I don't want to be murdered

[Gary Childress]

If I don't want to be murdered and you don't want to be murdered, is it possible for the two of us to agree that murder is wrong?

Does anyone here think that murder is OK?

[Impenitent]

ask a soldier

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

ask a soldier

-Imp

What should I "ask a soldier"? Should I ask a soldier if murder is wrong? What do you think a soldier would tell me? Since the definition of the word murder is "unjustified killing" then I would think the soldier would respond that murder is wrong, don't you?

[Impenitent]

justified by a superior officer?

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

justified by a superior officer?

-Imp

If it's "justified" then it's not "murder" the question for all of us to ask is whether the "superior officer's" command was a command to commit murder or not. If it was a command to commit murder then that makes the superior officer complicit, perhaps even wholly responsible. Do you disagree?

[Gary Childress]

Taking bets on whether Impertinent will give me a straight up answer or continue with his incredibly vague one liners. Would you like to get in on the bet, Imp?

[Impenitent]

justified by a superior officer?

-Imp

If it's "justified" then it's not "murder" the question for all of us to ask is whether the "superior officer's" command was a command to commit murder or not. If it was a command to commit murder then that makes the superior officer complicit, perhaps even wholly responsible. Do you disagree?

if that's all it takes to be justified....

second line just for kicks

precision is an illusion... vague enough?

what was the wager?

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

justified by a superior officer?

-Imp

If it's "justified" then it's not "murder" the question for all of us to ask is whether the "superior officer's" command was a command to commit murder or not. If it was a command to commit murder then that makes the superior officer complicit, perhaps even wholly responsible. Do you disagree?

if that's all it takes to be justified....

second line just for kicks

precision is an illusion... vague enough?

what was the wager?

-Imp

Poor Imp, not so good at reading comprehension. No, as I indicated in my reply, it's up to others to determine if the superior officer's command was a command to commit murder. The command alone by a superior officer doesn't make it not murder. You're even dumber than I am, Imp, by what seems like a large discrepancy too.

[Impenitent]

be sure you aren't mistaken for an enemy soldier...

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

be sure you aren't mistaken for an enemy soldier...

-Imp

Ooh, another vague one liner. You're so much smarter than the rest of us, especially me.

Serious, please stop bothering people who have some intelligence with your numbskull one liners.

Better yet, why don't you answer my question. If a commander tells a soldier to kill someone unjustifiably, is the commander not complicit or even wholly responsible for the soldier's actions?

[Impenitent]

be sure you aren't mistaken for an enemy soldier...

-Imp

Ooh, another vague one liner. You're so much smarter than the rest of us, especially me.

Serious, please stop bothering people who have some intelligence with your numbskull one liners.

Better yet, why don't you answer my question. If a commander tells a soldier to kill someone unjustifiably, is the commander not complicit or even wholly responsible for the soldier's actions?

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law- ... o-disobey/

do your own research

thank you

finis

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

be sure you aren't mistaken for an enemy soldier...

-Imp

Ooh, another vague one liner. You're so much smarter than the rest of us, especially me.

Serious, please stop bothering people who have some intelligence with your numbskull one liners.

Better yet, why don't you answer my question. If a commander tells a soldier to kill someone unjustifiably, is the commander not complicit or even wholly responsible for the soldier's actions?

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law- ... o-disobey/

do your own research

thank you

finis

-Imp

Ooh, one case proves a rule now? Is that your position impediment.

[MikeNovack]

Gary, please restart. You unfortunately used "murder" and that term means more than just "killed". It's not even the same as "intentionally killed". It means WRONGFULLY intentionally killed. That's why our language includes other terms like "manslaughter".

It would be a separate discussion for us to debate when killing is murder.

[Gary Childress]

Gary, please restart. You unfortunately used "murder" and that term means more than just "killed". It's not even the same as "intentionally killed". It means WRONGFULLY intentionally killed. That's why our language includes other terms like "manslaughter".

It would be a separate discussion for us to debate when killing is murder.

Murder is unjustified killing. Do you disagree?

[Veritas Aequitas]

If I don't want to be murdered and you don't want to be murdered, is it possible for the two of us to agree that murder is wrong?
Does anyone here think that murder is OK?

It is more effective to say "I don't want to be killed".
Other than the mental cases, no normal humans want to be killed.
There is no evidences that ordinary human beings want to be killed. Are there?

Not only that,
all humans are programmed to survive at cost [thus do not want to be killed] till the inevitable.

As such, it is logical and rational to state,
Killings of humans by humans is absolutely wrong.

If anyone do not accept the above, it meant they are willing to be killed.

Other than the mental cases, no normal humans want to be killed
Soldiers are tested to be normal
Therefore, no soldiers would want to be killed.

War itself is immoral and the killings that entail are immoral.
But given the current situation, war in inevitable and soldiers has the duty to kill.
However, the ultimate for humanity is to avoid all wars and killing, which is impossible in the current conditions, but humanity must strive towards be as close as possible to the moral ideal in the future.