Therefore, situation 3 applies, and the point is moot either fucking way. No matter the kind of weaponry involved, he DECLARED his intention to kill you. Even if he had a stick and you had a nuclear bomb, if he communicated that he was going to kill you with the stick, and you have no reasonable doubts, you WILL bomb the shit out of him. It’s not a question of whether it was wrong or right to do so, but the safeguard of your safety as a living organism.
If he didn’t communicate clearly that he was going to kill you, and you shoot the fuck out of him, you may invoke self-defense, but the decision to do so wasn’t morally right as it was influenced by factors which had no bearing on the present situation (he looked like this so I killed him, I killed him dead, for example).
Hating is an emotion which may be swayed by persuasion, after all, and if that person hates to kill, there’s a good chance that this person will attempt to do so before you can do anything about it, which goes back to situation three if he didn’t ninja you.
Nono, you’ve got buttons. Now be quiet and pick one: Kill or not kill
And the point of this topic is kinda past it’s… prime. It was mostly to talk about how dumb the things said in the fallujah thread, only not while arguing and maybe not you guys even knowing it. I thought it would be interesting to see the guys that argued say something completely opposite of what they said in the other thread, when the situation is basically the same.
That’s basically ignoring any sort of human reasoning that was developed over the ages and comparing our rationale to the rationale of an instinctual animal without any choice.
In that case, as I said, you kill the motherfucker dead because you have no reasoning to speak of. If you do not kill him, he will kill you. You cannot doubt this truth because you cannot doubt at all.
The same thing could be accomplished through simple talking. Talk with the person, find out why they hate you, and would kill you, and try to mend the situation. Simple.
For those of you who haven’t caught on yet, this thread is about the soldier in Iraq who “shot a defenseless civilian.” The same one referenced in <A href=“http://agora.rpgclassics.com/showthread.php?t=21358” target="_blank">Info’s earlier thread</A>.
And the way I see it, that soldier was in a sick way justified for what he did. As much as some people here seem to blindlessly rush to accuse him, you should evaluate what your values are before you jump to conclusions. Are you really willing to say that the life of a citizen in a country that we are at war with is really more important than the life of an American soldier?
The truth is that when the military is called in, it’s not a pretty thing. Stuff like this happens all too frequently in warfare - there’s a reason that people abhor it so much. Everything should be done to avoid war, but when it does come, one should jump in with both feet and not limit soldiers to levels where they become sitting ducks.
Well, it didn’t help that you tried to force your opinion onto the people who replied to the thread. If you try something like this and people don’t seem to be “getting” it, try approaching it from another angle rather than getting frustrated and trying to force the issue down their throats. The problem here is that you’re dealing with people who have very different value sets from your own. Besides, with the situation you’ve provided I’d be a bit horrified if everyone replied without hesitation that they’d kill the guy - it’s not a natural response.
No it doesn’t. Bert McCracken is pretty much the sexiest man alive, not like those fuckin pseudo-anarchist weiners from Green Day who like to pretend they’re rugged and brag about their nonexistant rule-breaking conquests even though they’ve never done anything but conform to the media and write songs condemning themselves for being American Idiots.
Whew, it felt good to say all that
As for the rest of the topic, no one really disagreed with you Ramza. Yeah, we’d kill him. I think most of us were trying to look at the bigger picture though: Was it right to create opportunities for these types of situations by sending tens (hundreds?) of thousands of men into an area that wants to kill them and happens to be filled to the brim with guerillas, for really no reward? I mean I’m no five star genius here, but common sense tells me no.
I wish I could snap like you did, Ramza. I haven’t in such a long time, but telling people they’re really fucking wrong and retarded used to be so fun because it was just so fucking true.
