I would like to join in your gesture of appreciation for that uncommonly fine contribution.Svartalf wrote:Clinton Huxley wrote:You'd need a large boar cannon for that.rEvolutionist wrote:The Brits should use pigs as live rounds. Shoot pigs at the enemy. They'd either die of the stink, or stop fighting and fry it up and eat it.^ I missed that one, though I looked for a nice pun. Stop hogging the wit.
It was shoat, but sweet.It does say so in the article.JimC wrote:Are they anaesthetised first?
On June 15, 1859, exactly thirteen years after the adoption of the Oregon Treaty, the ambiguity led to direct conflict. Lyman Cutlar, an American farmer who had moved onto the island claiming rights to live there under the Donation Land Claim Act, found a large black pig rooting in his garden. He had found the pig eating his tubers. This was not the first occurrence. Cutlar was so upset that he took aim and shot the pig, killing it. It turned out that the pig was owned by an Irishman, Charles Griffin, who was employed by the Hudson's Bay Company to run the sheep ranch. He also owned several pigs which he allowed to roam freely. The two had lived in peace until this incident. Cutlar offered $10 to Griffin to compensate for the pig, but Griffin was unsatisfied with this offer and demanded $100. Following this reply, Cutlar believed he should not have to pay for the pig because the pig had been trespassing on his land. (A possibly apocryphal story claims Cutlar said to Griffin, "It was eating my potatoes." Griffin replied, "It is up to you to keep your potatoes out of my pig.") When British authorities threatened to arrest Cutlar, American settlers called for military protection.
Military escalation
Brigadier-General William S. Harney, commanding the Dept. of Oregon, initially dispatched 66 American soldiers of the 9th Infantry under the command of Captain George Pickett to San Juan Island with orders to prevent the British from landing. Concerned that a squatter population of Americans would begin to occupy San Juan Island if the Americans were not kept in check, the British sent three warships under the command of Captain Geoffrey Hornby to counter the Americans. Pickett was famously quoted as saying defiantly, "We'll make a Bunker Hill of it," placing him in the national limelight. The situation continued to escalate. By August 10, 1859, 461 Americans with 14 cannon under Colonel Silas Casey were opposed by five British warships mounting 70 guns and carrying 2,140 men. During this time, no shots were fired.
The governor of the Colony of Vancouver Island, James Douglas, ordered British Rear Admiral Robert L. Baynes to land marines on San Juan Island and engage the American soldiers under the command of Brigadier-General Harney. (Harney's forces had occupied the island since July 27, 1859.) Baynes refused, deciding that "two great nations in a war over a squabble about a pig" was foolish. Local commanding officers on both sides had been given essentially the same orders: defend yourselves, but absolutely do not fire the first shot. For several days, the British and U.S. soldiers exchanged insults, each side attempting to goad the other into firing the first shot, but discipline held on both sides, and thus no shots were fired.
Well, they're not inflicting any pain on an anaesthetised pig... We kill animals for food, which I'm OK with, as long as it's done humanely (stunning and/or lightening fast)rEvolutionist wrote:Really?
I think this is inconsistent ethics.rEvolutionist wrote:I think it's way worse. Food is food. Medical research is arguably justifiable, although, not with highly intelligent animals (and rightly so). If these fucks want practice, then send them out with the paramedics on any weekend night in their nearest capital city.
I suspected you might say that. Seriously, send them to the US to train. Killing sentient animals for the purposes of enabling war is easily far more unethical than killing them for food.JimC wrote:I think this is inconsistent ethics.rEvolutionist wrote:I think it's way worse. Food is food. Medical research is arguably justifiable, although, not with highly intelligent animals (and rightly so). If these fucks want practice, then send them out with the paramedics on any weekend night in their nearest capital city.
Killing is killing. Doing so without a purpose, so simply for fun, is one thing. Doing so for a purpose is another. You may disagree with the particular purpose in the case of battlefield surgical practice; a vegetarian will disagree with the food-based purpose you are happy with...
And these are British soldiers - not many human gun-shot victims to practice on with the paramedics...
Now if it were American medics we were talking about, you may have a better argument...
The obvious solution is to breed intelligent and conscious pigs that really, really want to be eaten. This is not my original idea. Douglas Adams proposed it almost 40 years ago.rEvolutionist wrote:If they are highly intelligent and possess consciousness, then you've got to question whether it is right to be raising them to later kill. I kind of placate these feelings with the reality that I only eat pork once every two or three weeks. So I'm probably only responsible for the death of a pig every few years or so.
There's a lot of wageslaves waiting for their chance....rainbow wrote:Do we breed people that want to be shot?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests
