From: Michael M. Butler (butler@comp-lib.org)
Date: Fri Apr 12 2002 - 00:44:13 MDT
Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> There are specific rules of engagement that are defined and recognized
> by civilized countries. You can't shoot non-combatants. You can't
> shoot unarmed people. You can't shoot people who surrendered. You
> can't shoot people that you have not declared war against. You can't
> shoot reporters, medical personnel, relief efforts, or other non-engaged
> parties.
You can order crowds to disperse, and if they fail to do so, what?
You can declare a curfew, and if you find people not obeying it, what?
> Do extropians really support the death penalty for disobeying a news
> blackout? Do extropians really support monopoly sources of information
> in any situation? Do extropians really support armed agents of state
> governments? I am really surprised at the response I am getting here.
> It is not at all what I would have expected.
I don't support it, but I'm not convinced it's about a news blackout, nor
about killing reporters. To recap my current impression: from the one
prominent case you've mentioned, it sounds to me like it's about "no crowds of
putatively privileged sheep" in a difficult urban ("MOUT") combat environment.
Gedanken: What would you have said if there had turned out to be a
"TV"-labeled suicide bomber, or a team of them, at the gate at an inopportune
time? I know what the Knesset would have said.
I don't particularly like it, but I don't have enough data to agree with your
assessment of it. This might change.
--
butler a t comp - lib . o r g
I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization.
Sometimes I forget.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:26 MST