The most important question out of all the ethical questions in my opinion is about the use of human life during wars or violent conflicts. Basically, how should and shouldn't humans be used in war (?), is the main 'overall' question being asked here.
The next logical step in consideration with this question is to create lots of other 'sub-questions' about various situations that take place during war operations; meaning that you ask a question or multiple questions about what should be done for each of those various instances.
The point of all these questions is to define a set of standards from the answers as to how things are to be done in various situations that come up during the war.
As you can imagine the read may be long and boring for most people besides those that actually need the info in which case it still might long and boring but necessary, nonetheless.
The main point that needs to be taken out of this first section is that questions need to be asked about all the various war 'situations' that could take place and then a set of ethics needs to be layed out based on the answers to all these questions.
As you can imagine the question of how tax funds are used needs to come up as well when asking all these various 'ethical' questions as the gross misuse of tax funds for the sake of a few company's profits in reality means the slowing down of the further development of the nation or nations using the tax funds as well as the lessened ability of the army that receives weapons from these tax funds, as they would get more if there were strict laws that limited profits.
But don't get me wrong though, I'm not against the use of tax funds to defend people's lives, even if its other countries we're defending, the main point of this section is that tax funds should be used much more ethically or wisely; meaning that massive amounts of profit should not be cut on the production of war weaponry.
How military equipment is used is also a major factor in this conversation about fighting a much more ethical war. This topic, however, is not that easy to discuss as the discussion would reveal some important fighting methodologies. A main point that needs to be made here however is that certain use of equipment should be considered too dangerous and not allowed and that whole entire lists of what can and can't be done need to be written to govern all type of military equipment use. This being the same scenario as with how to use humans where lots of questions are asked and a set of standards is developed from the answers.
Combat operations are what gets the job done but how should they be planned and executed and to what standards? Obviously you can probably guess what the answer is by now after reading to this point in the article so I'll just quickly make a summation of how this needs to be handled;
All operations need to be planned and executed according to strict safety guidelines for humans, equipment and property. All operational standards need to be checked and re-checked before and after all executed operations. All proper considerations need to be taken according to previously agreed upon standards for the execution of combat operations. All parties involved in the execution of combat operations need to be held accountable for all the decisions made during said operation according to beforehand set standards.
Templar Battalions already has a serious set of standards 'envisioned' but not yet in full written form. This will be on its way but may not be shown to anyone except those who need to see it in its entirety.
This is something that is already understood by the overall world's population through the Geneva Conventions; people are supposed to be treated with certain degrees of respect and codes of conduct BUT are these standards truly ethical in all their respects?
In my opinion the Geneva Conventions are not a 'righteous enough' set of standards that take effective enough measures to truly protect human populations or create an atmosphere where human populations could quickly be saved from conflicts then be placed right into situations where they live normal again almost without interruption.
As you can probably tell this website is written from somewhat of a 'Christian' standpoint more than a corporate entity standpoint. By this I mean that each human life is precious rather than 'the ends justify the means' type of mentality towards my fellow man. There are no compromises where I stand from! There are no compromises for the KNIGHTS TEMPLAR 2020 .ORG OR TEMPLAR BATTALIONS! The ethical treatment of human lives during war is more like Christian charity than Geneva Conventions.
After wars are over the surviving soldiers have to go on and live out their lives but what kind of treatment they get for their services is really an ethical question and as you may understand by now Templar Battalions' solution this 'problem' may not be the same as what is currently happening.
Because there are so many aspects to any person's life the discussions for what the ethical treatments of soldiers after a war is can go on for days. There are, however, a few points that should be understood.
Each soldier that served and was injured should have access to long term medical and other types of help, including complete support from the state if they are seriously injured.
But like I said there's too many aspects that can be discussed here and a serious set of standards needs to be outlined for how help is given to soldiers, their families and more.
For a business making a profit is what is key to success but how much profits should be made during a war where many lives are being effected is another important question of ethics as well.
Templar Battalions unfortunately differs greatly with the current profit margins being cut on war machinery by the world's arms suppliers and we're not just talk either, the solutions are brewing, in the making and hopefully up to bat sooner then later.
The most important thing to understand from this section is that gross profiteering during wartime can be a very significant hinderance for operational abilities and will only stretch wars out rather then end them quickly.
Also it is important to understand that not only should there be rules for controlling profits on war supplies but also humanitarian supplies and anything else associated with aid or help in relation to war as well. Meaning that if food or other supplies are purchased as aid that the companies selling it should be limited to the amount of profits cut.
