Rusky,Originally Posted by Rusky
I thank you for expressing your concerns about my opinions. I do realize that most soldiers and commanders (history does have its psycopathic characters) have basic senses of morality and justice. At the very least, most men have a physical disgust of the battlefield and massive amounts of death.
It is interesting and unfortunate that you do not take me seriously, but I am by no means offended. It is not the first time my arguments have been dismissed as sociopathic.
However, think first: is what I am saying really so radical? I have made only two main assertions concerning nuclear war:
1) The United States made the right decision in using nuclear weapons on Japan in World War II.
2) The United States should keep a nuclear option open in regards to Iran.
Also, you may be misinterpreting my frank discussion about nuclear war as an advocation of nuclear war. This could not be further from the truth. I am fully aware of the catastophic effects of nuclear war. Nonetheless, I believe it is important to have an honest discussion about the subject.
We can't just ignore it because it is too horrible to think about.
However, I do view an army as a machine. The soldiers are often not wittingly part of the machine, but the commanders at the top are often calculating and shrewd, viewing their mens' lives exactly as machine intelligence would. How merciful and compassionate were Hitler, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan? I wonder sometimes about the 'humanity' of the army, especially looking at the savage episodes of history. Don't you?
Pardon me if I have mistaken ideas about the machinery of the military. I try to think like a machine, dispassionately and with calculation. As a result, I view the world as a collection of systems with specific purposes. Logically, if I view an army as a machine designed to kill, all objectives must be geared towards perfecting that system's purpose. In short, increasing amount of enemy deaths while minimizing damage to the army.