Links
-
Blogs, in vague order of updatedness/niceness
- Funny Lonely Life
- Something about a future God...
- Dave's Blog
- Penny Arcade
- Bash
- Questionable Content
- XKCD
Other links
Archives
- June 2003
- July 2003
- August 2003
- September 2003
- October 2003
- November 2003
- December 2003
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- February 2007
- June 2007
- March 2008
It's only semi autobiographical
Friday, January 06, 2006
Clarifications
Had an ace night out involving scandals last night, and there are several things I would like to write about, including the 150% comment, however, I think I shall first take a moment to talk about my last post, and the comments following it.
Comments:
it’s a terrible thing that people die, it’s a terrible thing that people die at the hands of others, and it’s a terrible thing that wars happen, but it is the way our civilisation has grown and developed over thousands of years. Please do post your ideas for a new civilisation without conflict, id love to know how it would work. The problem is not with the people fighting, the average soldier, but with general human nature. Its with the people who believe they are better than another race, its with people who use force to suppress others. until those types of people and that mind frame don’t exist we will always have a need for the forces. And there will always be conflict. It is a way of life, and its in all of us.
# posted by 
: 11:58 am
: 11:58 am
Mmm, I think there would probably be less war with a more even distribution of wealth around the world- the more educated a population, the less the inclination for war....
Hmm, although then you have the educated people wanting to "save" other nations- the British Empire, and of course the war against Iraq are signs of the idea of "saving" people. Whether this idea is legitimate or not can be argued, but it is certainly one that mongers war. Still, well educated nations do not war as frequently, it seems. (I'll ignore world war 1 and 2. OK, fine, my point is crap.)
Anyway, by no means was I implying that the army draws only from underpriveleged quarters, however for the underpriveleged, the army can be the only choice. You seemed to be implying that people were making a free choice Rich, while actually I suspect for many they did not join the armed forces primarily to fight, but to support their education.
I think the right of self defence is perfectly moral Rich- if someone was to threaten your life, you are morally allowed to defend yourself by most codes, apart from extreme ones like pacifism. So we get the just war idea- armies should only be deployed in a clearly just situation where all other options have failed. The Iraq war was not one of these by al standards, although one could possibly claim the earlier gulf war was, it being a defence of a nation against an invader (admittedly an invader we armed and supported).
But I would generally agree with what you are saying. Being a soldier does not automatically make you a good person at all. However, I do not wish for any of them to be killed, and I think that's what a lot of people mean by "supporting our troops"
Hmm, although then you have the educated people wanting to "save" other nations- the British Empire, and of course the war against Iraq are signs of the idea of "saving" people. Whether this idea is legitimate or not can be argued, but it is certainly one that mongers war. Still, well educated nations do not war as frequently, it seems. (I'll ignore world war 1 and 2. OK, fine, my point is crap.)
Anyway, by no means was I implying that the army draws only from underpriveleged quarters, however for the underpriveleged, the army can be the only choice. You seemed to be implying that people were making a free choice Rich, while actually I suspect for many they did not join the armed forces primarily to fight, but to support their education.
I think the right of self defence is perfectly moral Rich- if someone was to threaten your life, you are morally allowed to defend yourself by most codes, apart from extreme ones like pacifism. So we get the just war idea- armies should only be deployed in a clearly just situation where all other options have failed. The Iraq war was not one of these by al standards, although one could possibly claim the earlier gulf war was, it being a defence of a nation against an invader (admittedly an invader we armed and supported).
But I would generally agree with what you are saying. Being a soldier does not automatically make you a good person at all. However, I do not wish for any of them to be killed, and I think that's what a lot of people mean by "supporting our troops"
my god this is all sooo deep, id rather have the light hearted banter about people in clubs, and being rich's blog i know that means fat pompey 'women' in clubs, and the attacks on the catholic church, always fun!
# posted by : 8:11 pm
: 8:11 pm
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it!
# posted by : 12:40 pm
: 12:40 pm
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it!
# posted by : 12:40 pm
: 12:40 pm
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it!
Post a Comment
# posted by : 12:54 pm
: 12:54 pm
