Lets play a game HL

[Hood Critic]

we're going to call it "The Moral High Ground"

Purpose: To pit your moral beliefs against your practicality.

Rules: Provide a scenario or give your take on a previously posted scenario. Scenarios must include a 'moral' choice AND a 'practical' choice. Can not include real names, places, people, etc. to prevent any liability to you personally or the Coli. Feel free to be descriptive to paint a picture of those in your scenario, just avoid crossing the line.

We all know where we're at, so we know how this will ultimately go off the rails but lets try to be civil and respectful. I'll kick it off with a fairly common scenario:

You are an intelligence analyst tasked to verify and confirm intelligence in an ongoing major military conflict to provide targets for precision airstrikes. You have successfully verified a remote location in the theater of operations where one of the enemy combatants senior leadership often disappears to. You have discovered that this is where he's hiding his family but this is the only time he's not shrouded in the cloak of his security detail or his nation's intelligence. You solely have the ability to hand your leadership a major win against the opposing force, potentially even ending the conflict. But you are also in the position to eliminate multiple generations of a single family, maybe wiping it from the face of the earth entirely.

Does this location make it into your strike package?

 

[acri1]

we're going to call it "The Moral High Ground"

You are an intelligence analyst tasked to verify and confirm intelligence in an ongoing major military conflict to provide targets for precision airstrikes. You have successfully verified a remote location in the theater of operations where one of the enemy combatants senior leadership often disappears to. You have discovered that this is where he's hiding his family but this is the only time he's not shrouded in the cloak of his security detail or his nation's intelligence. You solely have the ability to hand your leadership a major win against the opposing force, potentially even ending the conflict. But you are also in the position to eliminate multiple generations of a single family, maybe wiping it from the face of the earth entirely.

Does this location make it into your strike package?

Nope, I'm not knowingly ordering a strike against civilians.

Would that make me a bad military analyst? Maybe, but that's why I'm just an IT guy

 

[OfTheCross]

we're going to call it "The Moral High Ground"

Purpose: To pit your moral beliefs against your practicality.

Rules: Provide a scenario or give your take on a previously posted scenario. Scenarios must include a 'moral' choice AND a 'practical' choice. Can not include real names, places, people, etc. to prevent any liability to you personally or the Coli. Feel free to be descriptive to paint a picture of those in your scenario, just avoid crossing the line.

We all know where we're at, so we know how this will ultimately go off the rails but lets try to be civil and respectful. I'll kick it off with a fairly common scenario:

You are an intelligence analyst tasked to verify and confirm intelligence in an ongoing major military conflict to provide targets for precision airstrikes. You have successfully verified a remote location in the theater of operations where one of the enemy combatants senior leadership often disappears to. You have discovered that this is where he's hiding his family but this is the only time he's not shrouded in the cloak of his security detail or his nation's intelligence. You solely have the ability to hand your leadership a major win against the opposing force, potentially even ending the conflict. But you are also in the position to eliminate multiple generations of a single family, maybe wiping it from the face of the earth entirely.

Does this location make it into your strike package?

This isn't much of a choice, as presented. That family is getting bombed to Bolivia

 

[Hood Critic]

Nope, I'm not knowingly ordering a strike against civilians.

Would that make me a bad military analyst? Maybe, but that's why I'm just an IT guy

Nothing wrong with that, your morals in this situation outweigh your practicality.

 

[Hood Critic]

This isn't much of a choice, as presented. That family is getting bombed to Bolivia

There's always a choice. @acri1 didn't hesitate to not bomb the family.

I mean you can simply say there wasn't enough to verify the intelligence sparing the family if you so choose.

 

[OfTheCross]

There's always a choice. @acri1 didn't hesitate to not bomb the family.

I mean you can simply say there wasn't enough to verify the intelligence sparing the family if you so choose.

I feel that...I'm just saying that if I'm doing something with a goal in mind, I'm taking the W now. In this case, the W involves bombing a family...

 

[Hood Critic]

Another scenario for the thread, difference is, this is a real one that has taken place today:

Do you agree with this? Would you have done the samething?

 

[ill]

Another scenario for the thread, difference is, this is a real one that has taken place today:

Do you agree with this? Would you have done the samething?

In wartime, yes.

During peace, no.

I think these examples ignore that war is ugly and generally there is no moral high ground. Survival > all else

 

[Hood Critic]

In wartime, yes.

During peace, no.

I think these examples ignore that war is ugly and generally there is no moral high ground. Survival > all else

I agree with your sentiment, but judging from the Ukraine vs Russia thread I sense there are others here who feel different.

 

[choc_cardigan]

In wartime, yes.

During peace, no.

I think these examples ignore that war is ugly and generally there is no moral high ground. Survival > all else

I agree with your sentiment, but judging from the Ukraine vs Russia thread I sense there are others here who feel different.

I'm in agreement with ill. In wartime scenarios these decisions are made all the time. I wouldn't want to be responsible for wiping out a generation. Buy if that's my job I signed up for I have to do those missions upon completion.
















If I want have morals I wouldn't sign up to be an intelligence analyst during wartime

 

[Hood Critic]

I'm in agreement with ill. In wartime scenarios these decisions are made all the time. I wouldn't want to be responsible for wiping out a generation. Buy if that's my job I signed up for I have to do those missions upon completion.


If I want have morals I wouldn't sign up to be an intelligence analyst during wartime

You don't get to decide when you can be an intelligence analyst, if its your job, its your job during peace and wartime.

 

[hashmander]

Another scenario for the thread, difference is, this is a real one that has taken place today:

Do you agree with this? Would you have done the samething?

exposing russian spies? shyt i'd do that in peace time.

 

[NZA]

if this war is an existential crisis, i would do it. if this is some kind of "police action" or whatever, no.

 

[Hood Critic]

if this war is an existential crisis, i would do it. if this is some kind of "police action" or whatever, no.

This is an interesting take. So the inevitable question is, what do you consider existential?

 

[NZA]

This is an interesting take. So the inevitable question is, what do you consider existential?

war of defense (we are being attacked in our own land) or a war for a vital resource that we historically had access to (such as the only river nearby) but a new power swooped in and tried to take it from us (such as building a damn).