|
Wiseowl
|
Apr 1 2009, 02:18 PM
Post #61
|
|
- Posts:
- 37
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #11
- Joined:
- Feb 16, 2009
|
- ShiloFish
- Mar 31 2009, 03:57 PM
- Wiseowl
- Mar 31 2009, 03:30 PM
true, I'll need to do more homework about it... but I'd rather have people scared of doing something wrong then have people not even second guess about taking someone's wallet.
Well, I am just speaking for myself. What you are talking about is basically tyranny. What society leads us to belive is that rulers like Dong Zhou, Lu Bu, the many rulers of Rome, and various other people, who slaughtered their own people, people that were their personal responsibility to protect, are evil. People who steal from the people they should be giving to and basically ruling the government in any way the please. From what I see, you are suggesting that we re-instate people who agree completely with the "By any means" and "For their own good" philosiphy. Hitler ruled with an iron fist, peopled feared him, yet we still saw hundreds of his own countrymen, who shared most of the same ideals as him, defy him openly. His elite personal soldiers and the S.S. inspired terror in everyone who heard of their names, yet many were killed by simple citizens. We also saw America, who I think feared Hitler, defy him him. Russia, a country that was almost completely defenseless defied Germany's invading armies. Past that, what about Hitlers idea's of purity and the means to purify? The countless camps he kept P.O.W.'s in, where the soldiers beat and tortured defenseless men every day, and in the end had to die a death from physical abuse or starvation. What about Hitlers idea to purify the "tainted" jewish population by sending Jewish families to concentration camps, killing the parents, and selecting the few promising children, injecting blue dye into their eyes, and killing them when their experiments failed? All the shit he did was "for the good" of Germany, "for the good" of its people, and what he tried to accomplish by assaulting the rest of the world was "for the good' of the rest of us. I can only imagine what kind of hellish place this world would be if he succeeded, and you are commending people like him? Are you suggesting that all the innocents he murdered were acceptable for his dream? Another question, if the innocents who had to be given up for a working government, and an obeying population, were your family members, would you give them up? Would you give up yourself? P.S. You is one silly Owl ;). I wouldn't classify myself as "silly", but very rational.
I mean, yes, some ideas are twisted around one person, but as you like to say "for the good of the country", especially when the population size in massive and needs order - some innocents will get in the way of the crossfire and will pay dearly for walking at the wrong time... but if the main objective of maintaining peace is being stabilized... then I'd justify it.
Call me heartless or whatever, but I'd rather have the odd sacrifice then have the unexpected killings of others.
|