Capital Punishment

[riggerrob 558]

Just now, gowlerk said:

I don't think the the geography allows for a long term peace without a major change in Russia.

Agreed which is why some critics are calling for Mr. Poutine to resign since he will never be able to dig himself out of the miserable muddy hole he has dug for himself in Ukraine.

It used to be that despots were allowed to retire to their villas in the South of France (see Baby Doc Duvalier from Haiti or Idi Amin Dada from Uganda).

[jakee 1,254]

21 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

Dear Skydekker,

Please stop trying to put works in my mouth. Every war in history has killed a few civilians...

Hi Rob,

You're missing his point. He's not talking about killing civilians, he's talking about killing people. You said hired killers deserve the death penalty. Soldiers who deliberately kill people in war, including enemy soldiers, are by definition hired killers. I'm not really sure it's a discussion worth pursuing but you must concede that you're drawing a line where on one side some hired killers are the worst of the worst and on the other side some hired killers are among the best of the best.

 

My question would be why you do think that (specifically among criminal murderers) hired killers particularly deserve the death penalty? Do we know that they're particularly more or less likely to re-offend than other people? Or morally, is (for example) a guy paid by a drug dealer to kill a rival drug dealer that much worse than an angry man who kills his wife because she made his dinner wrong?

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

30 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

Agreed which is why some critics are calling for Mr. Poutine to resign since he will never be able to dig himself out of the miserable muddy hole he has dug for himself in Ukraine.

It used to be that despots were allowed to retire to their villas in the South of France (see Baby Doc Duvalier from Haiti or Idi Amin Dada from Uganda).

Hi Rob,

Slight correction:  Idi Amin spent his exile days in Saudi Arabia.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  You are correct about Baby Doc.

 

[billvon 2,400]

2 hours ago, riggerrob said:

Dear Skydekker,

Please stop trying to put works in my mouth.

Every war in history has killed a few civilians, even if those casualties were purely accidental.

And every war in history has killed a lot of PEOPLE.  The people who do this are trained to kill other people; they are quite literally professional killers.  Sometimes civilians are killed accidentally.  Sometimes they are killed intentionally.  (Dresden, Hiroshima.)  But combatants - who are also people - are intentionally targeted and killed by those professional killers (soldiers.)

[gowlerk 1,912]

31 minutes ago, billvon said:

But combatants - who are also people - are intentionally targeted and killed by those professional killers (soldiers.)

Killing non combatants is mostly okay as well. Unless you are on the side that loses the war. In which case it is a war crime. Ask Erik Prince. The Blackwater murderers got off. 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

56 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Killing non combatants is mostly okay as well. Unless you are on the side that loses the war. In which case it is a war crime. Ask Erik Prince. The Blackwater murderers got off. 

Pfft. Losers can get away with a lot of murders if they have knowledge that makes them valuable enough.

Just ask Werner Von Braun.

[kallend 1,623]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Pfft. Losers can get away with a lot of murders if they have knowledge that makes them valuable enough.

Just ask Werner Von Braun.

Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not his department.

[wmw999 2,121]

10 hours ago, kallend said:

Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not his department.

Tom Lehrer is still alive, even. Still lives in California, too. He said once that political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Wendy P.

 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

20 hours ago, kallend said:

Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not his department.

I was thinking more along the lines of the slave labor, many of whom died, that made the rockets.

I'd consider the launching of them almost a legitimate act of war.

Fun fact: The Allies never deliberately bombed civilian targets. But they sure missed a lot of valid military targets, factories mostly, that were in the middle of cities & towns, surrounded by civilians who were 'collateral damage'.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

7 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

I was thinking more along the lines of the slave labor, many of whom died, that made the rockets.

I'd consider the launching of them almost a legitimate act of war.

Fun fact: The Allies never deliberately bombed civilian targets. But they sure missed a lot of valid military targets, factories mostly, that were in the middle of cities & towns, surrounded by civilians who were 'collateral damage'.

Hi Joe,

The combatants in WW I were little more than cannon fodder.*  The generals would just ask for 50,000 more, or more, whenever they wanted.

In WW II, the US was determined not to wage the same type of warfare.

Our mfg capabilities allowed us to carpet bomb our targets.

I once read that only about 5% of the bombs dropped in WW II, actually hit their targets.

