"Pro or Con"

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
10,725
Location
CONUS
I had an idea I wanted to run by you guys.

I'd like to try an experiment in critical thinking. I will post a topic, and members of the board who choose to participate will choose "pro" or "con," and have to defend their point of view through logic, research, and rhetoric. The topics will be from current headlines, and will be related to SOF, the military, terrorism, or law enforcement in some manner.

Here's the catch: you don't know what the topic is until you declare yourself "pro" or "con." Potentially having to defned the opposite point of view on a topic is precisely the goal of the exercise. This will force people to consider other points of view, and will help you "know the enemy" on contemporary topics.

If we get a couple of folks interested I'll post the first topic and we'll see how it works out. Consider it a mini-case study ;)

Anyone want to give it a shot?
 

ARS-031

Canuckistanian
Verified Sniper
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
30
Sounds like a good way to make an idiot of myself, sign me up eh :cool:
 

car

Old NCO (Ret)
Rest In Peace
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
2,403
Location
In Transit
Did this same exercise in the last few weeks of language school - but there was an extra twist - we had to do it "in language." Made us all better linguists IMO.

So, hell yeah! I'm in, boss!

SS CJ2 SGM :)
 

x SF med

the Troll
Verified SOF
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,841
Location
Not far from the south of Canada, 'Murica!
SSMP
SOF Mentor
Too late, we already have a "pro" so you're the first volunteer for "con." Thanks for signing up!

Hey Copper, I ain't no con, y'hear? Hey Bugsy, get the Copper...

Ok, I guess I have been Soviet Voluntold where I need to be.... I suppose the SGM will be proto and I will be anti.

What is the subject? What are the parameters?
 

x SF med

the Troll
Verified SOF
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,841
Location
Not far from the south of Canada, 'Murica!
SSMP
SOF Mentor
Ok, I'll play.

The SGM needs to be on the other side of the issue. Formal Reasoning, and Formal logic rules to apply? Ad-Hominem attacks are verboten, nichts wehr? Points for GSP and use of archaic verbiage?

Set the Parameters and rules. Set the subject. Set the time frame for the initial argument to be submitted.
 

car

Old NCO (Ret)
Rest In Peace
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
2,403
Location
In Transit
Ok, I'll play.

The SGM needs to be on the other side of the issue. Formal Reasoning, and Formal logic rules to apply? Ad-Hominem attacks are verboten, nichts wehr? Points for GSP and use of archaic verbiage?

Set the Parameters and rules. Set the subject. Set the time frame for the initial argument to be submitted.

Why do you SF Medic types always wanna oppose a SGM? Especially an MI SGM? You're at such an intellectual disadvantage that I would think, well, it does no good to tell you what I think.....:doh:}:-)

Oh, and....formal this and formal that be damned......it's about critical thinking.......generations, old Soldier, generations.........

BTW, I'm on the opposite side of the Troll, whatever side that may be. Pro, I think......

So......what's the subject, sir?
 

x SF med

the Troll
Verified SOF
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,841
Location
Not far from the south of Canada, 'Murica!
SSMP
SOF Mentor
Why do you SF Medic types always wanna oppose a SGM? Especially an MI SGM? You're at such an intellectual disadvantage that I would think, well, it does no good to tell you what I think.....:doh:}:-)

Oh, and....formal this and formal that be damned......it's about critical thinking.......generations, old Soldier, generations.........

BTW, I'm on the opposite side of the Troll, whatever side that may be. Pro, I think......

So......what's the subject, sir?


Truth trees and formal logic at 20 paces, you overeducated retired redneck.

Mara- you may post the subject at your leisure.
 

ARS-031

Canuckistanian
Verified Sniper
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
30
Ill jump on the Pro bandwagon... cause quite frankly, that's what I am gents :rolleyes:
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
10,725
Location
CONUS
PRO CON
ARS-031 MetalMom
Whiplash CAR
X SF Med J.A.B.
Firemedic Ranger Psych
RacingKitty Marauder06

Here's the assignment:

1) view the 60 Minutes video posted here: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6160161nhtm
2) if you are "pro," you are writing from a "pro-American" point of view. Explain why the shooting in the video was justified. If you are "con," you are writing from an anti-American point of view. Explain why the shooting was not justified.

Remember that the assignment is to support the point of view you have been assigned, not to support your personal point of view on this subject.

I'm going to close this thread and reopen it tomorrow night. you can post your responses then.

After the responses are posted, using your own powers of reason, critique the opposing points of view and attempt to poke holes in their logic.

Remember that this is an intellectual exercise, anyone with thin skin or who can't respect the point of view of others should probably not partake.

Good luck, should be fun!
 

ARS-031

Canuckistanian
Verified Sniper
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
30
Way to go, let the Canuck take the first jump for the PRO side.

1.) Soldier followed NATO wide general checkpoint force escalation

Warning Shots are standard operating procedure for any situation in an attempt to prevent an escalation of force as long as there is a percieved threat. A Truck loaded with of age appearing men, that is not slowing or stopping, is a percieved threat. Considerably more so for a 2 man team with a hasty vehicle check point, and, a small distant support net.

2.) The locals are well versed in vehicle checkpoint protocol

NATO/ISAF forces have been deployed to Afghanistan for almost a decade. All militaries use a similar warning system at vehicle check points. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to expect the locals know how to proceed when confronted with a situation such as the one presented. The driver of the vehicle reasonably should have known to slow down and come to a stop prior to the warning shots being fired. Having not stopped, the driver is the one responsible for initiating the warning shots.

3.) The SF soldier appears to have followed lawful Rules of Engagement for the situation

Almost all ROE's for vehicle checkpoint operations allow for a warning shot prior to force escalation. ROE's are passed down inevitably from the brass, and that being said, justify the shooters actions in the unfortunate event.
 
Top