Now that the war is here what of the the future created by it? This question of ethics is very hard to understand a straight answer for as no one really knows the exact multiplicity of outcomes available from such a large scale conflict. Nonetheless, a 'set of standards' needs to exist for this realm as well!
Questions need to be asked and wise answers need to be found for all possible outcomes so that proper planning is in place at all times.
The planning mentioned here being one that leads to little time waisted, the least possible amount of money waisted and the solutions for all the problems caused by the war directly and indirectly being solved quickly so to continue in the growth and development of the world and the section of the world most effected specifically.
The MOST important thing to be taken out of this little introduction is that the longer the war goes on and the more money and time is waisted the more this blocks certain other sectors of society from advancing meaning that taxes that would have been used for growth are now being used for war and the longer this goes on for the greater the 'butterfly effect' will be on overall society.
After reading this far you should already have a really good understand as to what this 'article' is getting at. The overall effort trying to be created here can be summarized in the statement 'QUICK SOLUTIONS FOR LASTING PEACE'.
Meaning that if all of the above ethical standards are met an atmosphere can exist where quick solutions are implemented in wars to make peace happen.
The effectiveness of these solutions can eventually possibly lead to lasting peace where the world's 'aggressors' fear to any longer move forward with aggression into other countries DUE to the fact that such 'QUICK SOLUTIONS' exist to push them back and out.
The scary 'on the ground' reality of the current Ukrainian / Russian conflict is that the war ethics written of here so far may not be implemented into the military structure quickly, if even at all, unless the laws of UA change.
The good thing is, however, that UA ia a democratic society where petitions from the people do get accepted by higher levels of government and laws are written or re-written from which then changes can be made accordingly to the pre-existing structures that govern military order.
This way, through the writing of petitions and new laws, is the first realistic way to try to begin to effect change in the manner in which wars are being fought but the implementation of the new laws still needs to be realistic in an of themselves.
In the end the final implementation of the war ethics spoken of in this 'article' may take a few to many years to become fully active within any military structure, especially one that is actively fighting like UA's so the next realistic approach is to start to build real fighting units that already use these ethical methods.
Hopefully the plan to attempt to change UA's and all of the free world's fighting methods to ones that are ethical according to the here written standards will work and all the people of these places and their children may never have to fight in a war or wars where such methods aren't used ever again. But for now it is also smart to make an attempt to create a fighting force that uses these ethics and methods while trying to gain ground through the political route as well.
Even though this page is only an introduction to some of the concepts that, time permitting, I'll be able to write about in greater detail later, what was introduced here is enough to more than spark the imagination.
At this point you should be drawing your own logical conclusions about what you've read so far but I wanted to write this next section anyway to bring to light some of the logical conclusions that I feel should be drawn from War Ethics For The 21st Century.
If you haven't ever studied logic in your life I'll just give a really quick introduction to it now; basically, logic is something you try to use to reason out if something may or may not be true, or may even be partially true based on certain variables.
The main point that I am getting at here is that I want you to reason out what I am saying throughout this whole article and website and then come to your own real 'logical conclusions' rather any other kind of conclusions.
For example, as the title states there should be logical conclusions that are drawn from reading this article meaning that you should be asking yourself various questions and then trying to use 'logic' to see if you can come to the same reasoning as I did or your own.
With that being stated, the reasoning that I have come to and which made me write this article and want to do more is that; IF an 'ethical fighting force' existed that used a 'set of standards' to conduct operations AND all those standards were in line with what is written on this website and elsewhere by me, [ meaning that all the standards that I wrote about ], are met, THEN the possibility may exist that Russia and other aggressor armies may be removed quickly with the loss of little life, the use of less money and the waisting of less time.
So basically for you, as the reader and person who wants to help UA, this means that IT IS LOGICAL and worth the time to try to make an attempt to create such a fighting force as it may dramatically change the future of wars; how they are fought or if they happen at all, [ due to fear from aggressor states ].
Nextly, as you can imagine, there would be many steps of logical reasoning that need to be thought out for such an army to exist. How should it operate(?), what kind of weapons should be used(?), how should this be done and that be done(?) and so on and so forth and all these steps of logical reasoning would all be reasoned out the same way as the example above using the conditional IF / THEN model.
