Loss of Honour

[ordos45]

When did we all lose our honour? Really as a world, how much honour is truly left?

You might say that our nations all still have honour. Yeah right.

The US, Britain, France, Israel, etc. All have committed warcrimes, probably even Canada and the Netherlands have done so.

French and Indian war sure had a few massacres, and the diseases the Dutch brought to the New World, as well as the rest of the European powers, bio-warfare.

Now yes, one might argue that the European powers in the New World only wanted to "help" the Indians. Yes but help always comes with lives as the price tag, whether intentional or not.

In fact it comes to the question, is honour a myth? No sacrifice, no action is purely altruistic, which would mean honour is only a veil for greed.

Okay now that I've posted and confused some people, any ideas?

[Acriku]

The Civil War is considered as the last Honorable War. They did not aim for the Generals, they did not attack during the night, etc. It's almost sad.

[SurlyPIG]

I think the most honourable wars/battles were actually the old English ones. An official challenge was issued, a date and time was set, the armies (or sometimes duelers) would meet and the battle would begin.

Those countries you listed may have committed masacres, but look at who they were taking down; people who would use civillians as shields, and would take a heavilly populated civilian area to make a stand so that when they were killed and civillians inevitably died they could cry "Murderers, murderers, they're slaughtering our people rise up against them". It's the least honourable form of propaganda in existance. These people (particularly the extremist Arab regimes) would kill every person on Earth, including their own people, before they would give up whatever power they have.

For example, take Saddam Hussaine. I think a war with Iraq is inevitable, now, but I think it's a good thing. My social teacher told us about this video he'd seen of Hussaine meeting with his "party" in which he began the meeting with "There is a traitor among us." Following that, two of his armed goons randomly picked a man out of the group, took him out of the room, a gunshot was fired, they came back. "There are still traitors among us." Same thing happens to a different guy. By now the entire room is sweating like mad, some guys are crying, but one guy finally gets it. He stands up and begins applauding and saying "Hooray for Saddam, long live Hussaine" Everybody joined in, the killing stopped.

Sick isn't it?

It's also known that he changes locations every couple hours, and that he has lookalikes go around dressed like him so that if they are shot at it's someone else that dies. He will LITERALLY use anybody as a shield. How CAN you remove a man like this from power without killing civillians? It's impossible. It just can't be done. It's not the fault of the military powers, it's the fault of the evil, sadistic dictators like Hussaine who leave the free world with no choice. Why do they hate us you ask? Our very principles are a threat to them. Freedom, democracy, equal rights, womens rights, truth, satire, media, circulation of all ideas, art, and expression are a threat to their dictatorships. They would KILL to keep their people under control, and they do. They would kill to keep their women at home, out of schools and jobs, covered under robes obeying their every wich. THEY have no honour. Not us.

[TMA_1]

honor doesnt fall upon a nation but to each individual within it.

[Anathema]

I disagree. In Vietnam, most of the atrocities of the US army were simply covered up, to save their reputation. So I do think dishonour can fall upon a nation.

[nemafakei]

Any disgraced country cannot remain disgraced indefinitely. Once its ways are changed, it is no longer dishonourable.

[Terror]

the question is: should an entire nation be considered dishounarable or just certain people who make that reputation? (i.e. government, army, etc.)

[Edric O]

Hmmmm... define "honour".

[Dude_Doc]

I think the American Civil War was the last one, but the real honorable battles took place in Medievil England, where the did attack during day, both sides did see each other first, then they attacked. Also, the classic duels are one of my favourite honorable battles, if you take a look on 1vs1. I think the Independence War (Britain vs America) also were one of the last. Nowadays, we have developed new technologies, and strategies, we want to beat the enemy as fast as possible, and have as little casaulties as possible.

[The_Sadukar]

The samurai battels were more honorable, than any Medievil battel, english or not

[gryphon]

TO loose ot you first have to possess it. And I think honous is more a thing that shifts place and tim eall by itself. One minute you have it, the other it can be gone.

[ asside from the fact that some one else alway has to judge if you'r honourable, you can never say it yourslef. it's always some one elses judgment. So you can be judged as honourable, when the action you did to get a judgment like that was indead unhonourable. ]

[TMA_1]

There is no honor in battle. Only shame.

[aox0m0xoa]

since when are you english philip?

[Digital Guerrilla]

What is considered honor? Where is this honor to be shown is it in battle, during the time of life or death or just everyday living. There is no honor in politically motivated actions against peoples being subjugated to others rule.

[Terror]

honor is respect

[gryphon]

But then you can have ones respect while being hated by a second persone. So it would be subjectieve to.

[Terror]

hmm perhaps you are right. honour is also like keeping your honour. no raping :P, no murdering (unless it is for a good cause), etc.

[Caid Ivik]

In every war there are things done with honour, other with shame. If you fight for just cause, you are honorable. If you stay in order and do as much as you can for good society, you are honorable. Honour is only thing you can have after you die. That's why we call much war heroes brave. Honorable battles are fought today too. Loss of honour is when you're caught and pray for a life. Also, Taliban mujaheeds fought honorably against USA or Russians. Shameful war was that one on Balkan, were soldiers terrorized civilians to weaken the enemy. That's why we don't call barbarians, recent or ancient, honorable.

[The_Sadukar]

Form my code of honour, on the topic of honour, page 37

"...honour is to be loyal to yor allies/freinds, polite to strangers and be trecherus to your enemies."

Yes I have actuley written my code of honour, in "The book of honour and honorable lives" (my code of honour)

No shit

[emprworm]

The last documented honorable moment in a war (that I know of) that involved a large army occured during World War 1 in Belguim on Christmas Eve of 1914. It is known by historians as the Christmas Truce of World War 1. This was the war of the trenches. An absolutely amazing story. Thousands of Germans and allied troops came out of their trenches to exchange gifts, drink together, sing christmas carols and light christmas trees- even turning the no-mans land between the trenches into a soccer field and playing Germans Vs. Allies soccer while troops from both sides cheered!! UNBELIEVABLE. LOL They eat dinner together on Christmas night, and then a few hours later, they resumed killing each other.

One of the men at this amazing event was a young corporal named Adolph Hitler.

read about this rediculously unbelievable honorable moment during the bloodbath of a brutal war:

http://www.pastforward.ca/perspectives/Dec_212001.htm

[ordos45]

since when are you english philip?

Umm...I'm not, but hey, sometimes I confuse my British and American spellings.

As for the Christmas Truce, that is amazing. I can just imagine these guys playing soccer on fields in between barb wire and machine guns.

[emprworm]

war really is sick. unfortunately, it is sometimes necessary to prevent something that could be worse. having said that, I find that it is a trajedy that things like the Geneva conventions are not obeyed and that no honor is left in combat.

[Edric O]

When we build nuclear weapons specifically for mass slaughter of civilians, what honour could possibly be left?

[emprworm]

i think nuclear weapons are built more for deterrence than anything else. no one (other than a maniac dictator state) would ever even consider using a nuclear weapon. Its just a bunch of little boys grown up into adults. A nuclear threat doesn't worry me in the slightest. Its the bilogicial threat that scares me to death.

[Edric O]

Does Hiroshima ring a bell?