| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
andyana
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
56 Posts |
 Posted - 23 June 2006 : 5:06:31 PM
|
So, I was merrily bashing the Carthaginians on Rome, gloating in the total extermination of their cities and indeed their race as a whole, when I was struck by a sudden thought. My mother disapproves of modern games such as call of duty, due to their relatively modern setting. However, she does not object to Rome as it all happened long ago (in a galaxy far far away...) and somehow this makes genocide, slavery and crucifixion acceptable in a computer game! Never mind that WWII had the geneva convention and was against an evil foe!
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 25 June 2006 : 09:17:53 AM
|
| I don't think this is very unusual. People tend to accept the brutality of previous ages because it is so remote and "they didn't know any better", with some sort of underlying conviction that we have advanced since then and "know better" now. That's a bit facile, and there's precious little support for it. Human nature doesn't change. |
 |
|
|
Parmenion
Homosapien
United Kingdom
13892 Posts |
Posted - 25 June 2006 : 1:16:01 PM
|
at the end of the day man has not changed that much its just that society has imposed different moral restrictions, that in time of war soon go flying out the window!!
LASCIATE OGNE SPERANZA, VOI CH'INTRATE
|
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 29 June 2006 : 6:46:25 PM
|
We're worse today than they were back then, today we can sit behind computers and cause havoc on a major scale. Got worse things that can kill you quicker and without knowing who did it.
At least back then you faced your enemies on the battle fields, unless you were a senator in rome :D or the latest Caesar :D |
|
|
|
andyana
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
56 Posts |
Posted - 29 June 2006 : 10:48:32 PM
|
| I'd disagree - I think we were much worse back then. I mean, nowadays things like making prisoners of war fighht to the death for sport is universally frowned upon, but in the 1st century AD it was the norm. No rules of engagement, and non-combatants were classed as easy meat. Rape and pillage were good fun, and the soldier's wages of war. In the Iraq war, collateral damage was minimised; compare that to deliberately slaughtering the populace of Carthage, say. |
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 06:45:13 AM
|
I have an uneasy feeling that gladiatorial combat would still bring in the crowds if it was reintroduced. Some proponents of capital punishment believe that it should be gory and public, for the maximum deterrent effect, but I've come across counter arguments suggesting that this would become a form of entertainment again.
Was collateral damage in Iraq really minimised. Not everyone would agree with this. Slaughter of civilians? My Lai and Oradour Sur Glane spring to mind, without really thinking about it. |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 07:10:34 AM
|
Collateral damage is far from minimised, as many Iraqis that want peace would testify, there are many cases of civillians being gunned down or blown up.
What they get up to when the cameras aren't rolling and other media isn't there, can only be guessed at. Rape and pillaging still goes on now as it did then, because the commanders either turn a blind eye or just don't know about it. (I lean more to blind eye)
Bringing back gladitorial combat isn't worth it, as there are so many miscarriages of justice out there. How do we know that the people fighting are really criminals, or the guards aren't taking pleasure in seeing two inmates beat each others brains in?
Besides, can you see celebrities who are on charges having to fight it out??? ROFL |
|
|
|
Ankhsy
Homosapien
United Kingdom
7087 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 09:32:11 AM
|
The indiscriminate killing of unarmed bystanders by US troops is pretty common in Iraq these days. Remember Haditha (24 civilians, including children and an old man in a wheelchair) and Ishaqi (including a 6 month old baby that was tied up and shot). The Iraqi Prime Minister has accused US soldiers of killing civilians "on a hunch", and even soldiers who have returned home to the US report that soldiers carry shovels in their armoured vehicles which they leave at the scene of a killing to "prove" that their victim was planning to plant a bomb.
Ironic, isn't it. Before the war, the USA criticised Saddam fro slaughtering innocent Iraqis; now the PM of Iraq is criticising the US for killing innocent Iraqis.
No, nothing has changed. Bring back the games, and it would still be the same.
"It's hard to work in a group when you're omniscient."
|
|
|
|
AndyCanty
Homosapien
United Kingdom
6629 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 09:39:15 AM
|
To be honest, now Iraq has it's own elected goverment AFAIK, so the foriegn armed forces should pull out and provide humanitarian aid, rather than miitary.
