REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Ends and means

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Thursday, November 22, 2007 15:49
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5866
PAGE 1 of 3

Thursday, November 15, 2007 10:18 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The theme comes up over and over (and over, and over) in thread after thread: Do the ends justify the means? If we're fighting for freedom, does this allow buddying up to tyrants? If we're against callous disregard for sensitive feelings, are we right in calling the offenders inbred cretins? If we're defending liberty, does this mean clamping down on civil rights in the short run? Do we have to become Nazis to fight Nazis? If we want to make politics more representative, do we get there with back-room deals? Does it take big government to protect individual liberties? Should we protect life by executing murderers? Can a billionaire fight capitalism? Does every shortcut come back to bite you in the *ss?

I'm beginning to think that the ends almost never justify the means. Trite as it sounds, you may have to be the change that you wish to see in the world. What do you think?





---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 10:47 AM

SERGEANTX


Depends on the ends.
Depends on the means.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 10:50 AM

FREDGIBLET


I agree completely with Sarge.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:42 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Sorry, that answer is a cop out.
=================================
Do they?

No, never.

Unless you can justify the means from the initial use of them, without regard to success, then you have no rationale whatsoever, despite what the intended ends are.


Old Proverb, not sure where it's from.
"If you do not KNOW the answer, then you must BE the answer."

It's one of my personal mottos, one might say, so as for your last statement, I guess I do believe that - and working with the up and coming generations most of mine is crapping on and selling out into lifelong debt, that change IS gonna be applied, all in good time... if we survive that long.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:07 PM

SERGEANTX


It is a copout.

It's a pretty vague proposition though. I certainly don't believe in 'emergency ethics'.

But I do believe that values will come into conflict. The key for me is that extreme measures are only justified in specific circumstances and should never be part of a 'policy'. People who feel like they need to step outside of the bounds of accepted behavior should do so if they are absolutely sure it's necessary, if it's clearly in preservation of some higher value. But they must be ready and willing to be held accountable for their 'exception'. They need to be able to make their case as an individual.


SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:12 PM

CHRISISALL


Excellent responses, all.

I'm with you. And you. And you Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:25 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
The theme comes up over and over (and over, and over) in thread after thread: Do the ends justify the means? If we're fighting for freedom, does this allow buddying up to tyrants? If we're against callous disregard for sensitive feelings, are we right in calling the offenders inbred cretins? If we're defending liberty, does this mean clamping down on civil rights in the short run? Do we have to become Nazis to fight Nazis? If we want to make politics more representative, do we get there with back-room deals? Does it take big government to protect individual liberties? Should we protect life by executing murderers? Can a billionaire fight capitalism? Does every shortcut come back to bite you in the *ss?

I'm beginning to think that the ends almost never the means. Trite as it sounds, you may have to be the change that you wish to see in the world. What do you think?





The lies and exaggerations that we're giving up liberties and freedoms at the cost of doing in evil scum bags is a sad thing to view. Back when we were fighting WITH the Islamos against the Soviet Union, we knew from early on that not all the players on the Political game table were nice. It often came to our attention that we had to fight fire with fire, or in some cases, pit bad guys vs bad guys. We did it in WW2, using Stalin to defeat Hitler, and we sure as hell knew it while fighting against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:10 PM

LEADB


The means you use should those for which you are prepared to pay the price. One should not use means which have costs that out weight the benefit. These are value judgments one should consider carefully before acting.

The world is shades of gray.

====
Please vote for Firefly hourly: http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

Consider $5/year to support FFF: http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T39WWCGS4JYCV4


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:27 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:

Originally posted by leadb:
The world is shades of gray.



Quoted For Truth

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:15 PM

RIGHTEOUS9



I shouldn't have started in on this one...wrote a whole lot and then dumped it, saving like a paragraph...started like 40 minutes ago...guess I'm still feeling this one out.
..................

Maybe we can be a nation of people who sometimes justify the means by the ends, but we can't let the collective spirit of our nation be one that does the same.

I'm willing to accept that there are occasions where taking the law into one's own hands, or lying to the american people for the sake of national security, etc. etc. could be legitimate.

