2006-11-24 01:13:31 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Without question. Assassination of Hitler would have been a defensive tactic, not an aggressive one. Hitler was the aggressor.
The choice back then was either to kill Hitler, or to kill hundreds of thousands in a world war. Since we didn't kill Hitler, we had to kill hundreds of thousands.
Which would be more moral: killing one man, or refraining from killing one man and having to kill a million other men (more innocent men) as a consequence?
2006-11-24 01:45:28 · answer #1 · answered by Martin L 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'll replied to your question as honestly as possible, even though it is not what you anticipate for an answer; it may be an unpopular reply but it's honest. Assassination is murder, and murder can never be justified as moral; it is wrong regardless. I will get some nasty emails over this and a number of "Thumbs down," but doing what our enemies do does not make something wrong any better nor will it ever make it right; it only puts us at the same level as our hated enemies.
One may justify it as a necessary evil, but it is STILL evil! That is teh same justification that our enemies use, and acting as they act will never make us any better than they are. If going back in time to kill could ever be done, why not go back further and get him psychological help? When you fight evil with evil, only EVIL wins!
2006-11-24 13:04:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes. Unfortunately the USA would never have done that because their were certain citizens who were making too much money selling steel to Hitler.
2006-11-24 09:14:50 · answer #3 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but whether they would have done so is another matter.
(I see the larger implication of this question: do other countries have a moral right or obligation to kill leaders that are detremental to their own society and the world as a whole?)
2006-11-24 09:17:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Assassination will never be moral, it is still murder, even when your intentions are pure. The argument could made that it might have saved millions of lives, so it could be deemed justified, but not moral.
2006-11-24 09:26:45 · answer #5 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
yes but we should have arrested him and then gave him the same fate of the Jews he killed
2006-11-24 09:15:52 · answer #6 · answered by David N 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
DEFINITELY!!!! As this would have prevented millions of murders!!!
2006-11-24 14:01:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
You're kidding, right?
2006-11-24 09:19:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