Child soldiers

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by snowflake, Dec 23, 2008.

  1. snowflake

    snowflake Registered Member

    The majority of wars today are intrastate conflicts fought with small arms.
    And the disturbing news is that wherever such conflicts take place, many of those fighting are children..... Snatched from their homes by armed men who force them to carry ammunition, fight and kill, beaten if they refuse.

    Turning these children into killers, taking away their childhood. Is this what a war consists of now? Should children be fighting?

    Once a child has become a soldier, that's where the childhood ends.

    Should there be rules forbidding this to happen no matter what country the child is in. No child deserves to be put through this.
    English-Emo-Boy likes this.

  2. BigBob

    BigBob Registered Member

    You can't really make a law forbidding children from fighting in places like Iraq where no stable government is. I mean we could always have a U.N. Conference to talk about it and make a rule forbidding it from war, but how will the honestly enforce it?

    I don't think children should be forced to fight because as you said, it takes away from their childhood and could severely fuck one of them up in the head if they are young and unstable.
  3. Cait

    Cait Oh, poppycock.

    It is the way their culture is. There's nothing we can do to stop it. They might think we're crazy for waiting until someone is 18 to send them to war as much as we think they are for not.
  4. BigBob

    BigBob Registered Member

    To be honest, they just don't give a fuck who they send out to fight, they just do what they got to do. You can say it's part of their culture, but that doesn't mean we as a WORLD can't try and stop it.
  5. Merc

    Merc Certified Shitlord V.I.P. Lifetime

    You have to ask yourself what "childhood" is. All it really is is a made up period of innocence that isn't as necessary as we all make it out to be. Look back a hundred years when children were allowed to be workers, basically when they were seen as "little adults" and not children. It can be said that both seeing them as little adults and as children are great and bad ideas. Because as little adults, they are accepted into the world easier and get a better sense of the world quicker however as children, they're allowed to enjoy a time of basic lack of responsibility and learn it at a slower pace. People were fine centuries ago even with the lack of "childhood" which in itself is a fairly recent term.

    How much is "childhood" really worth after all? Should kids be going to war? Probably not. First and foremost, they wouldn't make good fighters unless the opposing side is not expecting them. I mean, who would shoot at a battalion of children? Secondly, they just aren't built for it.
  6. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    While I agree that there are probably advantages and disadvantages to varying ages of reaching "adulthood", it's important to realize that being deemed an adult at a younger age may have been from necessity more than what would be ideal for the young. If you only have a 40 year life expectancy, it encourages society to consider you an adult sooner.
  7. Merc

    Merc Certified Shitlord V.I.P. Lifetime

    That had nothing to do with it though. People only acknowledged two stages of life, almost an adult and adult and it did almost nothing to children. People constructed the idea of childhood because they thought children needed it and perhaps some do. But say a 12-year boy wanted to work because he wanted to earn money but his local law prevented anyone under 14 from working? That was my case. My parents couldn't give us an allowance, so I worked under the table. My "childhood" remained intact.
  8. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    That's not the same as being a suicide bomber though... I mean.. it's just not the same thing at all.

    Children should never be forced into becoming soldiers, in an ideal world. How can that be enforced though? The very act of war is one group of people trying to enforce something on another, more or less. In order to enforce it you'd have to send soldiers to fight the child soldiers. The types of countries that use child soldiers are not following UN sanctions and the Geneva convention in the first place.
  9. Merc

    Merc Certified Shitlord V.I.P. Lifetime

    I'm not comparing the two, Hybrix. I understand the atrocity that is child soldiers. I was defending my point about childhood. Besides, this happens in our country too (complete with the whole "army of God" thing), except they don't send their children out to kill. But they certainly brainwash and guilt the shit out of them.
  10. micfranklin

    micfranklin Eviscerator

    [QUOTE='snowflake"]Should there be rules forbidding this to happen no matter what country the child is in. No child deserves to be put through this. [/QUOTE]

    Yes and there already are rules/laws that forbid this in existence now, but they're not being enforced in a lot of countries. And it's a sign that a country has serious problems when they send children younger than my brother into their deaths. First thing that comes to my mind is the Sierra Leone Civil War.

Share This Page