I'm also willing to bet that such conditions are rare, and that as Americans it is our responsibility to unqaulifyingly nail everybody to the wall who breaks the most esteemed laws of our land.

..............

I'm saying I can sympathize with a vigilante who actually got the right man, and still be willing to cast my vote to convict him.

And I'm saying that there's no way I'm going to support lawmakers who want to make it easier to torture, or to take personal responsibility off those who choose to torture under the cover of national security.

If a situation arises when a person truly can save a city if he pulls out a few fingernails, then so be it(though such tactics may not even be effective), but if we find out that somebody is pulling out fingernails, it does us as a nation no good to qualify it...we have to uphold the means over the ends.

And the less we tolerate such activity the less likely it will be abused. I have no doubt that given the right scenario, a President may have a legitimate reason to lie to the American people(national security, immediate safety issue...etc?) or that a situation might arise when a person feels like the only option is to take the law into his own hands. there are probably compelling examples for all of these things.

Those examples shouldn't stay our hand when we demand to be told the truth by our President, and when we demand that he be held accountable for any and all lies to the American people pertaining to his capacity as President. I see no problem here. If the reasons for lying are that compelling, then a responsible President will do it anyway, regardless of consequences down the line, and if the reasons are not so compelling, he'd better think long and hard about doing it just to grease the pockets of a few friends.

.............
Of course the real danger of all of these issues is the ends. The means to 'positive' Short term ends can result in more disasterous long-term ends, and I would contend that that is one reason why the means is so much more important.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:21 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
...It often came to our attention that we had to fight fire with fire, or in some cases, pit bad guys vs bad guys. We did it in WW2, using Stalin to defeat Hitler, and we sure as hell knew it while fighting against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan....



Actually, Stalin didn't join up with the Allies unitl after Hilter attacked the USSR. It wasn't like he had much of a choice. It's not like the Allies devised some clever plot to pit Stalin against Hitler. The Allies did not use the USSR to defeat Hilter they joined the Allied effort after Hilter double crossed them.

Also, I don't think we had any idea of what kind of monster we created when we allowed the Mujahadeem to fight a proxy war against the Soviets. At the time the press portrayed them as freedom fighters. Ironically, bin Laden didn't declare the US as an enemy until we stationed troops in Saudia Arabia during the Gulf War.

I think you would have done better to advance your argument if you evoked Truman's use of the atomic bomb to end WWII.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:43 PM

CHRISISALL


Righteous9, you validify that name you have- I'm with you all the way!

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:44 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Veteran:
It's not like the Allies devised some clever plot to pit Stalin against Hitler.

Details, details...

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 5:06 PM

LEADB


Quote:

Originally posted by Righteous9:
I'm willing to accept that there are occasions where taking the law into one's own hands, or lying to the american people for the sake of national security, etc. etc. could be legitimate.

I'm also willing to bet that such conditions are rare, and that as Americans it is our responsibility to unqaulifyingly nail everybody to the wall who breaks the most esteemed laws of our land.

All well said, but this particular captured my attention. This is one of the prices one must be prepared to pay when choosing one's means.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2007 9:09 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Veteran:

Also, I don't think we had any idea of what kind of monster we created when we allowed the Mujahadeem to fight a proxy war against the Soviets. At the time the press portrayed them as freedom fighters. Ironically, bin Laden didn't declare the US as an enemy until we stationed troops in Saudia Arabia during the Gulf War.

I think you would have done better to advance your argument if you evoked Truman's use of the atomic bomb to end WWII.





We knew what sort of scum the Mujahideen were, even back then. They were calling us the great satan, even as we were helping them defeat the other great satan. Go figure. The Press portraying them as 'freedom fighters' was only 1/2 the story. What we weren't told is the story of all the tribal factions , vying for power, after the Soviet withdrawal. What the press DIDN'T tell us wasn't what the policy makers and the intelligence folks did know.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 2:01 AM

FREMDFIRMA


*snort*

Hubris or not, imma requote it word for fekkin word from back then.

"You do know this is seriously going to come back and bite us in the ass one day ?"

I'd almost lay money on it that, although no one else seems to have raised or even thought of that possibility, that the Russians are having a little payback on us in much the same fashion right now - it would explain a whole hell of a lot about how things are going in Afghanistan right now.

