Terrorism as "collateral damages"

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by S.A.M., Mar 3, 2010.

  1. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    Those answers just don't work

    A bit out of date, eh?

    Perhaps you can help me understand this phenomenon. In the face of certain questions, people often back away from applied definitions and retreat to abstract ones. Why?

    Like firing a missile into a crowd of civilians because a couple of people you think might be terrorists might be there?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Could you imagine if al Qaeda had the military capabilities of, say, America? Do you think they'd bother with tactical weapons?

    Three words disprove your argument:

    Carpet bombing works.

    How many missionaries behead Afghanis?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    Um ....

    Relevance?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Why are you implying that Joe's response is an abstract definition? Do you understand the difference between firing a missile at a target who surrounds himself with civilians and simply detonating a bomb in a crowd of civilians that you hate, and wish to oppress or destroy?
     
  8. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    The relevance is clear, though I think Ben intends it as a humorous rebuttal.
     
  9. kenworth dude...**** it,lets go bowling Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,034
    terrorists dont attack military targets.by definition
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Which al Qaeda? The actor who taped his voice? The British/Americans dressed in Arab clothing setting off car bombs in Iraq? The ones fighting the US in Iraq/Afghanistan since seven years?

    Where has it worked? For whom?

    How does it "work"?
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2010
  11. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    Dresden? Rotterdam? Wesel?

    It worked for the Allies in Germany during WWII.

    Carpet bombing is also called "terror bombing" for a reason. In addition to clearing everything hostile out of the way, it scares the holy bejeezus out of anyone who survives and crushes morale.
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Did it really? How do you figure that? What did it change, besides killing maybe millions of civilians?


    Ah, its terrorism. But terrorism doesn't work, does it?
     
  13. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    It killed skilled civilians working in factories. It destroyed the German labour force.

    As in all things, it utterly depends on the will of the terrorists and the resistance to them.

    So then...since carpet bombing is terrorism, and terrorism is bad - as you allude to above - ...then is terrorism bad?
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    Coercive force

    Depends on who you ask. Additionally, as society evolves, standards change. Terrorism, biological warfare, crimes against humanity: it used to be called, simply, "war".
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Didn't the Germans invent the concept of Blitzkrieg?
     
  16. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Relevance?
     
  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    This and that

    Yes and no. Kind of, sort of. The idea of moving swiftly and ruthlessly in order to overwhelm the enemy was not new, but the specific elements emerging in WWII were, according to the technology involved.

    • • •​

    Tit for tat? Do unto others as they have done unto others? The idea that since the "bad guys" behave badly, so can the "good guys"? Kind of like Americans and torture in the War on Terror? Or, maybe, the willful destruction of civilians?

    Quit trolling.
     
  18. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Actually, the point was that Blitzkrieg, as a more tactical-maneuver concept, doesn't really relate all that well to atrocities against the industrial base of an entire nation. It wasn't revolutionary because it allowed the user to mow civilians down more effectively. I think this is often confused in the layman, and Sam was creating a link that wasn't real.

    Don't be absurd. This hasn't the slightest thing to do with trolling.
     
  19. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,508
    (Insert Title Here)

    Only to those predisposed to finding something to complain about. The question makes perfect sense to me in its context—e.g., pay attention to the discussion.

    Then don't wait for an invitation to be useful.
     
  20. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    A bit too esoteric to be averagely esoteric.

    I don't. The condition of the questioner always precedes such questions, frankly.
     
  21. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Ask the survivors from Hamburg or Dresden.
     
  22. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    It does if the hamster is a moral agent in his own right. And to that question, I reject the notion that terrorists are some sort of automata. This sort of moral reductionism makes a hash of reality, and in any case is only being applied selectively and cravenly to provoke one side while exhonerating the other: it's destructive, and done in bad faith.

    If applied in good faith, you end up in a situation where everybody is reactive and nobody has political agency, and the whole thing is the fault of God (if you're religious) or simply human nature (if you aren't).
     
  23. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Depends on what you want to achieve. Terrorism works great if your goal is to terrorize people. For most other purposes, it's not so useful.

    Likewise torture: great for terrorizing populations, not so much for gathering information.
     

Share This Page