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.
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.