There is one choice, 0 votes for Auxiliar's debate

Genocide: effective?

  • In the desert...

    In desert countries, all that are necessary are missiles aimed at airports, water pumps, power stations, train stations, hospitals or ports and people can no longer sustain life. It seems to me, that this is much better in cost-benefit analysis than the establishment of official concentration camps, as Goeth constantly brings up in "Schindler's List." In this case, you don't even need to lose the real estate - the enemy is imprisoned in his own country, cowering in his own shelter with his bars protecting him from the barbarians.

    With places less dependent on mechanized civilization, such as East Timor, Cambodia, or Rwanda for example, concentration camps could go up. But, say, in the desert, are the effects _so_ different, though less expensive, of a well-planned bombing?

    Add a comment
  • :

 

None of the choices fit your opinion?  Add one →