Perhaps, just perhaps, folk might wanna LISTEN to those pesky naysayers... you know, like before we went into the pay-for-itself, locals-throwing-flowers debacle we're in now ?

The Iranian border is the point of no return, we cross that, and it's WW III for sure.

I hope to hell to never have to quote that one at someone after we've done it.

btw - thanks for the clarification, Sarge.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 2:26 AM

JONGSSTRAW


In my opinion the ends never justify the means...period.

The US under Bush has certainly made some mistakes, but I still honestly believe that America is fundamentally a great nation, with high morality and noble goals.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 4:36 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
The theme comes up over and over (and over, and over) in thread after thread: Do the ends justify the means?


Yes. No. If your goal is the extermination of Jews, then the use of death camps does not justify those means.

If your goal is the defeat of the Nazis, then attacks on civilian infrastructure is justified.

Its all relative.

If your goal is global Communist domination, then supporting communist tyrants is wrong.

If your goal is to prevent global Communist domination then supporting anti-communist dictators is ok.

So it depends on the ends and the means. Which was already said.

I note for the record that this makes the issue subjective.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 6:16 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

If your goal is to prevent global Communist domination then supporting anti-communist dictators is ok.
So OOC, how many people can we enslave while fighting communism, assuming that the ONLY problem is a non-capitalist economic structure, in an area otherwise becoming prosperous and stable?

How many people are we allowed to kill while fighting for freedom? 100? One million? Less than the tyrant would have killed? More?


Here's the thing: I DON'T think "its all relative". Killing people is killing people. The only reason to kill people is to save more lives than otherwise. Supporting horrific tyrannies to "fight communism" is just plain stupid, especially since some of the tyrannies we supported combined the worst of genocidal oppression, corruption, AND deliberate grinding poverty.

I think if we get caught up in "isms" we make the same mistake that the jihadists make, and we start viewing human lives and happiness as less important than our particular "ism".
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 10:02 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"I think if we get caught up in "isms" we make the same mistake that the jihadists make, and we start viewing human lives and happiness as less important than our particular "ism"."

Including capital'ism'.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 10:06 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Yep.

That's one big unexamined "ism".

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 11:04 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
So OOC, how many people can we enslave while fighting communism...How many people are we allowed to kill while fighting for freedom? 100? One million? Less than the tyrant would have killed? More?


Your missing the whole of the point. It depends on the means AND the ends.

Slavery is wrong. But if you recall during WW2 we drafted striking coal miners because we needed the coal more then they needed their collective bargaining agreement.

Its all circumstancial and very subjective.

How many people are we allowed to kill fighting for freedom? Zero. The question is how many are we forced to kill in defense of freedom? That answer is not a number...its an ideal and that is 'as few as possible'.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 11:10 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"how many are we forced to kill in defense of freedom"

She forced me to rape her. He made me murder him. Yeah, that flies.

***************************************************************
They made me do it !

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 11:20 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Maybe there's a problem when we try to weigh "ends"- which ARE subjective because they involve intention- with "means", which are very concrete. It's like comparing empathy and oranges.

I think what you CAN compare is means and results. Did the means yield the right results?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 11:23 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Then, generally taking shortcuts tends to give poor results.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 12:08 PM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Then, generally taking shortcuts tends to give poor results.


I take a shortcut home from work and it take five minutes instead of ten.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 12:17 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:

I take a shortcut home from work and it take five minutes instead of ten.


I know, you're limiting you carbon-footprint....blah blah

You're such a greenie-weenie...Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 1:23 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


HA HA HA HA HA HA - of all the things he's been called, I bet he's never been called that.
Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:

I take a shortcut home from work and it take five minutes instead of ten.

Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:

I know, you're limiting you carbon-footprint....blah blah

You're such a greenie-weenie...Chrisisall



***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 1:48 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


Quote:

rue wrote:
Friday, November 16, 2007 11:10
"how many are we forced to kill in defense of freedom"

She forced me to rape her. He made me murder him. Yeah, that flies.

***************************************************************
They made me do it !



Of course it doesn't fly. But we're not talking about rape and murder (are we?). Soldiers killing soldiers during a battle is not murder. If someone tries to liberate your purse and you turn around and groin him it's not assault.

I recall an Ethical Culture lecture where the speaker said he met an army colonel wearing a European theater ribbon. As they talked he found out that the colonel was Quaker. When he asked the colonel, how did you justify joining the Army. The colenel replied, "They were killing the Jews." This man led other men in battle and ordered them to kill, because he felt he was saving others and standing up for a cause. Was he wrong?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 2:39 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

This man led other men in battle and ordered them to kill, because he felt he was saving others and standing up for a cause. Was he wrong?
I think that's a perfect example of means and results.

I'm surprised that no one has accused me of (gasp!) secularism.


---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 2:50 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I'm surprised that no one has accused me of (gasp!) secularism.

Isn’t that like accusing the Pope of being Catholic?



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 2:52 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


He joined knowing he had a choice.

I just found Hero's desription of being forced into killing to be rather strained. B/c you can use that excuse to justify almost anything. The Jews forced the Nazis into exterminating them by not assimilating themselves. The US was forced into supporting Hussein against Iran.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 5:50 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


quote by SargentX
"Depends on the ends.
Depends on the means."

Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Sorry, that answer is a cop out.
=================================
Do they?

No, never.



Interesting concept. So the use of antibiotics to fight infection is a copout? WWII to fight against fascism was a copout?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2007 6:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA


"Unless you can justify the means from the initial use of them, without regard to success, then you have no rationale whatsoever, despite what the intended ends are."

You missed the line after that.

Whatever means you intend to use, one should be fully prepared to justify and stand behind them prior to ever using them, without regard to success or failure, or never apply them in the first place, period.

Unless you have justification up front, you don't have it at all, and anything else is just a rationalized self-delusion.

Even after the fact, even if it did work, you still don't have it, cause you never did.

Clear enough ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 17, 2007 5:29 AM

CHRISISALL


Yep.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 17, 2007 12:14 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


The Japanese forced Truman to use the atomic bomb?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 17, 2007 7:54 PM

ROCKETJOCK


Quote:

Originally posted by Veteran:
The Japanese forced Truman to use the atomic bomb?



In a very real sense, yes, at least as far as Nagasaki was concerned.

The Japanese Imperial government had two days to surrender. Two freaking days, with God's own bad example of what would happen to them if they did not.

They chose not to.

Which, to me, justifies Truman's decision to drop the Hiroshima bomb as well. He had correctly read the intractable nature of the military-dominated Japanese mindset of the time. To have done anything else would have been placing the Japanese population (which he was not beholden by his office to worry about) ahead of the lives of Allied military personnel (which he was.)

####

On the original subject, I'd like to point out that using the ends to justify the means definately fails if the means chosen do not achieve the ends. Which is why the current controversy over the use of tortures such as waterboarding confounds me so.

Putting it blankly, torture is an extrememly ineffective means of gathering reliable information!

Torture someone long enough, professionally enough, and they will either die, or they will tell you exactly what they think you want to hear.

Keep that in mind: what they think you want to hear , which is not necessarily congruent with the facts of the situation.

It's a dumb way to gather reliable facts, plain and simple. It's not just morally reprehensible, it's counter-productive. Which is why I don't understand why anyone can defend it.

"Gentlemen, let's face the real problem. We've got to get the stupid people out of intelligence." -- Steve Gerber

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 6:25 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I think about this question whenever I watch a show like '24' and the heroic government agent threatens to torture or actually tortures someone in order to quickly get important information that will save the world.

In that context, it seems as though almost any behavior is justified. The city/country/world hangs in the balance. Why, it almost feels as though it would be morally unjustified NOT to get this vital information through whatever means necessary.

What if my daughter was being held by kidnappers, and I had one of them in my custody? Would I not pull his spleen out through his bellybutton, inch by inch, if I thought that doing so would gain my daughter's location and a chance to rescue her? I might.

And that's why there need to be hard and fast rules about what means are allowed towards which ends. It is very human, a very real part of our nature, that we can rationalize to ourselves almost any inhuman action. So we need an infrastructure in place to keep us from doing what we are programmed to do by the lizard brain need for survival.

We are built to use any means to our ends. We need to create systems to rise above our natures.

