US Stealth Bomber Crash: USAF Probes Guam Incident

  • Thread starter Thread starter fourier jr
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the crash of a B-2 stealth bomber in Guam, exploring reactions to the incident, the implications of military technology, and broader debates about military actions and ethics. Participants express a range of opinions on the military, the nature of conflict, and the morality of actions taken against perceived enemies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express sadness over the crash of the expensive aircraft, noting the rarity of such incidents.
  • Others criticize the military and express a lack of sympathy for military actions, regardless of personal military family history.
  • There are discussions about the definition of "enemy" and the justification for killing in conflict, with varying perspectives on the morality of such actions.
  • Some argue that eliminating insurgents is necessary for stability, while others suggest that changing perspectives and addressing root causes is more effective.
  • Participants challenge each other's views on the morality of military actions, with some asserting that relentless killing is justified, while others argue for a more nuanced approach.
  • There are claims that the situation in Iraq is complex and cannot be reduced to black-and-white thinking regarding insurgents and civilians.
  • Some participants express frustration with the discussion, suggesting that it is unproductive and that differing views are unlikely to change.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the morality of military actions or the best approach to dealing with insurgents. Multiple competing views remain, with significant disagreement on the definitions and implications of terms like "enemy" and "relentless killing."

Contextual Notes

Participants reference legal definitions and moral justifications for military actions, indicating a reliance on subjective interpretations of complex issues. The discussion reflects a range of personal beliefs and experiences that inform individual perspectives.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in military ethics, conflict resolution, and the implications of military technology may find the varied viewpoints and debates in this discussion relevant.

  • #31
Hard to enter in a serious discussion with an idiot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
-Job- said:
Hard to enter in a serious discussion with an idiot.

So basically, you have nothing to say other than name calling.
 
  • #33
Nothing more worthwhile to say? Yes.
 
  • #34
I hope when innocent people are killed you don't call them idiots too because you did nothing to save their lives. I also hope you don't consider the familes of dead US and Iraqi soldiers to be idiots who died trying to make that country a better place.

You can call me an idiot, but don't imply that they are. That is too disrespectful.
 
  • #35
That must be because anything that doesn't involve killing qualifies as nothing right?
 
  • #36
This thread is clearly done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K