Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (60276)	12/13/2005 4:43:25 PM
From: miraje	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

Hmmm. OK. So it's OK to kill innocents (those soldiers on the other side probably haven't committed any crimes against your country), but NOT OK to kill those who HAVE killed your fellow innocent citizens??????????? Here's my POV, stated somewhat simplistically (gotta run). Violence, including killing, in self defense is not only moral, but necessary. Initiating violence is thoroughly immoral and repugnant. This is true not only in a one on one crime situation but also in major warfare conflict. Defense being the key word. I'd be quite capable of killing under such circumstances myself. Killing on the battlefield, as well as casualties suffered among innocent civilians caught up in it, are unfortunate aspects of war. Civilized nations seek to minimize the extent of them and do not kill captured enemy combatants. IMO, the same logic should apply toward captured criminals. Executions sanctioned and carried out by the state, no matter how you want to guild the lily, are simply cold blooded killings, no matter how emotionally gratifying they may be to many people. Again, the state already has far too much power. I strongly oppose giving the state the power to kill.