rollwithit Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's one way to put it. Of the 2 people I know who have joined the army, one of them's a nice guy who wanted to give himself good career prospects after not doing so well at school, and the other was a total thug who just wanted to get to use guns and be 'ard'. Admittedly, its a very small sample though. I've known 4 ex service men in my time. One was in his early 20s at the time, i met him whilst he was on leave through another mate. The guy was constantly thrill seeking. I recall being in his car going up Nethertorpe road touching 100. Bear in mind his car was overlaiden with ratarsed lads. The other 3 where lads a bit older than me who'd just come out of the paras. I met them in a chinese takeaway one night on our estate. They proceeded to take the micky out of me. Being pssed up, i had some duch courage and said a load back and threatened the biggest of them. Instead of getting in a fight the lads laughed their heads off and befriended me. I recall been down Hillsborough in the Ball on a number of occaisions witnessing these lads looking for fights to be involved with. They even bailed me out of a few in there too. Years later, it turned out these lads where all mates of my best pals big bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Don't you think it's sick, valuing human lives more than animals lives? You seem to missing the part of the report where it says the soldiers appear to have set the IED themselves. I wouldn't be party to a damn stupid enterprise like setting IED's to blow up dogs in the first place. Doubt if the IED was set to kill dogs anyway. Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 To you AJ and halibut. Are no dogs worth more than humans? That's an easy one. No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Coming from someone who values his life as having literally the same worth as pond scum I'll take that with a pinch of salt. As I've said, for me it's about capacity for suffering. I can suffer a lot more than an insect, or some plankton. Therefore preventing my suffering is more important. The fact that there are food chains and those at the top cannot survive without those at the bottom does not come into it, it is completely irrelevant. If all the plankton died you would suffer, if by killing you we saved the plankton that would prevent your suffering and save the more valuable species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 This is a very controversial statement. I've known a few frontline soldiers in my time, and they have all been adrenaline junkies. Like it or not, a front line soldier actually gets a buzz from being in battle, shooting guns, blowing things up and killing people. It's not the norm in modern society for every human being to unleash their hunting instincts, so it takes a certain kind of individual to want to do a front line soldiers job. Any forum members who have willingly done such a job in the forces please feel free to either confirm or denny this statement. After all, this is a dicussion forum. Confirmed, all humans are different and if it wasn’t for the killer instinct in humans then we probably wouldn’t be here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddycoffee Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 To you AJ and halibut. Are no dogs worth more than humans? No of course not. Do you understand what you are asking ? If you were on a jury and you were to consider the life of a dog as equal to that of a human you could easily find that you might cause a grave miscarriage of justice. If I was in control of a runaway vehicle with no brakes and it was going down hill and I had to decide whether to run over a human or a dog as there were only two possible paths to steer I would run over the dog. If I had run over the human I could easily find myself in prison for murder or manslaughter. Whereas the dog does not have the same protection of the law. If you are so sentimental that you think that a furry animal has more rights than a human or even equal rights, then you are mixed up and have extremely questionable morals in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stvoider Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Why is there not an option to vote for exactly what they did? If there were, that is what I would have voted. All other options have an implied, added danger to them for people whether they be soldiers or the locals and as such are not worth the risk for the life of a dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollwithit Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Confirmed, all humans are different and if it wasn’t for the killer instinct in humans then we probably wouldn’t be here. If humans didn't have a killer instinct to cause harm on other humans, then we'd either all be here, or be facing a population explosion that the earths resources couldn't cope with. If the majority of humans on both sides refused to kill one another, then the politians and ruling elite would have no one to do their dirty work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's an easy one. No. So these dogs aren’t more important than the Raoul Moat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 So these dogs aren’t more important than the Raoul Moat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.