Are humans becoming worthless?

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: abub which explains why primarily american soldiers carried out operation torch in algeria in 1940. :rolleyes:

Don't forget the "civilian" fighter pilots with complete military training, and US military equipment, flying out of China, the Flying Tigers.

It's quite clear that between the Germans, Japanese and Americans, it was the Americans who fired the first shots in WWII.

Keith

[Keith Hamburger]

OK. So, directly on topic ...

If humans are of less value today than they were 400 years ago, how is it so difficult to fight wars when we can't even see the enemy compared to the wars in Europe of the 17th century.

In the 1600's, wars were pretty much fought hand-to-hand. To kill someone you had to look them in the face and take their life. There was little compunction at the time to do so, it was just another enemy.

Today, we have people arguing against wars that are fought against people they've never seen, let alone met.

While there are some indications that human life has less value, there are lots of indications that individual life has greater value. The overall answer would be very difficult.

However, if we ever determine the real value of the individual, being greater than that of any collective dreamed of, the world would be a far better place. Nothing else matters in the advancement of civilization other than the efforts and achievements of the individual.

Keith

[Jack]

If humans are of less value today than they were 400 years ago, how is it so difficult to fight wars when we can't even see the enemy compared to the wars in Europe of the 17th century. In the 1600's, wars were pretty much fought hand-to-hand. To kill someone you had to look them in the face and take their life. There was little compunction at the time to do so, it was just another enemy.

My view is exactly the opposite.

It's far harder to kill another human face-to-face. It's just as hard to kill someone with a handheld weapon than it is to use a more impersonal one, like a gun or bomb. The warriors of old must have possessed a degree of bravery nearly unknown in today's military. In some cases they were killing old friends and even family members. Individuality, to them, was a ceaseless reality...killing others one person at a time.

How much easier to push a button that releases a laser guided bomb which will kill people you never had to see, let alone get physically close to.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Isherwood My view is exactly the opposite. It's far harder to kill another human face-to-face. It's just as hard to kill someone with a handheld weapon than it is to use a more impersonal one, like a gun or bomb. The warriors of old must have possessed a degree of bravery nearly unknown in today's military. In some cases they were killing old friends and even family members. Individuality, to them, was a ceaseless reality...killing others one person at a time. How much easier to push a button that releases a laser guided bomb which will kill people you never had to see, let alone get physically close to.

But, what kind of value must they have placed on the individual to even be able to do that?

Yes, it is harder to kill someone face to face, when you value that person as an individual. If they are of no value to you, it becomes easier. Today, people around the world would find it much more difficult to fight in such a manner, having to face their enemy directly. The only time that commonly happens is if a society completely devalues the people they are killing, as the Nazis did with the Jews and has happened in several locations in Africa.

However, most people would have great difficulty directly killing another human in such a manner because most people put too high of a value on human life.

Keith