If we take Eric Hartman’s quote as a quote: „A place where young people who don’t know each other and don’t hate each other kill each other, war is due to the decision of old people who know each other and hate each other. , but don’t kill each other” we can compare the situation we are experiencing with the Gaza massacre. The transition has left a dent in the front as well. Technological advances are one of the main „things” in this somewhat chaotic new world order we are experiencing. We are no longer talking about conflicts with crossbows, we are talking about more powerful weapons that play a huge role in their support: technology.
According to the humanitarian aid organization the Red Cross, butterfly bullets, white phosphorus and anti-personnel mines are some of the weapons that international law prohibits from using. But how many of these hurdles have been met? Conflicts in the Palestinian territories at the hands of the occupation army have resulted in over 3,700 deaths in the Palestinian territories. Save the Children claims that every 15 minutes a Palestinian child is killed by weapons of mass destruction. Weapons, many of which are prohibited by IHL, and worst of all, weapons that have only one purpose: mass destruction of a population. We must remember that Israel has one of the countries with the largest active technological weapons and a very powerful intelligence service, such as the Mossad, which coordinates its activities with the Shabak, which is responsible for the internal affairs of Israel and the Palestinian territories. . The service receives more than $2.73 billion a year in funding to keep thousands of Palestinians in control. We are talking about millions of dollars to interrogate and kill civilians, but only 2 trucks of humanitarian aid can reach Gaza. only
2. So we talk about the great paradox of achieving the neutrality of science and technology in arms production (Medina Doménech and Rodríguez Alcázar, 2004) because militarism integrates the hierarchy of the social system, where one of the principles of pessimism and radicalism. In addition to the increase in the basic pillars, patriarchal and authoritarian society structure.
In this way, military groups see the only solution to problems is the use of force, normalizing it and making it the dominant form of conflict resolution. Therefore, a military culture is always steeped in violence. It is worth highlighting the impact of technological science, one of the areas of greatest use in war conflicts, one of the sectors that produces the most weapons, which have only one use: death. Bombs, missiles and weapons are manufactured with technology only to kill. Aren’t we facing the issue of disengagement from silent technology? Isn’t technoscience one of the paths to peace processes?
In the culture of peace, there is talk of the possible dialogue of civilizations and the use of technological science to promote peace, but as always, the interests of big business lobbies use this technology to win the war and „destroy” the other. All wars are orchestrated by high officials, political economists and the arms lobby to benefit themselves, and the real victims of actual conflict are the most disadvantaged groups in society: women, children and the elderly. .
Not only about the massive destruction of infrastructure that technology in the arms industry can cause, but also about the effects of chemical weapons and hereditary genetic diseases, spasticity, quadriplegia, microcephaly, blindness or cerebral palsy. The chemical weapons used by the US in the Vietnam War and its massive impact on the entire population is a clear example of how children with these types of problems are born to this day. (Havana Collective: „Chemical Warfare in Vietnam, Journal of Science, 1982).1
Since the beginning of the 20th century, the use of technology in warfare has been increasing, and today we talk about dual-use technologies, both civil and military, because the use of technology can be used to save or kill, but it depends on the hands in which it is found, it will serve one or the other. That is why we speak of a double-edged sword, and the thin line that separates it from peacemaking is not war. It is true that science can make war more efficient, but this is not their cause. For this reason, we cannot censor new technical or scientific knowledge, because not only will we prevent bad developments from appearing, but also good ones, because until the case occurs, we will never know what the fate of new knowledge will be. Let’s take for example the invention of gunpowder in China, who were having fun with bombs, but it wasn’t until the discovery of bronze, iron and steel in Europe that they began to integrate these into weapons. First Guns and Cannons.
Collaboration The habana, 1973. 1982. „The Gera Chemical Inside Vietnam”. Science No. 1, January February, Pg. 22-31.
1 Another of the worst disasters caused by the use of chemicals was in Chernobyl. Where A day of Hey They continue Pity can should be implemented of The sum of Radiation what Still straw Current.