Weapon development contract - moral objection?

Brian8bit said:
I hope you reported that domestic terrorist to the proper authorities.
Click to expand...

Well the person in question was arrested and eventually acquitted and the rest of them (they taped the whole thing) face being freed due to some law which states that a crime which prevents another crime (apparently the release systems are allegedly used in gaza by the israelis), effectively isn't a crime.
 
Mr Jack said:
Yeah, that's just not true though, is it? The asymmetry of warfare is what lets out boys slaughter thousands of Afghans and Iraqis for very little come back. If our equipment was matched by theirs, there would have been no war in either country.
Click to expand...

Actually its very true. The majority of weapons projects are to reduce the "death factor" of weapons. Weapons are designed to neutralise a target, not to destroy. A lot of guided bombs carry very little explosives and rely almost exclusively on the kinetic impact to neutralise, for example, a power plant. If the ordnance can be dropped within 10cm of its designated target, theres no need for a big bang too.

The morality of developing guns is, in fact, very easy for most to get over. If someone is going to shoot at you, then shoot back - and if you have a better weapon for doing so (better in terms of you can put the bullet as close to where you want it as possible) then you've got a better chance of surviving that attack, and a better chance of only killing your intended target and not everything else around them.
 
I've thought about this as weapon systems development would be a viable career choice given my qualifications and I've come to the conclusion that I just couldn't do it. Even if my input was to save just one life they're still weapons at the end of the day, tools designed for the sole purpose of dealing misery, pain and death.
 
Gaijin said:
Well the person in question was arrested and eventually acquitted and the rest of them (they taped the whole thing) face being freed due to some law which states that a crime which prevents another crime (apparently the release systems are allegedly used in gaza by the israelis), effectively isn't a crime.
Click to expand...

That sounds odd. Smashing up the premises of a company carrying out legitimate business could be a crime, but what the Israelis do in Gaza doesn't come under UK law, I think.
 
I must be morally bankrupt, I would, I have in the past and it doesn't trouble me. As long as it'll put bread on the table and the system will in all probability never be used against British soldiers then I see no problem.
 
I probably would, it's a roof over my head and food on the table. We do morally objectionable things every day. Our computers contain gold that were mined in Africa under inhumane conditions for example. IBM machines are made in Israel with minerals and resources that are stolen from Palestinian land with no payment in return. Our clothes were made with underpaid child labour in India. Our iPhones were made by a company that has a massive spate of suicides. All those lovely wedding rings and watches we like to show on these forums were made with parts acquired with blood money. I could go on and on and on. Point at a random object in your room and I can tell you who died for it.

Just being a white man in England is one long series of unethical tribulations. Our lifestyles were done off the backs of the poor and the impoverished and anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
 
Those Stop The War burks at my university attempted to ban Boeing and BAE Systems from having any involvement with the university. If they succeeded, which they almost did the end result would have been many students wouldn't have the finances to continue their studies in various engineering areas. The university would lose out on vast amounts of funding and subsequent equipment which can be used throughout the university to help many and ultimately it would cause my university to go down the drains.
People that have some sort of objection to these companies are quite simply burks.

No time for them when they pull stunts like that.

In direct answer to your question, of course I would take the job and not have any moral or ethical dilemmas.
 
I'd have no problem taking it, would even happily think of up of new ways to kill more people more accurately.

End of the day if we are using the weapons system then I would figure the other side deserves it, so I would have no problem contributing to it's development
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom