Of course my perspective on both is consistent. There is no moral justification for sending a human who’s brain is as undeveloped as a child’s to war. I doubt most people would say it was justified to send intellectually disabled adults to war either. I sure wouldn’t want to see guys with Down’s Syndrome in body armor and carrying a rifle, not having a true conception of the actual danger they’re in or maybe even what they’re fighting for.
I think that’s a fair perspective and one I generally agree with. But I also see a compelling argument for “self defense.” Children are victims of war, maybe they need to be able to defend themselves in times of war at home.
It’s one thing to use child soldiers as cannon fodder or in wars of aggression, but maybe another when they’re defending their homes and themselves. I’m not sure
Putting them on the front lines puts them on the offensive, not the defensive. Sure, let them keep weapons in their home or whatever if they are threatened. That’s a different issue. Then it becomes defensive.
But that is not what is going on. What is going on is that they are being conscripted and put on the battlefield. It’s just not morally defensible.
Underage Western men fought in the world wars
And?
If your perspective on both is consistent, more power to you, but putting that out there for others who may judge things differently in that case.
Of course my perspective on both is consistent. There is no moral justification for sending a human who’s brain is as undeveloped as a child’s to war. I doubt most people would say it was justified to send intellectually disabled adults to war either. I sure wouldn’t want to see guys with Down’s Syndrome in body armor and carrying a rifle, not having a true conception of the actual danger they’re in or maybe even what they’re fighting for.
I think that’s a fair perspective and one I generally agree with. But I also see a compelling argument for “self defense.” Children are victims of war, maybe they need to be able to defend themselves in times of war at home.
It’s one thing to use child soldiers as cannon fodder or in wars of aggression, but maybe another when they’re defending their homes and themselves. I’m not sure
Putting them on the front lines puts them on the offensive, not the defensive. Sure, let them keep weapons in their home or whatever if they are threatened. That’s a different issue. Then it becomes defensive.
But that is not what is going on. What is going on is that they are being conscripted and put on the battlefield. It’s just not morally defensible.
Granted, I just see some grey area. Home: justified. Neighborhood? City? Country? Hard to say.