The scope of this article is not to go into all the 'paths' of logical conclusions that will need to be drawn to create such a fighting force as most of them will be secret from the public anyway. However, what I can do is take you through some logical reasoning based on the above introduced ethical war concepts meaning that I'll apply a logical statements to each of them;
01: THE ETHICAL USE OF HUMANS IN WAR
IF a set of ethics was created that governed how humans are allowed to be used in wars AND those ethics created a much 'safer' fighting environment where less people died or got hurt THEN; less humans would die and get hurt in wars and more humans may want to join the fighting force.
02: THE ETHICAL USE OF TAX FUNDS IN WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed the use of tax funds during wars AND those ethics set forth very strict rules which allowed no waisting of tax funds AND those ethics also leaned towards helping 'victim' nations remove the enemy and rebuild their countries THEN less tax funds may be used during wartime but with a greater effect then before to both remove the enemy and help the repair process.
#2
IF the collective west believes in peace and the upholding of other democratic nations' security and border integrity
AND they also don't want to waist lots of time, tax money and people live's
AND they want to find quicker ways to solve real war situations
THEN then a solution where less tax funds are used to achieve more is one that needs to be 'AT LEAST' thoroughly explored and then 'FULLY IMPLEMENTED' when found logical and feasible.
03: THE ETHICAL USE OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT IN WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed the use of military equipment during wars AND those ethics had very strict rules of conduct concerning safety and protection THEN less military equipment may be waisted through dangerous use and lack of protection.
04: ETHICAL COMBAT OPERATIONS IN WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed combat operations AND those ethics contained very strict rules of conduct concerning safety, defense and protection AND those ethics had very strict rules concerning the use of only precise & effective weapons THEN a fighting force could be created based on these ethics which may be much more effective at doing its job against the enemy then any currently existing army or force.
05: THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF CIVILIAN POPULATIONS IN WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed treatment of civilian populations during war AND those ethics contained very strict guidelines as to how civilians were helped to relocate and to recover THEN a system could exist that almost nullifies the effects that an invasion could have on a human populace in the first place.
06: THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF SOLDIERS AFTER WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed the treatment of soldiers after a war or after their service AND those ethics contained very strict guidelines for helping soldiers and injured soldiers as well as their families THEN all the injured soldiers would have a much more serious chance at being able to live a good life even if they were too seriously injured to be able to perform work.
07: ETHICAL PROFIT MAKING DURING WAR TIME
IF there was a set of ethics that governed profit making during war time AND those ethics contained very strict guidelines where companies are NOT allowed to make major profits during wartime THEN much more military equipment could be purchased for less tax money and the possibility of wars ending much more quickly would become increased.
08: ETHICAL TIME, MONEY & FUTURE PLANNING FROM WAR
IF there was a set of ethics that governed how governments reacted to wars AND those ethics contained very strict guidelines which made sure that there was thorough planning for the future, in reaction to a war, THEN the west would be much more prepared to deal with possible future outcomes which stem from war, meaning that the preparation that resulted form the planning could save great amounts of money.
09: QUICK SOLUTIONS FOR LASTING PEACE
IF there was a set of ethics that governed all the overall efforts used to end wars as well as solve all the problems that are created by wars AND those ethics contained very strict guidelines which made sure that all taken efforts were to be quick and cost and life effective THEN all the problems caused by wars could be solved quickly and the solutions could lead to lasting peace and even fear from possible aggressor nations to attempt any further 'aggressions'.
As you can see once you apply simple logical statements to the ethical concepts in this article you begin to understand that it indeed may be logical and within sound reason to attempt to create a real set of 'war ethics' and then apply them into the way that wars are 'handled'.
As also stated above the implementation of such ethics needs to be handled realistically which could mean many different things but one thing it means for sure is that no army will be able to change quickly into such a new 'fighting stance'.
So then, what next? IF the war ethics spoken of in this article can't be applied really quickly to any army AND the war might last longer with more casualties and money and time lost as a result THEN what CAN be done to make a quick attempt to remedy the situation?
Like stated above as well, a new fighting force needs to be created and introduced which abides by the war ethics written of here while at the same time political moves need to be made which attempt to turn the overall army in to such a force, 'realistically over time'.
FINAL NOTES: When this was first written some of it was in ALL CAPS and when I did a 'mass change' into lowercase I didn't check if anything needed to get capitalized anyway. Also I don't have anyone to proof read for me as well. I'll check all this over with time permitting.
As with all other writing, there needs to be a next chapter and for War Ethics For The 21st Century IT HAS TO BE Templar Battalions as these are the direct solution to this serious needs brought up in War Ethics. In this next article you will see the introduction of an end times fighting force set to end war and bring peace. Read Now
Created with
Offline Website Creator