Alright so as you can see unless of course you cannot read english that I am on the last book of the series of Alex Rider. I just started reading the last book Scorpia Rising By Anthony Horowitz and I must say that so far it isn't very promising, but then again I just started.
Anyway In my book so far there has been a huge battle in the Museum of London and about 17 out of 50 soldiers have died a rather weird way in war. Many of these soldiers were injected with the tip of a very expensive cane. So during this battle the museum was destroyed and many innocent people were killed in cross fire. This just made me think a lot about how in some cases during war casualties are allowed and many important places are allowed to be destroyed.
And when are these things allowed in war? What do the circumstances have to be in order for this to be allowed? In the recent killing of Osama Bin Laden casualties were not allowed and the U.S navy seals made sure that they wouldn't be any. And the United States government decided not to bomb the compound so many important pieces of information was not destroyed.
So... When are these protocols allowed? As I said before do the circumstances have to be too high? Do the circumstances have to be save the world or allow the world to be destroyed (Which seems to be a lot of the cases in this book), and why is this person in the book so important that this was allowed to be taken, and a wonderful museum allowed to be destroyed.
I really like how you related the book to the recent killing of Osama Bin ladin. as I was reading this I was about to say it sounded sort of related to Osama's death. And then I saw that you had made the connection, so I really agree with you on that point. I also think that you should expand more on when you think that causualties should be allowed and why. all in all, great post.
ReplyDeletethere's a new alex rider? I have to get that!
ReplyDeleteGreat post ames! The questions you asked are really interesting. Unfortunately, sometimes they are questions I would rather not think about. Generally I would like to think it is wrong to kill civilians no matter what the situation. I can only ever think about their families who are never going to see their son, daughter, mother, father, husband etc. ever again. Then again, if it would save more lives, maybe it's right. But should those families have to lose someone just so some others don't have to? My brain is going to explode! Seriously amazing post! Your ask some really interesting questions! (And congrats on being an all star mentor!)
ReplyDeleteI think this is an interesting world question, and I think its good that you included current events of Osamas death in your post...I love how you ask tons of questions but I think you should try to answer it a little better.
ReplyDeleteGood post,
Deaaaaaaaaa
really great post Ames! i really like your text to world connection, and how you incorporated osama bin ladens death into your post. Also, you have asked some really great philosophical questions. To answer them, personally, i would say that that the circumstances have to be high for the police to risk civilian life for a mission because human life is irreplaceable.
ReplyDeleteI thought that this was a very great blogpost. You did a really good job. I liked how you used current events and you asked very interesting philospohical questions.
ReplyDeleteGreat job Ames! I really like how you connected the book to the killing of Osama Bin Laden. I think that you should of gave your opinion in your post.
ReplyDelete