Since we're in the donating mood

[Diver0001]

Actually, this is an interesting trend in the discussion. We started talking about the ethical treatment of animals and now some people are defending the necessity of war.....

I don't think we could have crafted a more telling twist to this tale...

R..

 

[Diver Dennis]

Look at Rwanda. Most of the weapons were machetes or clubs. Rob is right, efficiency does not equate to humane.

 

[wardric]

In today's war, at least for US soldiers, less death but more "seriously wounded" soldiers. The protection is so good around the chest and the medics are so well equipped and fast that you see a lot of soldiers that lose all members yet survive. At least, that's what I read (and noooo, not in the Enquirer :sigh

 

[wardric]

Look at Rwanda. Most of the weapons were machetes or clubs. Rob is right, efficiency does not equate to humane.

You make a very good point there Dennis. Rwanda and Burundi was a real massacre.

 

[wardric]

Actually, this is an interesting trend in the discussion. We started talking about the ethical treatment of animals and now some people are defending the necessity of war.....

I don't think we could have crafted a more telling twist to this tale...

R..

that's the quality of a good Troll

 

[dlndavid]

where's Jep anyway?

 

[dherbman]

off the top of my head, flight was invented by civilians 20 years before its use
in war.

internal combustion: developed for commercial use long before it was used in war. in fact, during Word War I, private taxicabs were commandeered by the French Army to transport soldiers to the front ... the Army didn't have too many trucks.

You are using the French army as an example of military ingenuity? Too funny.

astronomy: practiced for centuries unrelated to warfare

Practiced, but certainly not at the level made possible by technologies developed for military and intelligence use. Hubble would never of been possible without rocket science, satellite technology or the electronics driven by a need for defense.

computers: again, this was developed by civilians for private business before they were ever used in war

Actually, one of the first practical uses for a computer was to compute artillery trajectories during WWII. It's common knowledge that current consumer technology lags behind military tech by several years. In the past there was an even broader difference.

mass production: perfected by Henry Ford for his autmobile plant in 1903, again,
for commercial gain.

HF certainly was the first person to utilize an assembly line, but his technique was pushed to a new level by the demands of war. Much was learned by manufacturers in the process of retooling for the war effort that would have taken decades to realize during during peace time.

i think if we explore your list a little more in depth, you will see that again and again commercial developments (developed to make money) were adapted by the armies of the world to wage war.

the real impetus in our development has been the private enterprise motive. in fact, you could argue that war has become another tool for private enterprise to make a buck.

Military and intelligence have fueled R&D, driven production, provided civilian benefits with trickle down technology gains and funded civilian developments indirectly by propping up companies with the military dollar. As a counter point, perhaps you could point out a peaceful society that has progressed technologically independent of a warring nation.

 

[H2Andy]

You are using the French army as an example of military ingenuity? Too funny.

you have clearly not read much about WWI.... the French Army was the second
best prepared army in Europe, second only to the Germans. they had state of the
art technology. and prior to that... there was this guy named Napoleon
that kicked butt all over Europe for a while ... he was French too

but let me clarify: no army at that time had incorporated the internal combustion
engine, not the Germans, not the British, not the Austrians. nobody had.

the only Army that thought of using cars was the French, and they had to improvise
and requisition taxi cabs.

clearly, the internal combustion engine was not a military development later used
for civilian purposes, but the other way around.

As a counter point, perhaps you could point out a peaceful society that has progressed technologically independent of a warring nation.

you are framing the problem wrong. i would suggest you read John Keegan's
A History of Warfare, and Jared M. Diamond's Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.

 

[dherbman]

you have clearly not read much about WWI.... the French Army was the second
best prepared army in Europe, second only to the Germans. they had state of the
art technology. and prior to that... there was this guy named Napoleon
that kicked butt all over Europe for a while ... he was French too

but let me clarify: no army at that time had incorporated the internal combustion
engine, not the Germans, not the British, not the Austrians. nobody had.

the only Army that thought of using cars was the French, and they had to improvise
and requisition taxi cabs.

clearly, the internal combustion engine was not a military development later used
for civilian purposes, but the other way around.




you are framing the problem wrong. i would suggest you read John Keegan's
A History of Warfare, and Jared M. Diamond's Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.

I'll give you the internal combustion engine and bow to your superior knowledge of WWI, but it doesn't change the fact that defense has fueled innovation and production to an extent that would never be realized without it.

 

[H2Andy]

well, read the books ... if anything else, they're very entertaining reads

warfare can accelerate some development, but it more often overtakes any possible advancement being made and leads to a society's stagnation and
ultimate defeat when its overwhelming cost overtakes the society's ability to
keep up.

for examples, see the Roman Empire, the British Empire, and the Soviet Union.