Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

irateplatypus · 01-17-2005, 09:42 PM

but, if we're to take your definitions... then all laws are self-enforced (and, i suppose... inconsistently enforced by your estimation). the citizenry abides by laws that are enforced by those elected and supported by us... why is the military (an institution that must enforce the most stringent levels of discipline and regulations for its own survival) exempt from the same principle?

in fact, the military has even more people peeking over its shoulder to ensure that justice is done than anyone in the private sector does. it has the weight of 1) international law and the LOAC 2) congressional oversight and executive responsibility 3) it's own internal codes of conduct, regulations, and methods of prosecution 4) the media and press's oversight and investigation 5) each soldiers individual moral compass and discipline.

you see, given additional layers in which military policy and action is scrutinized under... i would argue that enforcement of military law and conduct is just as legitimate (or more so) as anything you're likely to find in any traditional government court. the law is one of combat and bloodshed... no doubt about that. however, i find it difficult to side with your bleak assessment of the military's overall law abiding practice when your opinion is (so far) based on nothing more than something between your ears.

and to provide an answer to your hypothetical question: the one who holds the child is the guiltier party. the one who chooses to involve the innocent will always hold the guilt, the holder of the child is dictating the rules of engagement. if you cannot win with honor... perhaps you just cannot win. there are worse things than death, holding a child in the line of fire in hopes of saving your own or incriminating your enemy is one of them.

01-17-2005, 09:42 PM	#54 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	but, if we're to take your definitions... then all laws are self-enforced (and, i suppose... inconsistently enforced by your estimation). the citizenry abides by laws that are enforced by those elected and supported by us... why is the military (an institution that must enforce the most stringent levels of discipline and regulations for its own survival) exempt from the same principle? in fact, the military has even more people peeking over its shoulder to ensure that justice is done than anyone in the private sector does. it has the weight of 1) international law and the LOAC 2) congressional oversight and executive responsibility 3) it's own internal codes of conduct, regulations, and methods of prosecution 4) the media and press's oversight and investigation 5) each soldiers individual moral compass and discipline. you see, given additional layers in which military policy and action is scrutinized under... i would argue that enforcement of military law and conduct is just as legitimate (or more so) as anything you're likely to find in any traditional government court. the law is one of combat and bloodshed... no doubt about that. however, i find it difficult to side with your bleak assessment of the military's overall law abiding practice when your opinion is (so far) based on nothing more than something between your ears. and to provide an answer to your hypothetical question: the one who holds the child is the guiltier party. the one who chooses to involve the innocent will always hold the guilt, the holder of the child is dictating the rules of engagement. if you cannot win with honor... perhaps you just cannot win. there are worse things than death, holding a child in the line of fire in hopes of saving your own or incriminating your enemy is one of them. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill Last edited by irateplatypus; 01-17-2005 at 09:49 PM..