Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Robb

(39,665 posts)
50. Perfectly sound argument. However it requires grading morality on a curve.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:46 AM
Jan 2013

If things are only "moral" or "immoral," the argument falls apart. Hence the unpopularity of the notion on DU, where we have the luxury of black-and-white thinking.

Under the grim rubric of global conflict, it makes a great deal of sense and is perhaps some salve to the players. But the public generally -- and DU specifically -- are less interested in measures that slow horror, and vastly prefer envisioning some fanciful end to it.

The wounded Marine is bleeding out; the medic drops to his knees and digs into the bloody body, clamping off bleeding with slippery hemostats and dousing everything with clotting agent. He knows he must do this before any healing can possibly take place -- and he knows it just as likely won't help, but he's doing it anyhow.

Alternately, we stand before the dying man, bend to his ear and scream "GET BETTER!!"

The Moral Case for Drones [View all] arely staircase Jan 2013 OP
I think this is utter bullshit.... mike_c Jan 2013 #1
Too bad we can't have kill ratios like Nagasaki and Hiroshima Downwinder Jan 2013 #2
100 percent of drone victims are civilians? arely staircase Jan 2013 #3
Maybe you are a civilian until you slap on a uniform with patches... Coyote_Tan Jan 2013 #43
How can you prove that most Drone targets aren't combatants? bluestate10 Jan 2013 #8
I recommend Mark Bowden's book, The Finish arely staircase Jan 2013 #10
Just because you say so? tabasco Jan 2013 #24
And how do you know they are not? The American people have no clue what sabrina 1 Jan 2013 #45
Stop arguing about the method and Lurks Often Jan 2013 #4
we are justified in killing terrorists and the means to achieve that goal do matter. eom arely staircase Jan 2013 #5
I wasn't disagreeing with you, Lurks Often Jan 2013 #9
my bad arely staircase Jan 2013 #12
Would using drones to kill terrorists include domestic terrorists domiciled in the US? indepat Jan 2013 #25
if they were, say, holding hostages and it could be done without killing said hostages arely staircase Jan 2013 #38
Drones appear to be the least bad of a horrible set of military options. SunSeeker Jan 2013 #6
yes, that is the legit argument arely staircase Jan 2013 #7
Agreed. nt SunSeeker Jan 2013 #26
The relative efficacy of improved technology in an unlawful war is beside the point. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #11
I think killing people who committ crimes against humanity (al qaeda) to be a moral obligation arely staircase Jan 2013 #13
Would you consider killing half a million children to be a "crime against humanity"? n/t Fumesucker Jan 2013 #18
yes arely staircase Jan 2013 #39
"We think the price was worth it." Fumesucker Jan 2013 #41
you are making my point arely staircase Jan 2013 #55
Your bloodlust makes DU look creepy leftstreet Jan 2013 #19
they are members of a military orgnization that has declared war on and attacked the united states arely staircase Jan 2013 #35
Seems to me that most al qaeda combatants are declared after the fact. Hanzip Jan 2013 #49
Well maybe, just maybe, what "seems to you" isn't always the case arely staircase Jan 2013 #56
Because it so much better to be the aggressive tyrant? The dissonance is Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #23
Of course "militant" has now been redefined by Obama woo me with science Jan 2013 #29
It's so obvious... Oilwellian Jan 2013 #51
drone victims speak.... mike_c Jan 2013 #14
very bad but better than arely staircase Jan 2013 #15
are you suggesting that it's better to murder non-combatants with drone strikes... mike_c Jan 2013 #17
no i am saying that killing our enemies in a way that meets the three main necessities of the lawful arely staircase Jan 2013 #36
This message was self-deleted by its author mike_c Jan 2013 #16
and a drone killer speaks green for victory Jan 2013 #21
Awesome, The Moral Case for Murder! whatchamacallit Jan 2013 #20
"War is Peace." woo me with science Jan 2013 #31
no not murder arely staircase Jan 2013 #40
"Sacrifice few to save many." is perfectly logical...unless you or your family are the "few". Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2013 #22
were you advocates of drones choie Jan 2013 #27
yes arely staircase Jan 2013 #37
What an utterly repellent argument: "Look at the firebombing of Dresden and compare..." Romulox Jan 2013 #28
"We have always been at war with Eurasia." woo me with science Jan 2013 #34
"by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist..." Romulox Jan 2013 #48
"The firebombing of Dresden was a singular event"...not EX500rider Jan 2013 #54
I don't trust our government to select 'terrorists' RedCappedBandit Jan 2013 #30
As well you shouldn't. woo me with science Jan 2013 #32
The most disgusting OP on DU woo me with science Jan 2013 #33
Moral use of war machines... cbrer Jan 2013 #42
It is terrorism. aandegoons Jan 2013 #44
+1 AgainsttheCrown Jan 2013 #52
Thank you. woo me with science Jan 2013 #53
There is no 'moral case' for slaughtering people. None whatsoever. sabrina 1 Jan 2013 #46
The "moral" case disappears when one is just outside your window. mmonk Jan 2013 #47
Perfectly sound argument. However it requires grading morality on a curve. Robb Jan 2013 #50
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Moral Case for Drones»Reply #50