Comment by jhallenworld
2 years ago
I imagine you get to tune the probability window of "person is >90% likely a Hamas terrorist" and choose how many innocent people you kill. Who set the window?
"Hamas terrorist" criteria: a male of fighting age, give higher weight to those congregating with others of fighting age. Basically take out a generation of Palestinian men and you're all set. Lovely.
>This sentence is horrifically dystopian... "in order to save time and enable the mass production of human targets without hindrances"
Reminds me of similar industrial thinking of a certain previous fascist government.
A war that would only kill 10% civilians would be a massive improvement over any recent conflict.
Well, that was a 10% failure rate supposedly on selecting the primary target of the attack.
The attack itself was allowed to have a 15x to 100x number of civilians killed depending on the supposed importance of the target.
I imagine that's very WW1-y and is a sign that the military leadership is just sending soldiers to die without care
Isn’t it close to Russian-Ukrainian war ratio?
That ratio is by all estimates lower than 10%.
UN Estimates, as of March 1st, are "10,675 [civilians] killed, 20,080 wounded" -- on both sides.
The number of soldiers killed on both sides (combined) is certainly no less than 100k, and might even exceed 400k.
In Gaza, more than 25,000 civilians have already been killed. https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/01/1145742
This is a callous, inexcusable massacre. By comparison with the Israelis, the Russians look like "gentle and parfait knights." But the former are presumably on our side, and the latter are our geopolitical opponents. So.
11 replies →
For every militant they correctly identify (90% of the time, they'd have us believe) and kill, they also kill dozens of innocents. This doesn't give them pause; on the contrary the Israeli public revels in the carnage and bring out lawn chairs to watch. It's genocide.
Many people in the west enjoy it too. Lots of Europeans and Americans don't like Muslims (or even Jews or just people who don't look 'white'), and they like turning on the news to find out how many have been killed each day because it wouldn't be acceptable to carry out in their own countries, especially in the era of DEI.
There's the two-wrongs-make-a-right atonement for the holocaust aspect on the German side and the promise of the rapture for Americans also.
Maybe most importantly willingness to show eager support for something that may seem 'bad' such as genocide functions as a shibboleth to display allegiance to one's political party and society because ultimately what's happening in the news has no deep significance for most westerners beyond that of a football match. Showing you're not an anti-semite is the most important thing one can do, and there's no better way to do that than support whatever the current Israeli government feels like doing (perhaps sparking a large regional conflict) and rounding up any Jewish people who object on charges of being race traitors.
>Basically take out a generation of Palestinian men and you're all set.
Now that we've established that this is horrific, please turn a small portion of your attention to American predictive policing systems (digital and not) and the circumstances that lead to mass incarceration (including the War on Drugs).
...and then target them at home along with their entire family.
But you see, if you kill just them, then their family would very likely get radicalized because of that, and then you'd have to kill them too, only some time later so it's just more efficient to do it in one fell swoop while you have the chance.
Of course it's perfectly ethical, why do you ask?
See i found this old book by this machiavelli guy that sums up our approach perfectly. He was really onto something here.
1 reply →