Soldiers are just fermenting trouble as they are still seen as the invaders and invaders must be pushed out! remove that stimuli and things might quieten down, provide support for training but let the iraqi people govern themselves and it will improove, IMHO much of the iraqi p[eople see the government as US puppets, they needto stand on theri own 2 feet!
_________________________
If all the worlds a stage?
Where's my script???
|
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 10:15:00 AM
|
Totally agree Andy, the govt of Iraq should've been appointed by the people. Given help to get sorted, then pull out the forces and give food and medical expertise help which is far more important.
|
|
|
|
andyana
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
56 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 5:41:17 PM
|
What I mean to say is that the murder of innocent civilians is definitely a no-no in modern war, but in the ancient world, if there was a civilian wandering around in a war-zone, someone hadn't done their job properly! Things like My Lai and Oradour-sur-Glane stand out because they are the one-off, rather than the rule. Nowadays we are horrifed by the deaths of the innocent, but in Rome the death of, say, a villageful of Gauls would probably be welcomed by the plebs and patricians alike! Has civilisation become more compassionate, or are we just restraining our basic urges?
My head hurts from thinking baout ethical issues, so I'm going to lie down... |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 30 June 2006 : 5:47:10 PM
|
The innocents in wars were never acceptable to most people back then, just as much as they are a no no now. But what do most people say when they hear of innocents being murdered now, what they did back then "It couldn't be helped."
Today the whole place is the war zone, back then they went to one place fought and retreated to rest. |
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 11:35:14 AM
|
Warfare, in earlier days, was fought on a rather more limited scale but that didn't protect the "innocents" most of the time.
"Cry havoc and let lose the dogs of war". "Havoc" was the medieval call for a free for all, following a bloody assault on a fortified town which refused to surrender. The attackers were, more or less, allowed to kill, loot and rape as a reward. This also happened during the Peninsular War, although Wellington tried to keep it under control by imposing harsh discipline on his men, and I'm sure there are lots of other examples.
There is evidence, apart from the propaganda stories, that German troops were encouraged to behave in a bestial manner during their invasion of Belgium in 1914, as an example to anyone else who might be considering resistance.
Bomber Harris has been accused of waging war on civilians during the Second World War, but this poses a question. Why is it wrong to bomb civilian neighbourhoods housing people who work in factories making the bombs and other munitions employed against your own people? There certainly isn't any evidence that the people of London and Coventry were horrified. I imagine most of them cheered.
My Lai and Oradour Sur Glane are just the first two examples that sprang to mind. They were not extraordinary.
I don't think many people really care very much about the innocent civilians at all. They get caught up in a war, and become victims. |
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8415 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 12:47:14 PM
|
There used to be a conventional status of "open town", meaning one that was not defended and had no military presence apart from non-combatant troops - medics and suchlike. This grew out of the sacking of places that refused to surrender, as a counterbalance to avoid atrocities - the local army commander, or even the toon itself, could declare it as "open" and it would therefore not be bombarded, attacked or (in theory) looted. Unfortunately modern guerillas like to hide among the general population when challenged, and even set up their gun and missile stations in civilian areas. It's not surprising, then, that if troops are fired upon by gunment who promptly hide their weapons and pretend to be civilians they tend to shoot back and ask questions afterwards. Similarly, if rockets of artillery are fired from next to a hospital it isn't surprising that the hospital maybe hit in a return of fire. No-one can expect troops to ignore hostile fire.
Cheers
John |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 1:56:56 PM
|
I dont expect them to ignore it, but I was referring to blatant killing when there are no signs of any enemy within the city limits.
There is no need to wipe out a town just because they think there are enemy soldiers in there, it would've been more acceptable before communications are what they are today. |
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8415 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 2:26:45 PM
|
Of course, there is a problem when we talk about Iraq - the Iraqi and foreign terrorists (let's not confuse them with guerillas which they aren't) tell lies and civilians are quite happy to go along with those lies. Remember the UK court case a little while ago in which a "witness" happily admitted that he hadn't actually seen anything but had been told by a "human rights" lawyer that he would get a free trip to the UK with accomodation and money? Or the proven cases a couple of years ago when the photographs of "innocent victims of US bombing" were shown to be exactly the same for several alleged cases? If someone has an axe to grind, and is told by their "religion" that it's not just OK but encouraged to lie to anyone who doesn't share that belief, why should anyone believe a word that is said by that person or persons?
