الله@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months ago‘Disposable’ operatives for hire are a new menace for western countrieswww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square28linkfedilinkarrow-up193arrow-down14
arrow-up189arrow-down1external-link‘Disposable’ operatives for hire are a new menace for western countrieswww.theguardian.comالله@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agomessage-square28linkfedilink
minus-squareMiller@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up68arrow-down1·4 months agoThey are called mercenaries and the practice is as old as war.
minus-squareCmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·4 months agoThere are tons of mercenary companies working for the US Government too.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down15·4 months agoIt’s like saying that a muzzle loading musket and an assault rifle are the same thing.
minus-squareMiller@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·4 months agoYou are just talking about scale, they are both guns.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down16·4 months agoSo, if you personally were going into combat, you’d be happy to have the 1700s single shot musket instead of a modern weapon? Next you’ll be saying that two tin cans connected by a string is as good as a modern landline.
minus-squareMiller@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·4 months agoI am not really sure you understand how language works.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down18·4 months agoOne way it works is by evolving over time. An idea that seems to elude you.
minus-squareParlimentOfDoom@piefed.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·4 months agoYou’re the one who seems confused that not working for a corporation doesn’t make doing violence for payment less professional or mercenary…
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down5·4 months agoI don’t know who you think you’re replying to. I’m commenting to Miller. His take is that a weapon is a weapon, mine is that there’s a lot of difference between a spear and a tank.
minus-squareParlimentOfDoom@piefed.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·4 months agoYou. I’m responding to you. You’re not getting it.
minus-squareCmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·4 months agoDo you have first hand knowledge of the work these mercenaries do versus the work of western mercenaries? Your entire argument is premised upon having said knowledge.
minus-squareDagwoodIII@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down6·4 months agoI think you replied to the wrong commenter. I’m having a beef with Miller about how the meaning of the word mercenary has changed over time.
They are called mercenaries and the practice is as old as war.
There are tons of mercenary companies working for the US Government too.
It’s like saying that a muzzle loading musket and an assault rifle are the same thing.
You are just talking about scale, they are both guns.
So, if you personally were going into combat, you’d be happy to have the 1700s single shot musket instead of a modern weapon?
Next you’ll be saying that two tin cans connected by a string is as good as a modern landline.
I am not really sure you understand how language works.
One way it works is by evolving over time.
An idea that seems to elude you.
You’re the one who seems confused that not working for a corporation doesn’t make doing violence for payment less professional or mercenary…
I don’t know who you think you’re replying to.
I’m commenting to Miller.
His take is that a weapon is a weapon, mine is that there’s a lot of difference between a spear and a tank.
You. I’m responding to you. You’re not getting it.
Do you have first hand knowledge of the work these mercenaries do versus the work of western mercenaries? Your entire argument is premised upon having said knowledge.
I think you replied to the wrong commenter.
I’m having a beef with Miller about how the meaning of the word mercenary has changed over time.