Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

drippingwet · 01-12-2005, 12:49 AM

If you were the captain of a nuclear ballistic submarine, and your leader gave you an order to fire, and if you followed those orders, it would lead to the deaths of millions and millions of people, would you do it if it meant there would be fewer deaths than if you didn't act? Would you do it if it meant more deaths than if you didn't act?

If an enemy fired nukes on you first, and you firing nukes back would achieve nothing but even more MASS killing, what would be the point in firing back, killing millions of INNOCENT people out of revenge (perhaps only one or two people would have been responsible for launching the weapons, not all those millions of others who had nothing to do with it)?

ThatReallyHurt · 01-12-2005, 12:53 AM

I don't know if I could do that.

Here's another question, though - when you "push the button" to launch a missile that will kill thousands/millions of people, is it different from being in, say the infantry, where you look down the barrel of a rifle at a specific human target?

Is it easier to sit in a small metal room and press a plastic button and kill many people you'll never actually see, or to kill a single person that you can see with your own eyes?

Nope, I don't think I could do that.

Epee_Pox · 01-12-2005, 12:58 AM

Yes I would do it. If I couldn't do it, I have no business being assigned to that button.

And the enemy, knowing that the people by all the buttons are all like me, is less likely to launch. Because he's not keen on committing suicide.

And if I'm in a nuclear sub, I'm probably launching at specific military targets with the purpose of disabling their ability to kill millions of my countrymen. So that makes the decision even easier.

Is it a pleasant decision? Of course not. And I hope I never have to make it.

drippingwet · 01-12-2005, 01:06 AM

Specific military targets may not be so specific (however unintended) when you consider the fallout, and the destructive blast area of a nuke.

ThatReallyHurt · 01-12-2005, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epee_Pox

Yes I would do it. If I couldn't do it, I have no business being assigned to that button.

I had interpreted the question as would I, as myself right this very instant.

akaiyuki · 01-12-2005, 01:40 AM

I hope nobody will ever have to do this but if I'm in that situation, I guess I would do it. If I don't, the leader will probably order someone else to do it, or do it himself anyway! Not only that doesn't do anything, I'd get in big trouble for not following order.
If I don't fire any nukes back, my opponent will probably fire a million more at me.

Maeve_Mari · 01-12-2005, 01:40 AM

If you are a captain of a nuclear submarine, and you receive orders to fire your missile, then you do it. From your vantage point you do not have the perspective (or analysis available) to question the order.

Not everyone has what it takes to command a submarine. The men who live in cans are selected specially and trained to perform as expected.

VELISARIOS · 01-12-2005, 05:53 AM

In war you have no choises. If you have orders to do something you must done it, otherwise you will consider as a traitor. I pray for no one come in this terrible situation. Now about your question...I dont know if I could do it.

Zilverzmurfen · 01-12-2005, 08:20 AM

As an officer you would obey the orders of your superiors. This is an scenario that must be taken in consideration before chosing this proffession.

grotto · 01-12-2005, 10:11 AM

I had a boss who was a missle man during the cold war. He is a kind honest caring guy. He also would have blown the head off any officer not able to perform their duty if the time came. He explained drills where the objective was to get the missles off before they were destroyed. His Job ment certian death deep in a silo control bunker. Could I do it, with the training absolutely. here now, probably not.

D+F+P=Hadouken! · 01-12-2005, 11:48 AM

Its an order. If I was being given the order, I trust that my superiors have the wisdom and intelligence to make the right choice. I dont.

drippingwet · 01-12-2005, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drippingwet

If you were the captain of a nuclear ballistic submarine, and your leader gave you an order to fire, and if you followed those orders, it would lead to the deaths of millions and millions of people, would you do it if it meant there would be fewer deaths than if you didn't act? Would you do it if it meant more deaths than if you didn't act?

If an enemy fired nukes on you first, and you firing nukes back would achieve nothing but even more MASS killing, what would be the point in firing back, killing millions of INNOCENT people out of revenge (perhaps only one or two people would have been responsible for launching the weapons, not all those millions of others who had nothing to do with it)?

Well, what about the moral issues? What if the scenarios above were all that there was to consider - no greater purpose that your leader knew about and you didn't - just plain and simple revenge, or one of the two scenarios from the first paragraph in the quote/what if you were making the decisions based on the scenarios in the quote?

Maeve_Mari · 01-12-2005, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drippingwet

Well, what about the moral issues? What if the scenarios above were all that there was to consider - no greater purpose that your leader knew about and you didn't - just plain and simple revenge, or one of the two scenarios from the first paragraph in the quote/what if you were making the decisions based on the scenarios in the quote?

If you are the captain of a nuclear submarine and under the command of a leader with no plan or purpose, then you are in bigger trouble than whether it is moral for you to execute a direct order. They don't just stick any odd sailor into nuke cans.

In the military there is a need to know. If your commanding officer directs you to do something, under only extremely limited conditions, can you decide to execute a moral (or otherwise) perogative. Re: The hyped up situation in the movie Crimson Tide.

If you have moral issues with potentially killing millions of people, then accepting a commission and assingment in a nuclear weapon machine would be your big mistake in the first place.

Hypothetically, of course I wouldn't launch a weapon for someone else's revenge or madness. In reality though, the men who work in nuclear submarines do what they are told to do.

drippingwet · 01-12-2005, 02:20 PM

What I was talking about was if you knew exactly the same as what your leader knew, not whether the leader was a madman/woman or not.

Soldier · 01-12-2005, 03:49 PM

By doing so, you save at least one more life.

Because if you don't push that button, then the man directly under your command is required to put a bullet in your head, and push it himself.

davtsung · 01-12-2005, 05:51 PM

I would push the button......TWICE!!

ThatReallyHurt · 01-12-2005, 10:47 PM

With the training, sure, probably someone would be able to do it under the right conditions (i.e. no doubt they were doing the right thing). But... can anyone really say they'd be able to do that? That would be an immense amount of pressure on you, having to make that decision, knowing that your action will impact many, many people, military targets or not.

Thankfully, we've never been right at the point where someone has had to find that out about themselves. Been close once or twice, but never right to that line.

Thankfully.