Jerry Baumchen

*  It seems as though Putin is following Stalin's methods:  new mobilization wave for up to 500,000 men to fight in Ukraine

Moscow to mobilize 500,000 new conscripts, Kyiv military intelligence says – POLITICO

 

 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

15 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

The combatants in WW I were little more than cannon fodder.*  The generals would just ask for 50,000 more, or more, whenever they wanted.

In WW II, the US was determined not to wage the same type of warfare.

Our mfg capabilities allowed us to carpet bomb our targets.

I once read that only about 5% of the bombs dropped in WW II, actually hit their targets.

Jerry Baumchen

*  It seems as though Putin is following Stalin's methods:  new mobilization wave for up to 500,000 men to fight in Ukraine

Moscow to mobilize 500,000 new conscripts, Kyiv military intelligence says – POLITICO

 

 

Time for the Germans to stop deploring and start warring. They need to release all restrictions on users of Leopard 2's and the US needs to expedite the shipment of Bradley's, Patriots, and any land based anti-ship missiles we can offer. We also need to max out the numbers of HIMAR's M30A1 Anti-Personnel munitions from ourselves and our stalwart NATO allies. Seriously, it would be nice if all citizens of all NATO countries would accept that expensive military hardware is what saves the world from autocracy not thank you's and empty promises to help with reconstruction.

[billvon 2,400]

44 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Fun fact: The Allies never deliberately bombed civilian targets. But they sure missed a lot of valid military targets, factories mostly, that were in the middle of cities & towns, surrounded by civilians who were 'collateral damage'.

Dresden was a civilian target with no significant military value.  It was, however, the home of 50,000 civilian workers who were working for companies who either directly or indirectly supported the war, which is how they justified it.  It is notable that they did not target the companies themselves, just the workers.  (The companies were outside the city limits.)

[gowlerk 1,912]

20 minutes ago, billvon said:

Dresden was a civilian target with no significant military value.  It was, however, the home of 50,000 civilian workers who were working for companies who either directly or indirectly supported the war, which is how they justified it.  It is notable that they did not target the companies themselves, just the workers.  (The companies were outside the city limits.)

I believe there had been some kind of similar attack on a city called London earlier in the war that needed to be answered for.

[billvon 2,400]

2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

I believe there had been some kind of similar attack on a city called London earlier in the war that needed to be answered for.

Oh definitely; I'm not saying it was unprovoked.  

But civilians were intentionally targeted by both Axis and Allied forces during the war.

[gowlerk 1,912]

Just now, billvon said:

Oh definitely; I'm not saying it was unprovoked.  

But civilians were intentionally targeted by both Axis and Allied forces during the war.

Yes, in war what matters most is winning. Second is limiting damage to your side. The enemy's civilian population? That is something we all can talk about later. Or sweep under the rug if we win. 

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Yes, in war what matters most is winning. Second is limiting damage to your side. The enemy's civilian population? That is something we all can talk about later. Or sweep under the rug if we win. 

Hi Ken,

When Germany attacked Poland and bombed cities, Hitler's generals told him that this was against the rules of war.  You only attack military targets.

Hitler told them that the winners make the rules.

Jerry Baumchen

[mbohu 77]

On 12/14/2022 at 3:09 AM, Stumpy said:

All civilis[z]ed societies no longer do this..

As a non US born, I agree and not much else needs to be said (as long as we are talking about how I feel about it.)
 

 

On 12/14/2022 at 5:04 AM, Phil1111 said:

Putin, Kim, Ali Khamenei, type mass murders, yes.

Possibly yes (not necessarily that list, but something like it). But here is the difference to me: 
killing, to prevent someone from doing terrible, massive harm--as long as that person is still involved in doing the harm (or has the power to do it)--may be justified (and if one gets a little satisfaction from that to "get even", well so be it--that's human)

...but the very idea of institutionalized punishment, especially punishment by death, is an idea that will hopefully outlive its attractiveness, as we evolve as civilizations. 
Once the perpetrator is not anymore able to commit the acts for which we want to "punish" him, I think the very idea of punishment is weak and useless--especially when administered in an institutionalized way.

Taking away the very means as well as (when possible) the causes/desires for the "evil"/undesired actions of the perpetrators is much more powerful and ultimately much more satisfying.

[jakee 1,254]

16 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Fun fact: The Allies never deliberately bombed civilian targets. But they sure missed a lot of valid military targets, factories mostly, that were in the middle of cities & towns, surrounded by civilians who were 'collateral damage'.

