[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="BMD004"]I'm pretty sure I, as well as most people, took killing innocent civilians to mean in a war-zone. For example, would you drop a bomb on a huge terrorist hide-out if it meant killing 2 innocent civilians and you wouldn't have another chance later? I'm pretty sure it is asking about a situation like that where you have to weigh just 1 or two innocent lives for the "greater good". BMD004
Given that 9/11 occurred for similar reasons and was done by similar people as much of the violence in the Middle East has been related to, I think the comparison is fair. And, if what you suggest about 9/11 applies by extension to the Middle East, how does random suicide bombing in public (non-military) places related to the scenario you speak of? Obviously that is not the only source of violence in the Middle East, but it is a kind that gets a lot of publicity.
You're right about the intention of the question of course, but 9/11 (BS conspiracy theories aside) could most certainly be seen as part of a war of the West done for "the greater good." Sure there may be some innocent Americans who die in the process, but for a broader statement, it was seen as worth it.
No because there was no war being fought. It was just an attack. If you put up a poll that said "Would you kill 3,000 innocent civilians in order to make a political point" and if those poll numbers were any different than they are right now, then it is a completely different question. And I have a strong feeling 99% of the American's polled would say NEVER, and just as many Muslims would say the same. The fact that you resorted to saying the two are anywhere near the same shows the weakness of your overall argument. I'm done debating anyway... it's getting boring. And the fact that you keep changing your argument while maintaining the same premise after point after point is disproven is pretty telling. meh...My point, because you didn't apparently read my post carefully enough, was that 9/11 violence was not significantly different from much of the violence that happens in the Middle East, and in particular than much of the violence that gets reported heavily.
You're right, the 9/11-war zone analogy was weak, but the rest is still relevant criticism of your argument.
Log in to comment