Posted: 1/14/2003 8:02:15 AM EDT
|
I love the "human shield" concept. It shows up now and then in these forms: 1) Saddam uses hostages as a shield (foreigners, UN workers, etc.). This is no different than any thug hiding behind an innocent hostage. 2) Iraqi civilians "voluntarily" use themselves as "human shields" around targets. 3) Peace activists declare themselves "human shields". The entire concept of a "human shield" is hillarious, when you think about it... Weren't "shields" first developed thousands of years ago, to protect us "humans" from weapons? Now the shield IS the human (to protect the weapon.). The ploy is a wonderful compliment to us as a society. It relies and depends on our chivalry and sense of honor. They know that we (Americans, Westerners..) don't approve of slaughtering innocents, and we will avoid it if possible. I bet they didn't try the "human shield" trick, when they fought the Iranians. Try it in Africa. |
|
Quoted: I love the "human shield" concept. It shows up now and then in these forms: 1) Saddam uses hostages as a shield (foreigners, UN workers, etc.). This is no different than any thug hiding behind an innocent hostage. You said it: Saddam is a coward who uses innocents to save his own ass. I hope he fries in Hell. 2) Iraqi civilians "voluntarily" use themselves as "human shields" around targets. Tough shit. If they're stupid enough to do this, then they deserve to be removed form the gene pool. No sympathy here. 3) Peace activists declare themselves "human shields". Again, tough shit. If yer stupid enough to volunteer to be a [s]target[/s]Sheild for an asset of a madman... The entire concept of a "human shield" is hillarious, when you think about it... Weren't "shields" first developed thousands of years ago, to protect us "humans" from weapons? Now the shield IS the human (to protect the weapon.). The ploy is a wonderful compliment to us as a society. It relies and depends on our chivalry and sense of honor. They know that we (Americans, Westerners..) don't approve of slaughtering innocents, and we will avoid it if possible. I bet they didn't try the "human shield" trick, when they fought the Iranians. Try it in Africa. And if we're smart, since force is all that these bozos respond to, we won't bat an eyelash when sending those who volunteer to be shields right to Allah since they're in such a damned hurry. IMO, vounteers for "shield duty" ain't innocents. The innocents who are forced, well, that's another story and it's a damned shame, but war isn't ever pretty. What can you do? R.F. |
|
Quoted: They may not have used the "human shield" concept in their war with Iran, but they were not above using the "child cannon fodder" concept. Many of the "soldiers" on both sides were teenagers, some quite young. Sad, and some sick shit, too. the concept is sometimes called "eating the seed corn". basically in a last ditch effort everyone fights. it didn't work for Hitler either. |