Can’t tell if serious?

The day after the directive was issued (on 15 February), the Chief of the Air Staff Charles Portal sought clarification from the Deputy Chief of Air Staff Air Vice Marshal Norman Bottomley who had drafted it:[5][8][9]

“ref the new bombing directive: I suppose it is clear the aiming points will be the built up areas, and not, for instance, the dockyards or aircraft factories where these are mentioned in Appendix A. This must be made quite clear if it is not already understood.”

Area Bombing

Also Hiroshima.

[riggerrob 558]

16 hours ago, gowlerk said:

I believe there had been some kind of similar attack on a city called London earlier in the war that needed to be answered for.

Sadly, Brits failed to learn the lessons from their own pummeling during the Battle of Britain. Inaccurate Luftwaffe bombing killed dozens of British civilians during World War 1 and hundreds during WW2. British morale stiffened.

Then "bomber Harris" decided to inaccurately bomb dozens of German cities. Most of those cities contained a factory that aided the German war effort, but the bulk of bombs fell on workers' houses. Eventually Germany lost the war because of shortfalls in production and difficulty in supplying troops on the front lines. A relative of mine died while flying a Halifax bomber over Versailles, France during May of 1944. He was bombing a rail yard that supplied German troops who collapsed three months later for lack of ammunition, fuel and spare parts.

After WW2, Bomber Harris was quietly side-lined as many within the British gov't quietly admitted that his policies bordered on genocide.

We would be unwise to accuse Harris of heinous crimes as he was just following 1930s dogma about "the bomber will always get through." Truth be told, everyones' bombers were hopelessly inaccurate during WW2. Even line-of-sight artillery was hopelessly inaccurate during WW2. Well-armed WALLIED troops routinely called in artillery to flatten French villages if they suspected that German soldiers were hiding within the village during the summer of 1944.

It is only since circa 1972 that guided bombs have been available to destroy one bridge with one bomb (see Walleye guided bombs during the Viet Nam War).

Nowadays it makes more sense for Ukrainian defenders to use guided munitions to limit collateral damage and the cost of re-building after the war. OTOH It is still in Russia's best interests to bomb Ukraine back into the stone age. Flattened Ukrainian cities will need more years to rebuild before they can resume their plans to invade Russia (see historical Russian paranoia HAR! HAR! HAR!). The flattened steel works in Mariupol gives intact Russian steel mills a short-term advantage in the now tighter market.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

Can’t tell if serious?

 

...Also Hiroshima.

Semi-serious.

And, as Bill pointed out, I forgot about Dresden (was tired).

Most of the 'legitimate targets' were surrounded by civilians. Back then, most everyone live as close as possible to where they worked (few people had cars, so they walked to work). So the factories were surrounded by the workers and their families.

Considering the accuracy of high level bombing in that time, the chances of hitting civilians was higher than the chances of hitting the actual target.
And the people in charge knew this.

Hiroshima had some 'token' military value. But...

#1 - It was chosen in large part because it hadn't been targeted before. So it was largely undamaged. That let the bomb people get an accurate picture of how much damage that particular bomb caused.

#2 - By targeting the center of the city, the 'military industries' that were on the outskirts were largely undamaged.

 

It was probably legal at the time. I'm not sure it was every fully investigated (we won).
One could argue that in Japan, at the time, there weren't any 'civilians'. Everyone was a subject of the Emperor, and most were planning on doing whatever it took to repel any US invasion. 

It probably wouldn't be legal today.

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Semi-serious.

And, as Bill pointed out, I forgot about Dresden (was tired).

Most of the 'legitimate targets' were surrounded by civilians. Back then, most everyone live as close as possible to where they worked (few people had cars, so they walked to work). So the factories were surrounded by the workers and their families.

Considering the accuracy of high level bombing in that time, the chances of hitting civilians was higher than the chances of hitting the actual target.
And the people in charge knew this.

Right… but they were also pursuing a campaign of terrorism against the civilian populace as a matter of policy. And that’s not looking at historical tactics through a modern lens - it’s precisely what they said they were doing.

On learning of the effect of the Anglo-American raid on Dresden on 13/14 February 1945, Churchill minuted: “It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing.”

