4 ms·

> Of course it doesn't Well why not?

saiya-jin 11y ago
not utilizing weapons and tools available to full potential vs possible harm to some marine life... guess what a soldier chooses?
- TomGullen 11y ago
  So we must just accept the fact that military is there to destroy environments and they just don't really care? I expect more from them.
  - spenczar5 11y ago
    I think that "of course" is often intended to be descriptive of the way things are, not the way things ought to be.
  - Zach_the_Lizard 11y ago
    Destroying the environment is half of what the military does during wartime. So long as we have militaries, it's hard to see a future where we're not burning cities, bombing bridges and other critical infrastructure, and driving around highly environmentally unfriendly tanks, planes, and warships.
    - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
      Well, to be fair, the military is also the largest and most capable humanitarian organization at the disposal of the world's governments. To think their sole purpose is destruction for the sake of destruction is also a bit of an oversimplification, peacekeeping is a useful role as well.
      - usefulcat 11y ago
        Sole purpose, no; primary purpose, definitely.
      - dajohnson89 11y ago
        Yet often, military humanitarian missions are in relief to atrocities caused by... other militaries.
        knowaveragejoe 11y ago
        Sure. They're also the first to respond to natural disasters.
        dajohnson89 11y ago
        That's more likely to be the National Guard or something like that. Which is military indeed, but not the same type of military that we're talking about here.
        knowaveragejoe 11y ago
        The National Guard is as equipped to kill as any element of the regular military. NG units have served in combat roles in pick-a-conflict-in-recent-memory. That's just the US, of course. Pick a natural disaster anywhere in the world - the military(or militaries) of the region are the first to respond and form the basis of the relief efforts thereafter.
  - sologoub 11y ago
    Agree that we should expect more of military and government, but given the fact that a lawsuit was required here and the rampant abuses in the name of national security, we are a long ways off.
  - ChrisPebble 11y ago
    It's not binary. It's a trade-off that potentially decreases their capabilities and readiness. We might weigh the calculus differently (fewer dead whales) but it's not as simple as saying they don't care.
  - wtbob 11y ago
    > So we must just accept the fact that military is there to destroy environments and they just don't really care? No, the military is there to win wars. When you're in a fight for your life, you don't much care if you trample on a bush, or even break your own bones.
- kohanz 11y ago
  > possible harm to some marine life It's not "possible", it is certain and documented. 155 whales and dolphins killed in 5 years and over 2000 injured [0]. And by accounts from marine biologists, they are dying agonizing deaths. [0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-to-limit-some-training-that-harms-whales-dolphins-pacific/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-to-limit-some-training-that...
mhurron 11y ago
Their entire purpose is to kill people, why would you expect them to care about some animals?
- wuntune 11y ago
  Search for "navy rescues people" and you will see that the military and other navies around the world do far more than fight and are trained to do far more than fight and do so willingly and without regard for their own safety, every day of every year.
droopybuns 11y ago
Their function is to both perform War and to project enough strength that War is undesirable to other parties. What is the reasonable argument that this institution should prioritize Whale protection in that continuum? I am arguing against you, but I am pro-whale, pro-dolphin, pro-environment. I am trying to make the point that "why not?" is a silly question. It's not simple. People need to fight for doing the right thing here. The Navy's job is "war." If your institution is in possession of & has the opportunity to use nuclear weapons, you aren't spending time focusing on "doing nice things".

not utilizing weapons and tools available to full potential vs possible harm to some marine life... guess what a soldier chooses?

TomGullen 11y ago
So we must just accept the fact that military is there to destroy environments and they just don't really care? I expect more from them.
- spenczar5 11y ago
  I think that "of course" is often intended to be descriptive of the way things are, not the way things ought to be.
- Zach_the_Lizard 11y ago
  Destroying the environment is half of what the military does during wartime. So long as we have militaries, it's hard to see a future where we're not burning cities, bombing bridges and other critical infrastructure, and driving around highly environmentally unfriendly tanks, planes, and warships.
  - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
    Well, to be fair, the military is also the largest and most capable humanitarian organization at the disposal of the world's governments. To think their sole purpose is destruction for the sake of destruction is also a bit of an oversimplification, peacekeeping is a useful role as well.
    - usefulcat 11y ago
      Sole purpose, no; primary purpose, definitely.
    - dajohnson89 11y ago
      Yet often, military humanitarian missions are in relief to atrocities caused by... other militaries.
      - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
        Sure. They're also the first to respond to natural disasters.
        dajohnson89 11y ago
        That's more likely to be the National Guard or something like that. Which is military indeed, but not the same type of military that we're talking about here.
        knowaveragejoe 11y ago
        The National Guard is as equipped to kill as any element of the regular military. NG units have served in combat roles in pick-a-conflict-in-recent-memory. That's just the US, of course. Pick a natural disaster anywhere in the world - the military(or militaries) of the region are the first to respond and form the basis of the relief efforts thereafter.
- sologoub 11y ago
  Agree that we should expect more of military and government, but given the fact that a lawsuit was required here and the rampant abuses in the name of national security, we are a long ways off.
- ChrisPebble 11y ago
  It's not binary. It's a trade-off that potentially decreases their capabilities and readiness. We might weigh the calculus differently (fewer dead whales) but it's not as simple as saying they don't care.
- wtbob 11y ago
  > So we must just accept the fact that military is there to destroy environments and they just don't really care? No, the military is there to win wars. When you're in a fight for your life, you don't much care if you trample on a bush, or even break your own bones.
kohanz 11y ago
> possible harm to some marine life It's not "possible", it is certain and documented. 155 whales and dolphins killed in 5 years and over 2000 injured [0]. And by accounts from marine biologists, they are dying agonizing deaths. [0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-to-limit-some-training-that-harms-whales-dolphins-pacific/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-to-limit-some-training-that...

mhurron 11y ago

Their entire purpose is to kill people, why would you expect them to care about some animals?

wuntune 11y ago
Search for "navy rescues people" and you will see that the military and other navies around the world do far more than fight and are trained to do far more than fight and do so willingly and without regard for their own safety, every day of every year.

droopybuns 11y ago

Their function is to both perform War and to project enough strength that War is undesirable to other parties. What is the reasonable argument that this institution should prioritize Whale protection in that continuum? I am arguing against you, but I am pro-whale, pro-dolphin, pro-environment. I am trying to make the point that "why not?" is a silly question. It's not simple. People need to fight for doing the right thing here. The Navy's job is "war." If your institution is in possession of & has the opportunity to use nuclear weapons, you aren't spending time focusing on "doing nice things".