Cheers
John |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 3:01:41 PM
|
| That is why you take everything that is said with a grain of salt, unless it can be independantly verified. Then again how can anything be verified when everyone has their price of telling what others want them to say??? |
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8415 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 3:38:04 PM
|
We sound like the X-Files don't we, LC - "Trust no-one"!
Cheers
John |
Edited by - John Prigent on 01 July 2006 3:38:47 PM |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 01 July 2006 : 3:45:12 PM
|
| Oh the only ones I trust are the people inside my head :D ROFL |
|
|
|
andyana
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
56 Posts |
Posted - 02 July 2006 : 4:25:45 PM
|
| YAY I got the mammoth book of Roman whodunnits toady for £2.99!!! mmmmmm roman mystery..... |
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8415 Posts |
Posted - 02 July 2006 : 5:36:44 PM
|
Oh you lucky man! I've never even seen that book or I'd have a copy too.
Cheers
John |
|
|
|
andyana
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
56 Posts |
Posted - 02 July 2006 : 7:03:01 PM
|
| It has one of Simon's short stories in it, and I heard about it on this website. When I was at Richborough today, I saw it on sale and scooped it up faster than you could say "Cato"! |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 02 July 2006 : 9:02:27 PM
|
| oh please let me know the name of the book :D |
|
|
|
Nísia
Small mammal
Portugal
661 Posts |
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 03 July 2006 : 07:06:45 AM
|
| thanks |
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 03 July 2006 : 09:59:51 AM
|
| Bit funny that you mentioned the X Files right now John. My son just bought a new magazine witrh a DVD of the original episodes, which I preferred anyway. A much younger Mulder and Scully, using motor drive film cameras! |
|
|
|
Legates clerk
Small mammal
United Kingdom
783 Posts |
Posted - 03 July 2006 : 11:28:35 AM
|
| Then along came a bigger budget |
|
|
|
drosdelnoch
Small mammal
United Kingdom
482 Posts |
Posted - 05 July 2006 : 5:32:45 PM
|
Warfare is always brutal. We all like to think that we're more refined yet a few minorities cause havok throughout a nation leaving them crying out for blood and vengeance. Its the same now as its always been.
I hate the term collatoral damage, it implies that its acceptable and something that just isnt worth worrying about. However this can include human beings, not just property but flesh and blood, yet we're given these velvet lies to cover the truth.
Now I really do think that if leaders want to go to war, fine, lead from the front. See the horror that youre commiting to first hand, survive it and see if you want to go again. I think more peaceful solutions would be found from then on.
All things to do with warfare are still prevalent, killing innocents and planting evidence isnt something new, its been happening for centuries. Likewise Soldier sports such as pillage (rape is technically included in this term) are still seeen as number one sports. At least in Ancient times the armies took enough "loose women" to satisfy thier troops. Now we have pychologists who see the soldiers.
Theres one guy up on charges currently for the murder and rape of a family, yet his "buddies" arent up there with him, I wonder why, could it be that theyre still serving or is it a case of he's going to be the scapegoat for the rest. He's also alledgedly psychological disturbed, if thats the case how the hell did he make it into the army then?
Statistics are interesting, since world war two, more money has been spent on the Armed Forces in America than would have been spent if a million pounds a day since the birth of christ. Now this is truly frightening.
I really also dont think its going to be long before the computer games market is brought in, let says robot soldiers controlled by kids who dont know better, doing the dirty deeds for thier country, whilst thinking its fun and unaware of the real damage that theyre doing.
Legends Never Die, Druss Lives! |
|
|
|
Carus Andiae
Small mammal
United Kingdom
667 Posts |
Posted - 21 July 2006 : 11:30:13 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Legates clerk
Besides, can you see celebrities who are on charges having to fight it out??? ROFL
Oddly enough - in my Bible Study group of all places - we came up with the idea for a Reality TV show 'Celebrity Meat Cleaver'!
I do wonder if people would really baulk at Gladiatorial combat these days. After all, violent computer games and films are increasingly graphic and still pull in the punters.
In modern warfare - indeed, since the 18th century - civilians have not generally been considered fair game. But it is interesting how we find atrocities more... acceptable? in the ancient world. After all, Vespasian is something of an historical hero of mine yet in AD67 he allowed the population of Jotapata to be wiped out by his soldiers.
"Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat" - Any man can fly when he rides on the back of an eagle |
Edited by - Carus Andiae on 21 July 2006 11:31:11 AM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
