Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Shotguns were widely used by American troops in Vietnam...

Boiling oil was widely used by medieval troops in the Middle Ages
Robert — (archived)

What's your point, Larry? There are precedents for a lot of bestial things in human history, but we flatter ourselves that we can advance beyond our worst behavior. Precedent's a pretty weak argument.

Besides, what's with all the shotguns and grenades and paring knives dragged into this discussion? We're talking about napalm, and napalm is not a shotgun. Raoul asserted that napalm is a weapon of mass destruction, using an unfortunate choice of words that people seized on as a technicality. No, napalm is not a chemical weapon. But it most assuredly is a weapon of mass destruction; and it lies in that area that overlaps with terror weapons. Napalm doesn't kill cleanly, and it doesn't even kill reliably--it horribly maims those on the perimeter of its effects.

Certainly it's the job of our soldiers to kill the enemy and break his stuff. But we can legitimately question how our soldiers kill the enemy. Is it their job to inflict needless pain and suffering? Or should we expect them to kill as humanely as possible to accomplish their mission? That question goes to the very heart of our claim that we fight wars "better"--more humanely and with minimal killing--than anybody else. If we use napalm, are we really so superior?

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (183 posts)