Critical Thinking Bombing Essay -let me steal ur thoughts

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

You are the president of the United States. Your military advisors come to you for approval of a bombing mission to destroy an enemy's important munitions factory. The factory, however, is located near a school. It is certain that dozens, if not hundreds, of childen will also be killed in the raid.

Do you approve the mission? Why or why not?

2 page paper. I have to EXPLAIN WHY, so i cant just say blow them bishes up. I want to right about why i think we should blow them up, as it is my view point but im not sure if i can fill 2 pages. So i will write on either standpoint.

RULES OF THE ESSAY: cant be done at lunch time or over night, school is in session and it needs to be done NOW. Children are certain to die. Do i do it and kill the kids, or do i not do it and save lives, but let the enemies keep producing weapons to kill unknown amounts of us citizens.

I need opinions on why.

On the side of not approving, things i have to write about: right to life (which i can stem off of into capital punishment and bs some more), dont blow up the kids that will grow up and be good upstanding citizens.

Approving: those kids are the children of terrorists. never know if they will grow up and kill hundreds of us citizens, preemptive strike to save lives in the long run.

I need more things to hit on in my essay, thus making it longer in length.

Thanks.

Click to read more...

 

[1991Brougham 10+ year member]

One little factory. Hmm, ever look at what we did in World War II? Tokyo firebombing...100K dead. Dresden, the same. A couple of atomic bombs put a dent in the population count of the targeted cities.

All's fair in love and war is the rule. That's the way the game is played. That's also why one had better be careful about getting into wars. They are easier to start than finish and a whole lot of Bad Things happen. However if you are in one, spare nothing to win it since as bad as winning a war can be (quite costly), the price for losing one is much worse.

Rick

 

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

One little factory. Hmm, ever look at what we did in World War II? Tokyo firebombing...100K dead. Dresden, the same. A couple of atomic bombs put a dent in the population count of the targeted cities.
All's fair in love and war is the rule. That's the way the game is played. That's also why one had better be careful about getting into wars. They are easier to start than finish and a whole lot of Bad Things happen. However if you are in one, spare nothing to win it since as bad as winning a war can be (quite costly), the price for losing one is much worse.

Rick

gooooood shit

thank you

 

[SethPhillips 5,000+ posts]

bomb the school too... fuck em...

 

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

bomb the school too... fuck em...

thats what i said. they are terrorists children, they will be brought up to hate us, and taught to kill us. take them out now, dont let a new generations of Bin Laden's have a chance to run free. then donate a few hundred grand to the "for 90 cents a day you can feed a starving family for a week". itll even out

 

[wheeler8921 10+ year member]

Nope... The during the Vietnam War, the VietCong strategically placed missle launchers in small villages with innocent civilians all around. They would fire these at night upon US Military Baracks and the allies were never permitted to return fire and take out these missle launchers because too many women, children and innocent civilians were everywhere. Luckily the VC missle launchers weren't too accurate, but often times the bombs would land before the siren had time to sound. It was scarry and often times fatal, but this clearly demonstrates the integrity of our military and how the lives of US Soldiers were put in risk to avoid the deaths of countless VC civilians.. This is just an example of how it was in Vietnam and how the US handled it, but I guess the decision is yours. Hope this was helpful.

 

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

Nope... The during the Vietnam War, the VietCong strategically placed missle launchers in small villages with innocent civilians all around. They would fire these at night upon US Military Baracks and the allies were never permitted to return fire and take out these missle launchers because too many women, children and innocent civilians were everywhere. Luckily the VC missle launchers weren't too accurate, but often times the bombs would land before the siren had time to sound. It was scarry and often times fatal, but this clearly demonstrates the integrity of our military and how the lives of US Soldiers were put in risk to avoid the deaths of countless VC civilians.. This is just an example of how it was in Vietnam and how the US handled it, but I guess the decision is yours. Hope this was helpful.

good insight.

but on the other hand the US military has also passed the rule that to take out a high priority terrorist, we are allowed to kill (without fear of punishment) up to 33 innocent men, women or children.

 

[wheeler8921 10+ year member]

thats what i said. they are terrorists children, they will be brought up to hate us, and taught to kill us. take them out now, dont let a new generations of Bin Laden's have a chance to run free. then donate a few hundred grand to the "for 90 cents a day you can feed a starving family for a week". itll even out

this is a good opposing argument, but it's unfair to classify their future at age 6 or however young they were. Many of those children won't grow up as terrorists, but sadly many there are many of them that will. You may offer another option similar to the recent operation in Baghdad where the military goes in on ground to the city and has a controlled disarmming of this facility. It is more risky for US Soldiers, but safer to the school, you have to weigh your options.

 

[wheeler8921 10+ year member]

good insight.
but on the other hand the US military has also passed the rule that to take out a high priority terrorist, we are allowed to kill (without fear of punishment) up to 33 innocent men, women or children.

Wow, I have never heard of such thing where the US Military put a number on the amount of innocent civilians they are allowed to kill. Do you have any legitiment sources on this claim? Thats interesting?

 

[tyler_fitz 10+ year member]

bomb it, thats what they get for building a munitions factory next to the school.... for all we know the school children could be working there...

 

[xxBURT0Nxx 10+ year member]

I would use the vietnam as a point for why we should bomb them. Better for them to loose a few hundred civilians, or let us loose a few hundred civilians. Anyone who thinks there won't be collateral damage in a war needs to get off planet pluto. Nobody wants to kill innocent people, but sometimes it is necessary. Countries now a days know that we will be preemtive to strike if civilians are involved which is exactly why we had problems in vietnam and will have problems in the middle east. I'm not saying go around and kill innocent people but should we not protect our own innocent people before those of other countries? Also, with either decision people will be upset. If you strike and kill the innocents you are heartless and it should have never been done. If you don't strike, 5 years from now when we are attacked the same people will ask why we didn't stop the missles when we found out about them. War time decisions can never make everyone happy, so in my opinion we should look out for the good of our country, civilians, and troops first, then look out for our allies, and finally innocents who may be involved with our enemies. Just my .02 not saying, everyone has to or will agree with it!

 

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

this is a good opposing argument, but it's unfair to classify their future at age 6 or however young they were. Many of those children won't grow up as terrorists, but sadly many there are many of them that will. You may offer another option similar to the recent operation in Baghdad where the military goes in on ground to the city and has a controlled disarmming of this facility. It is more risky for US Soldiers, but safer to the school, you have to weigh your options.

im all for saving the kids, i really am. i agree with the you cant predetermine how they will be later in life. but when taking into account it could possibly prevent an event the magnitude of 9-11, i would approve of both the controlled disarming or the bombing.

unfortunately, i have to choose either and explain why on this essay, no gray area.

 

[billabongcr 5,000+ posts]

Wow, I have never heard of such thing where the US Military put a number on the amount of innocent civilians they are allowed to kill. Do you have any legitiment sources on this claim? Thats interesting?

my teacher is actually an ex-green barray(sp?). he nevers says exactly what, but you can tell by what he slips up and catches himself about to talk about and how he says things..he was involved in some pretty heavy stuff.

hes always telling us little unknown facts about his experiences. and he is still very much into all the new rules like that, so he passes them onto us to stimulate thinking.

this one was just approved recently iirc

 

[ricoshay 10+ year member]

2 pages huh?.......

NUKEM!/essay... write big!