Bad means are never justified. But it's oh so easy to justify them anyway. It's rough being human.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 10:01 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by RocketJock:
In a very real sense, yes, at least as far as Nagasaki was concerned.

The Japanese Imperial government had two days to surrender. Two freaking days, with God's own bad example of what would happen to them if they did not.

They chose not to.

Which, to me, justifies Truman's decision to drop the Hiroshima bomb as well. He had correctly read the intractable nature of the military-dominated Japanese mindset of the time. To have done anything else would have been placing the Japanese population (which he was not beholden by his office to worry about) ahead of the lives of Allied military personnel (which he was.)

And it could be argued that Truman forced the Japanese not to surrender, by removing key safe guards for the emperor from the Potsdam proposal, that he was told by experts were absolutly necessarry for the Japanese to accept it.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 5:45 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


RocketJock:

I agree with your take on torture.

The reason I keep bringing up the use of the Atomic Bomb is I think it's one of the better examples of the question at hand.

According to estimates it would have cost the lives of up 1,000,000 soldiers to invade Japan. However, the bomb was caused such devastation and continued to kill indirectly for years after the explosion. Ironically Albert Einstein suggested that if Germany had developed the bomb first, used it on two Allied cities but still lost the war, we would have declared the dropping of such a weapon as a war crime.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 6:59 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
And that's why there need to be hard and fast rules about what means are allowed towards which ends. It is very human, a very real part of our nature, that we can rationalize to ourselves almost any inhuman action. So we need an infrastructure in place to keep us from doing what we are programmed to do by the lizard brain need for survival.

We are built to use any means to our ends. We need to create systems to rise above our natures.



Realize that if we do this, we must be willing to sacrifice some of our own if the means to save them goes beyond those 'hard and fast rules'. We might want to check with everybody first, to see which set of rules they're really willing to die for.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:47 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
And that's why there need to be hard and fast rules about what means are allowed towards which ends. It is very human, a very real part of our nature, that we can rationalize to ourselves almost any inhuman action. So we need an infrastructure in place to keep us from doing what we are programmed to do by the lizard brain need for survival.

We are built to use any means to our ends. We need to create systems to rise above our natures.



Realize that if we do this, we must be willing to sacrifice some of our own if the means to save them goes beyond those 'hard and fast rules'. We might want to check with everybody first, to see which set of rules they're really willing to die for.

"Keep the Shiny side up"




Ah. I would submit that someone must be willing to undergo torture themselves before they can authorize it upon another. In that context, we are unlikely to have many votes in favor of the practice.

It's much easier to vote to violate someone else's rights than it is to vote for the violation of your own. If people believed that all the government's dirty tricks would be used against them, they'd never allow the government the power to employ them.


--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 18, 2007 10:39 PM

FREMDFIRMA


"If people believed that all the government's dirty tricks would be used against them, they'd never allow the government the power to employ them."

Q.F.T.

Now get a hammer and try pounding that into the heads of those cheerleading the way for it.


-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 4:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Realize that if we do this, we must be willing to sacrifice some of our own if the means to save them goes beyond those 'hard and fast rules'. We might want to check with everybody first, to see which set of rules they're really willing to die for.
Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security.- Benjamin Franklin.

I guess the FF had it wrong then? Because they were willing to die for Liberty.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 5:24 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Ah. I would submit that someone must be willing to undergo torture themselves before they can authorize it upon another. In that context, we are unlikely to have many votes in favor of the practice.



So you're also all right with innocent others getting killed because you won't do something against your morals, even if you knew it would save them?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 5:39 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security.- Benjamin Franklin.

I guess the FF had it wrong then? Because they were willing to die for Liberty.



Cute, but hardly germaine. (BTW. Read a bit about the Revolutionary War in the South and then talk about ends and means and the FF.)

Somehow it doesn't comfort me that you to are willing to sacrifice the lives of others, possibly including myself, for your principles.

Sorry, guys, but ends and means works both ways. If you don't use certain means due to moral qualms, you have to be ready to take responsibility for the ends which that decision inflicts on folks in your care.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 5:41 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Ah. I would submit that someone must be willing to undergo torture themselves before they can authorize it upon another. In that context, we are unlikely to have many votes in favor of the practice.



