage!
Whites go Looting!
Bomb Blasts School!
It is but the sound of man
worshipping his maker."
12-04-2005, 08:59 PM #21
This is why Jean Paul Sarte the french existenialist confessed God on his death
and renounced his naturalistic philosophies.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)