Posted on 09/27/2001 1:43:51 PM PDT by BADJOE
Would you rather only they knew it, and we were ignorant?
I am old and frail.
But be advised. Don't screw with me.
You are NOT old and frail. Now take that back!
"Playing dirty"... terrorism is "playing dirty."
The rules of "fair" combat were created in the Stone Age. Grognark the Mighty from the Belbar Tribe (fictional character) decided he wanted to be able to beat people up without getting his eyes gouged out or nasty teeth marks on his face, and all the other warriors agreed with him. This gave the warriors a monopoly on being able to beat up regular people--if a regular cavern dweller took on a warrior in a fair fight, he would get beaten 99% of the time. If the fight was "dirty," he stood a much better chance of winning.
This system of honor has been carried over from then to Medieval times, where we got Chivalry. It still exists today, professional armies are not allowed to use mustard gas or hollowpoint bullets. But if someone breaks into your home with intent to hurt you, I doubt you'll have any qualms about emptying a clip full of hollowpoints into them, even if all they have is a crowbar. That's "playing dirty," too.
Well, that is not exactly true. While technically knowing how to kill is obviously important, unless you are highly conditioned (or a sociopath) you will run into a lot of problems on the execution end.
Human beings are hardwired NOT to kill their own species. That is why even in blind rage we tend to hit with fists (a highly ineffective way of causing injury) when driving a thumb into the eye socket of an opponent would be infinitely more effective.
Killing gets easier as the you get "farther away" from your victim and the act - both figuratively and literally. It is much easier to push a button from an army base or airplane and drop a bomb that kills thousands than it is to walk up to someone with a Glock and shoot them in the face. Looking someone in the eyes and killing them with your bare hands (or a pencil) would we one of the harder things a human could be called upon to do.
You need both the knowledge and either a lack of humanity or extreme conditioning in order to overcome the natural resistance to kill in such a PRIMAL way even if your life is in immediate danger.
That said, assuming someone on the WTC planes had the knowledge and the conditioning it is probable they did not know the immediacy of the danger to the lives of themselves and their countrymen thus making this harder.
I love topics like this. You must read Loompanics like me.
This reminds me of the line in "Broadway Danny Rose," when Mia Farrow tells Woody Allen that her former husband was shot in the eyes.
"You mean he's blind?" asked Woody.
"No, dead," said Mia.
"Oh, that's right, cause the bullets keep going through..."
Speaking of killing people correctly, few of us appreciates the proper way of inflicting a truly deadly neck wound.
The cliche you see in the movies is the razor-like slash across the neck. This is not how to cut someone's throat. It's much better to plunge the knife deeply into the neck, then TWIST it inside the neck, and THEN pull it out. Even more effective with a serrated, notched blade.
You get much more blood loss much more quickly, plus it's almost impossible to repair surgically. A mere "slash" can (sort-of) be contained by binding the wound with cloth while treatment is found.
It's just one of those things...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.