Do you agree or disagree with this statement, and why.
And if you like, it might be interesting to hear your political affiliation as well.
2007-07-16 05:23:59 · 29 answers · asked by Steve 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well innocent people are dying in America and I don't know what good it is doing.
2007-07-16 05:27:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Interesting question. I'm going to have to say that, in part, I AGREE with that statement.
My point of reference is WWII where we (USA) decided to use the Atomic Bomb on 2 Japanese cities. We killed many innocent people, but ended WWII and saved millions of lives (the greater good) in the process.
It was not an easy decision to make and should never be taken likely.
I'm slightly right of center on my political leanings, and I'm a registered Independent.
2007-07-16 12:29:12 · answer #2 · answered by kja63 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you have to kill many innocent people, that good had better be really great. In WWII, many innocent German and Japanese citizens, who had no real part in the war other than being citizens of belligerent nations, paid the price for their governments' hostile actions. That was, unfortunately, necessary. So yes, I would have to agree, but the circumstances would have to be extreme.
And I am a liberal with no registered party affiliation.
2007-07-16 12:28:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hard to agree with the question when there are so many variables ... If you are speaking of Hitler's Greater good, or Truman or Custer.. We know that innocent people die in every War and conflict that has ever been.. How can our freedom be justified by the death of others.. I guess life is not always fair..
2007-07-16 12:35:22 · answer #4 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it depends on whether they are actually fighting or being used as humanshields or whether they are totally innocent bystanders.
Think back to world war 2 history. Winston Churchill had the very unenviable task of ordering that NO blackout or evacuation of a small English town take place because it would have given away the fact that England had cracked the ENIGMA code used by the Germans.
and it would have prolonged and lost the war for England and the allies. instead they went on to pounce on the unsuspecting Germans and eventually win.
That has to be considered justifiable as horrific as it was
2007-07-20 08:37:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally I disagree.
However, in extreme circumstances I can see where this would be necessary. A few requirements would be that there be absolutely no other way to save them, that the numbers be far different (losing 10 to save 10k), knowing that they could definately be saved, and that loses would be minimized, etc. This would have to be heavily discussed with many people before a decision could be made, and then it would have to be an absolute last resort.
I am independent, political parties are one of the biggest things tearing our country apart today. Socially I tend to be liberal. Economically and politically I tend to be conservative.
2007-07-16 12:43:18 · answer #6 · answered by Showtunes 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree , if some innocent people were killed to save thousand of others . I would be willing to die if it meant a better life for the greater amount that would go on living. we are so lucky to live in a country like america . where we have freedom of choice, Most country don't
2007-07-16 12:33:57 · answer #7 · answered by Joan f 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would word the statement differently. Sometimes, in achieving the "greater good", innocent people are killed.
See the difference in the focus. Not on 'killing innocent people' to achieve the good, but on achieving the good.
Conservative. (Which translates as mostly Republican, but not always.)
2007-07-16 12:31:09 · answer #8 · answered by Aristarchus 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with it as long as it includes innocent people hal-way around the world... it disagree if it means that the innocent people means people in my house or neighnorhood.
Seriously, I DISAGREE strongly with ANY innocents being killed... unless you (or an ally) are cornered and I don't think we were ever cornered on 9/11 or anytime since WWII.
2007-07-16 12:31:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, the ends never justify the means.
Truman may have ended the war by bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it was an atrocious act that killed, and continues to kill thousands of people.
Terrorists and suicide bombers work on the same mentality.
No affiliation.
2007-07-16 12:35:32 · answer #10 · answered by tiny Valkyrie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Al-qaida killed thousands of innocent people on 9/11 for what they thought was "the greater good." I can't say that I can agree with their way of thinking.
So...we retaliated. And in the words of Lincoln; "If fight makes right, then let us to the end dare to do our duty."
And, in the words of the Navajo warrior, "It is a good day to die."
2007-07-16 12:30:45 · answer #11 · answered by Chief Yellow Horse 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