 

https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-hour/finest-hour-137/churchill-proceedings-churchill-and-bombing-policy/

[nigel99 144]

On 1/7/2023 at 4:52 AM, jakee said:

My question would be why you do think that (specifically among criminal murderers) hired killers particularly deserve the death penalty? Do we know that they're particularly more or less likely to re-offend than other people? Or morally, is (for example) a guy paid by a drug dealer to kill a rival drug dealer that much worse than an angry man who kills his wife because she made his dinner wrong?

It's a really good question and highlights the complexity of 'treating' criminals rather than relying on punishment. Playing devils advocate you could say that as a hired killer was paid and therefore financially motivated a suitable punishment is to fine them more than they are paid. Whereas a guy with anger issues may never truly get his anger under control. 

My question is what do we do about people who for whatever reason are not able to be rehabilitated or reformed? A specific example, in Western Australia we have an arsonist who has been active for over 50 years. He is high risk, as every time he is released from prison he re-offends.He is putting lives in danger, and I would argue that if he has not changed in 50 years he is unlikely to ever do so. 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

7 hours ago, riggerrob said:

Sadly, Brits failed to learn the lessons from their own pummeling during the Battle of Britain. Inaccurate Luftwaffe bombing killed dozens of British civilians during World War 1 and hundreds during WW2. British morale stiffened.

Then "bomber Harris" decided to inaccurately bomb dozens of German cities. Most of those cities contained a factory that aided the German war effort, but the bulk of bombs fell on workers' houses. Eventually Germany lost the war because of shortfalls in production and difficulty in supplying troops on the front lines. A relative of mine died while flying a Halifax bomber over Versailles, France during May of 1944. He was bombing a rail yard that supplied German troops who collapsed three months later for lack of ammunition, fuel and spare parts.

After WW2, Bomber Harris was quietly side-lined as many within the British gov't quietly admitted that his policies bordered on genocide.

We would be unwise to accuse Harris of heinous crimes as he was just following 1930s dogma about "the bomber will always get through." Truth be told, everyones' bombers were hopelessly inaccurate during WW2. Even line-of-sight artillery was hopelessly inaccurate during WW2. Well-armed WALLIED troops routinely called in artillery to flatten French villages if they suspected that German soldiers were hiding within the village during the summer of 1944.

It is only since circa 1972 that guided bombs have been available to destroy one bridge with one bomb (see Walleye guided bombs during the Viet Nam War).

Nowadays it makes more sense for Ukrainian defenders to use guided munitions to limit collateral damage and the cost of re-building after the war. OTOH It is still in Russia's best interests to bomb Ukraine back into the stone age. Flattened Ukrainian cities will need more years to rebuild before they can resume their plans to invade Russia (see historical Russian paranoia HAR! HAR! HAR!). The flattened steel works in Mariupol gives intact Russian steel mills a short-term advantage in the now tighter market.

My Dad got the Presidential Unit Citation for his squadron obliterating an important target on his 21st birthday. He did some missions bombing targets at Oswiecim (Auschwitz) but not the camp. One can only imagine how hard a decision that targeting would have been.

[Phil1111 911]

8 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Semi-serious....

It probably wouldn't be legal today.

The best example of WW2 conduct that illustrated attacking civilians. Was US bombing of Japanese cities with incendiaries. "the Tokyo firebombing was aimed largely at civilians, in places including Tokyo's downtown area known as shitamachi, where people lived in traditional wood and paper homes at densities sometimes exceeding 100,000 people per square mile.

"There were plenty of small factories, but this area was chosen specifically because it was easy to burn," says historian Masahiko Yamabe, who was born just months after the war's end.

Another departure from earlier raids: the bombers flew low..."It was a blazing firestorm. I saw a baby catch fire on its mother's back, and she couldn't put out the fire. I saw a horse being led by its owner. The horse balked and the cargo on its back caught fire, then its tail, and it burned alive, as the owner just stood there and burned with it," she said.." From "Deadly WWII firebombings of Japanese cities largely ignored"

Edited January 9, 2023 by Phil1111

[riggerrob 558]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

My Dad got the Presidential Unit Citation for his squadron obliterating an important target on his 21st birthday. He did some missions bombing targets at Oswiecim (Auschwitz) but not the camp. One can only imagine how hard a decision that targeting would have been.

Most Nazi concentration camps were located beside factories that supplied the war effort. Most of those prisoners were slave labor for the factory. It was only when illness and malnuitrition slowed thier work that they were executed.