From: spike66 (spike66@ATTBI.com)
Date: Fri Apr 12 2002 - 15:19:17 MDT
> Harvey Newstron wrote:
>
> <<Even in a war, there has to be a pretty clear and present danger before
> the military is allowed to fire upon unarmed civilians. I really can't
> believe I am the only one who believes this.>>
Perhaps we could arrange for robots to wander around in a
battle zone carrying cameras, transmitting in real time for
anyone to see. Then it not only takes human reporters out
of harm's way, but it also would project a balanced view
by its inherent randomness.
A soldier might not want to shoot and destroy the
robo-reporters, for then the world would have images
of that side always turning toward the viewer and firing,
causing that side to appear as the agressor. A more
savvy soldier might turn to the robo-reporter and try
to explain to the world why she is fighting, thus winning
public opinion to her side.
In countries that cannot afford robots, perhaps a cheap
camera could be strapped to animals. Choose a species
that it not cute, that no one cares much about, such as
armadillos or porcupines or aardvarks.
This solution works on many levels. I myself have always
been an openness advocate and have opposed war and
favored accountability. Wouldnt the robo-cams cover
most of the bases? spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:28 MST