Okay, as everyone knows (or should) there is rules to a war. For example, you aren't allowed to hurt/kill someone without a gun whether it be a known terrorist or not.
I think this affects the war a lot because our soldiers are limited to certain standards. I know its nderstandable, but I don't think there should be any rules, I think they should be more guidelines or principals..
What do you think?
Rules of War
-
Logic
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:06 am
-
AYHJA
- 392
- Posts: 37990
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
- Location: Washington, D.C.
- Contact:
Man, this is news to me..!
Long gone are the days when war meant you had an overall respect for your enemy...When you could die and kill w/honor...
I say that alll rules to war were nullified with the gun became the primary weapon...It allowed the coward to be a hero...I would not want to be in the military for that very reason, to me, there is no glory to be had in modern day battle...
AYHJA
Long gone are the days when war meant you had an overall respect for your enemy...When you could die and kill w/honor...
I say that alll rules to war were nullified with the gun became the primary weapon...It allowed the coward to be a hero...I would not want to be in the military for that very reason, to me, there is no glory to be had in modern day battle...
AYHJA
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Fapper
- Rusty Guitar Player
- Posts: 3165
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:12 pm
- Location: ɹns ןǝp ɐɔıɹǝɯɐ
- Contact:
-
Pete
- Posts: 3115
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:03 am
I agree with AYHJA too. There's no glory in a gun. It might take technique to properly use a gun, but it isn't heroic like a sword.
Now what if both armies replaced their bullet guns with flamethrowers? Yep, just like ligthsabers, 3 foot flame to lash their enemy and sizzle them, handling them like swords! Wacko.....
Now what if both armies replaced their bullet guns with flamethrowers? Yep, just like ligthsabers, 3 foot flame to lash their enemy and sizzle them, handling them like swords! Wacko.....
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
deepdiver32073
- Iconoclast Extraordinaire
- Posts: 8395
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:25 pm
I propose that any countrys' leaders that want to go to war with each other must first duke it out in public. Winner take all.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
don't get it twisted...
i would bet most of the people on here have seen less guns than me, and certainly not enough to know what you are talking about when it comes to honor and duty on a battlefield.
having been on a few myself, I would say those that think swords require more honor than guns are romanticizing the whole thing.
"Honor is a weapon itself, and not the gift or perogative of certain weapons." If anything, swords are less honorable, all you have to do is have better shoulders in most cases.
I will say the gun is extremely effective, and those who respect the gun have a code of honor that pales even the bushido code, in some cases.
what killed the honor of war is the fact we as a people have outgrown it, and the whole purpose of standing military forces and actions of "war" are summed up in the number one priority of the U.S. Dept. of Defense:
"To ensure the economic sovereignty of the Country at all costs."
this we learn in bootcamp, even before we learn to polish our toes.
::end rant::
vertical,
raum
(who was a shit-hot gunners mate and taught basic and advanced firearms to many a sailor, and worked with some of the tightest security teams in the pacific fleet.) no honor, sheesh!
having been on a few myself, I would say those that think swords require more honor than guns are romanticizing the whole thing.
"Honor is a weapon itself, and not the gift or perogative of certain weapons." If anything, swords are less honorable, all you have to do is have better shoulders in most cases.
I will say the gun is extremely effective, and those who respect the gun have a code of honor that pales even the bushido code, in some cases.
what killed the honor of war is the fact we as a people have outgrown it, and the whole purpose of standing military forces and actions of "war" are summed up in the number one priority of the U.S. Dept. of Defense:
"To ensure the economic sovereignty of the Country at all costs."
this we learn in bootcamp, even before we learn to polish our toes.
::end rant::
vertical,
raum
(who was a shit-hot gunners mate and taught basic and advanced firearms to many a sailor, and worked with some of the tightest security teams in the pacific fleet.) no honor, sheesh!
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
AYHJA
- 392
- Posts: 37990
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
- Location: Washington, D.C.
- Contact:
^^
As expected, this is a topic that is sure to offend...I in no way mean to disrespect those of us that are or have once been in the military...That isn't my logic at all...
Alas, let me make myself more clear...If you are in this country's military, rare is it that you are fighting for your own personal ideals, but that of a man that will never ever suit up beside you in battle...
Call it being a romantic, but there is something to be said that is definitely missing, when a peasant looked to his side, and saw his king fighting the same fight...He would offer you no less of a sacrifice than he himself did...He could loose just as much as you...
I put myself in the position of the modern day soldier, and true enough, they could DEFINITELY be proud, and have honor, and the ultimate respect for those that do the same...But, how much of our Military is composed of mates like Pat Tillman..?
There are children roaming the streets of war zones, holding guns to grown men...If asked to put down his weapon and fight like a man, he would probably shoot you for saying it...To me, there is no glory to be had in being gunned down by a kid, because you realize that he is a child only doing the bidding of a system...
I myself cannot see how it would make me feel anything but animosity for having to be in a position to kill a child...Such is war these days, however...Such is why I don't feel I could ever involve myself in it...As you highlighted in your post RAUM, economic sovereignty...That's just not something I can agree with...
AYHJA
As expected, this is a topic that is sure to offend...I in no way mean to disrespect those of us that are or have once been in the military...That isn't my logic at all...
Alas, let me make myself more clear...If you are in this country's military, rare is it that you are fighting for your own personal ideals, but that of a man that will never ever suit up beside you in battle...
Call it being a romantic, but there is something to be said that is definitely missing, when a peasant looked to his side, and saw his king fighting the same fight...He would offer you no less of a sacrifice than he himself did...He could loose just as much as you...
I put myself in the position of the modern day soldier, and true enough, they could DEFINITELY be proud, and have honor, and the ultimate respect for those that do the same...But, how much of our Military is composed of mates like Pat Tillman..?
There are children roaming the streets of war zones, holding guns to grown men...If asked to put down his weapon and fight like a man, he would probably shoot you for saying it...To me, there is no glory to be had in being gunned down by a kid, because you realize that he is a child only doing the bidding of a system...
I myself cannot see how it would make me feel anything but animosity for having to be in a position to kill a child...Such is war these days, however...Such is why I don't feel I could ever involve myself in it...As you highlighted in your post RAUM, economic sovereignty...That's just not something I can agree with...
AYHJA
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |