There was a time when warfare was looked upon as a gentlemanly pursuit. Prisoners were treated nicely and once the killing stopped, everyone went back to being jovial.
The war we're in now, like it or not, has been going on since before 2001. Undeclared, perhaps, and against an idea rather than a nation. This war is a helluva lot different to those of the past, including WW2 when wars were still declared against a nation. The way wars were fought can't happen anymore. On one side you have people trying to fight by 'rules' and on the other you have people who dont follow those rules. This war won't be won by occupying entire countries or destroying an army, it can only be won by killing the entire enemy. Which obviously leads to a tough question, just who is the enemy??
In order for this war to be successful, the rules we fight by need to be disregarded. Which makes life tough for moralists, indeed for everyone involved - how low can one stoop to win, while still trying to stay above the level of the enemy? If we start summary executions of terrorists, for example, are we any better than those terrorists who behead their captives for tv? One thing that won't happen is for the west to use a nuke on terrorists. that is one rule that won't be breached by the west *except in retaliation*. More later.
Success depends on a drastic reevaluation of so many aspects of morality and conscience. Letum's way of thought (no offense mate) needs to be the minority, else we cannot win.
I touched on nukes briefly before. Noone in the 'civilised' world is willing to use them. in the cold war there was MAD, even now it'd probably be a case of shoot first, apologise later if someone saw icbms gettting launched. But noone was willing to go there because it would cost their own nation as well. Their use was literally *the* last resort. If nothing else, nukes are indiscriminate, as shown by the 2 japanese cities. the civilian population was decimated just as surely as military, and following the war, it was still the civilians who suffered. It is an unofficial rule that will not be broken easily.
Unfortunately, the enemy we fight now lacks the same ethical and moral standards we hold ourselves by. They do indeed have morals, however values are different. We see only the "military" units as a valid target, they see everyone as a valid target. To the eyes of our enemy, hiroshima and nagasaki are proof that nukes are an ideal weapon. Huge numbers of casualties for decades, what could be better?! They arent an individual nation which can be attacked, and more importantly they dont care if they die. They'd prefer to die.
What im getting at here is that nukes havent been used for 60 years. We've come close, maybe, but they havent been used! if we dont succeed in this war in the very near future (hence i tried to point out necessities for victory), we will see nukes used again. Only this time, casualties will make the japanese cities seem like nothing. (no offense intended there). and these will be used first on Western targets - big cities, sporting events, etc, with retaliatory strikes to places through the middle east. Will it stop there? unlikely... What will China and Russia do when they detect the US's launches??? Thats why we needa win this war asap, because otherwise we'll see nukes used again.
|