So you're also all right with innocent others getting killed because you won't do something against your morals, even if you knew it would save them?

"Keep the Shiny side up"



That's a lot like asking, "Would you savagely rape and murder a five year old girl if it might somehow save the lives of thousands?"

And if I said no, then the retort would be, "How dare you inflict your morals upon the innocent multitudes?"

There may be short-term benefits to authorizing tyranny, but in the long-term I feel the negative impact of tyranny far exceeds its benefits. While I might very well be tempted to do something unwholesome to save lives, that is precisely why we need a system in place to protect against that impulse.

Tell me Geezer, would you sacrifice your little girl to be raped, tortured, and murdered in order to create a safer world for everyone?

Oh, I know she doesn't have any valuable intelligence, but there are inevitably some few innocents who suffer during the pursuit of our nation's enemies. If one innocent little girl must suffer and die so that we can all be safe, isn't it worth it, in the end?

Perhaps it's not your son or daughter that you would nobly sacrifice to the cause? Whose, then? Mine?

I think not.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 6:26 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
That's a lot like asking, "Would you savagely rape and murder a five year old girl if it might somehow save the lives of thousands?"

And if I said no, then the retort would be, "How dare you inflict your morals upon the innocent multitudes?"



Sorry, but your mind reading is off today.

First, I'd make it clear-cut. If you take no action, this WILL happen.

I'd then ask if you were then willing to take responsibility for the deaths of those thousands. Apologize to their families. Support their children. Each action - or lack of action - has consequences. In the child vs. thousands scenario, someone dies either way.

Also interesting how you equate anything that doesn't agree with your principles with tyranny.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 6:44 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Sorry, but your mind reading is off today.

First, I'd make it clear-cut. If you take no action, this WILL happen.

I'd then ask if you were then willing to take responsibility for the deaths of those thousands. Apologize to their families. Support their children. Each action - or lack of action - has consequences. In the child vs. thousands scenario, someone dies either way.

Also interesting how you equate anything that doesn't agree with your principles with tyranny.

"Keep the Shiny side up"



Hmm... Oppressive power exerted by government?

But then, what is oppressive? Perhaps it involves robbing people of their rights? Ah, but you may not value or recognize those rights. Perhaps the individual has no rights at all when the wellfare of society is taken into account.

In any event, let me join in on your absolutism.

If we do not authorize the torture and killing of subject individuals, people will absolutely die as a consequence. Thousands. Perhaps millions. The consequence may or may not be immediate. But somewhere along the line, the intelligence we fail to capture will result in horrible bloodshed.

If we authorize the torture and killing of subject individuals, people will absolutely die as a consequence. Thousands. Perhaps millions. The consequence may or may not be immediate. But somewhere along the line, the regime we authorize to overlook people's rights will cause horrible bloodshed.

So yes, Geezer. Someone WILL die. Without question.

Now, seeing as how I must apologize to victims either way, I think I'd rather apologize for following my good conscience.

--Anthony





"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 19, 2007 9:49 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hmm... Oppressive power exerted by government?


And the government which has never exerted opressive power is???

Quote:

But then, what is oppressive? Perhaps it involves robbing people of their rights?
I'm a safe driver and safe shooter. The government won't let me drive 150MPH on the freeway or shoot deer in my back yard. Help! I'm being oppressed!

Quote:

In any event, let me join in on your absolutism.

If we do not authorize the torture and killing of subject individuals, people will absolutely die as a consequence. Thousands. Perhaps millions. The consequence may or may not be immediate. But somewhere along the line, the intelligence we fail to capture will result in horrible bloodshed.

If we authorize the torture and killing of subject individuals, people will absolutely die as a consequence. Thousands. Perhaps millions. The consequence may or may not be immediate. But somewhere along the line, the regime we authorize to overlook people's rights will cause horrible bloodshed.

Now, seeing as how I must apologize to victims either way, I think I'd rather apologize for following my good conscience.



Sure. If there's no difference in the outcomes, no matter what you decide, choose the one that makes you feel better. How about if it's 'agressive' but not life-threatening interrogation (extreme enough that you personally would consider it torture) of one suspect against the lives of, say, all the passengers in an airliner?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:45 - 982 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:44 - 496 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL