• Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    You’re giving me another singular example that i can probably nitpick. I’m giving you thousands. You’re not familiar with the success of this strategy to recruit kids , as you said in a previous comment, because it doesn’t happen where you live. It doesn’t happen because people don’t feel the need to, and kids don’t want to do that by default. The radicalization didn’t happen because someone came and said, “Hey kid, wanna get paid?”. It happened over the course of decades as kids grew up with missiles flying over their heads repeatedly and their friends and families dying. What did you expect these kids to do?

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You’re not familiar with the success of this strategy to recruit kids

      And you are? How did you become familiar with it? Or is this just a guess on your part?

      • Sundial@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It’s pretty obvious, man. I literally just explained why people like you and me, who live in a developed country, don’t really see it happening.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Sure. Apart from the specific times I mentioned where you do see it happening. And all the other times you see it happening.

          And it still doesn’t make child soldiers either moral or excusable.

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            18 hours ago

            One. You gave me one example. I gave you thousands.

            I never said it was moral or excusable. All I said is, what did you expect would happen given what we’re doing to them. You have a lot of anger over the people forced to do bad things for survival but not against the ones who created the situation where they need to do these bad things. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to understand?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              18 hours ago

              I gave you two actually. I can give you more.

              You have a lot of anger over the people forced to do bad things for survival

              Ah, so they are being forced. Thank you, that’s what I was saying.

              By the way, the idea that the only way you can survive is die on the battlefield doesn’t make much sense.

              • Sundial@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                18 hours ago

                No, you gave me one. I explained why the first one actually helped prove my point. Which is why you provided the second. And I’m too tired to read that person’s biography to point to why he actually did it and give him some kind of justification. Unless you can give me some kind of substantive example where there are a huge number of kids in developed countries who are having happy lives you’re point here is not justified.

                Ah, so they are being forced

                Now you’re just not even arguing in good faith here.

                By the way, the idea that the only way you can survive is die on the battlefield doesn’t make much sense.

                Is this your way of dismissing their suffering and their choices to defend themselves even in the face of overwhelming odds?