Page 1 of 3
#1
Do they?
Have you reached the end going through the morally wrong means? What was it?
In wars, does this apply?

Answer one or more questions if you feel like it.


Random images:


Death in captured frames


Camels and their shadows


Bullets are awesoem
#3
Once I justified my means in someone's end.


'eyoooooo
If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.

Quote by Bassist1992
When I was 11.

Googled "I would like to watch some porn please"



Quote by daytripper75
I;m rdruk I feel no pain

#4
The real question is: are the means of confusing the shit out of us with completely irrelevant pictures of camels and crayons morally justifyable in order to reach your end of us answering your question? Because i have a headache now, you jerk.
#6
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
No, the end doesn't justify the means. People use that as a fucked up way to justify violence.

And rape.
Blog Of Awesome UGers.
Quote by OddOneOut
I seem to attract girls.
Which is annoying, cos I'm a girl and I like cock.

Quote by IRISH_PUNK13
Being an idiot should be illegal too.
#7
Quote by Fiire
Do they?
Does it?

/grammar nazi
Quote by soccermom
The only epic thing about the bass forum is Pete Wentz penis. Its Epic. Epic penis.
BASS, MT, AND PIT JUNKIE


#8
Killing Miley Cyrus would be okay.
But doing it by brutally raping her with a spiky iron dildo thats been superheated in a furnace would NOT make it okay.
cwatimsayin?
love is love // return to dust
#10
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
No, the end doesn't justify the means. People use that as a fucked up way to justify violence.

But what about cases like dropping the A-bomb on Japan? It was a horrifically violent act, but the majority of historians now agree that it prevented more violence.
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
//////////////////////////////////////HEALTH
#13
Quote by sg255
But what about cases like dropping the A-bomb on Japan? It was a horrifically violent act, but the majority of historians now agree that it prevented more violence.



Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.
#14
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.


I guess they shouldnt have messed with Pearl Harbor.
The religious myth is the most powerful device ever created, and serves as the psychological soil upon which other myths can flourish.
#16
Depends what you mean by morally wrong.

Sure I havent killed anyone to attain certain things, but I sure as hell have lied to attain things. I can be deceitful if the outcome plays in my favour.
Sat in a lab, curing diseases. They actually LET me play with chemicals!
#17
Quote by LuckyBoys91
Once I justified my means in someone's end.


'eyoooooo

I just need about $3.50
(<X.X)O=('.'Q)

I'm the motherflippin'
#19
Well you have to consider the entire ends. If i want cake, and I kill somebody for it. The ends isn't just that I have cake, the ends is that I have cake and somebody is fuckin' dead.
The lives of thousands in my hands
I’ve come to take back what’s rightfully mine and now you’re damned
The lights grow dark in their homes
But our road is lit by fire from the sky
So we push forward



Last.fm
#21
Quote by Devix_SG
I guess they shouldnt have messed with Pearl Harbor.

Oh dear...
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#22
Quote by B455GU174R
to answer all questions:

WHO THE F**** IS COREYSMONSTER?????

He was a horrible horrible German man that killed millions of jews.
Blog Of Awesome UGers.
Quote by OddOneOut
I seem to attract girls.
Which is annoying, cos I'm a girl and I like cock.

Quote by IRISH_PUNK13
Being an idiot should be illegal too.
#23
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.

But continuing a conventional war would have caused more innocent deaths. Yes the whole war should have been avoided in the first place, but neither country would have backed down. At that point in the war, people were going to die. Is it better to kill a few to save many? (Relatively speaking, if that makes any sense)
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
//////////////////////////////////////HEALTH
#24
Quote by Devix_SG
I guess they shouldnt have messed with Pearl Harbor.


Yeah, stupid thousands-of-Japanese-civillians, attacking that naval base. Good thing they all got horrifically killed before they got the chance to attack another one, eh?
Quote by ChadLikesGuitar
even now, an 8 year old could go download gorilla rape porn and jack off to it.
#25
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.


hmm, well, dropping the bomb did less calculated damage, and killed less Japanese, civilians included, people than if we had invaded. So while it seemed more brutal because it was one massive strike and over in an instance, if we had invaded and not dropped the bomb, not only would a larger number of Japanese people have died, but countless other Americans, Europeans, etc. would have died.

So yes, i think in that case it does justify the means

GUITARS CURRENTLY USED
Ibanez RG7621
Ibanez RG121
ESP LTD H-400
#26
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.


I'm pretty sure all other options were exhausted at that point, otherwise they wouldn't have engineered a bomb out of atoms. You would have to be desperate to do something that ****ing crazy.
#27
Quote by sg255
But what about cases like dropping the A-bomb on Japan? It was a horrifically violent act, but the majority of historians now agree that it prevented more violence.

That had more to do with the preventing the USSR from having a say in the reconstion of Asia than it did with defeating Japan. Japan was fucked anyway; they had no resources and the Soviets were about to enter the war in the Pacific.
#28
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Absolutely not. There is no way you can justify what those killers did in dropping those bombs. Blockheaded patriot or not, you have to acknowledge how many innocent people died for an avoidable cause.


The atom bomb prevented the invasion of the Japanese homeland, which most experts have agreed would have caused many more deaths than the bomb did. Therefore according to your "morality" (which incidentally is entirely subjective and therefore doesn't actually exist,) the atom bomb was the right move.
#29
Quote by blackthought
Seeing as how morality is totally subjective


"Totally subjective"? That's a pretty big claim. You better have some sound reasoning to back that up boyo.
.
#30
Quote by 23dannybhoy23
Yeah, stupid thousands-of-Japanese-civillians, attacking that naval base. Good thing they all got horrifically killed before they got the chance to attack another one, eh?


Well theres a chance that they might have gotten the guy that did it.
The lives of thousands in my hands
I’ve come to take back what’s rightfully mine and now you’re damned
The lights grow dark in their homes
But our road is lit by fire from the sky
So we push forward



Last.fm
#31
Quote by 23dannybhoy23
Yeah, stupid thousands-of-Japanese-civillians, attacking that naval base. Good thing they all got horrifically killed before they got the chance to attack another one, eh?


Put whatever kind of spin on it you want. Point is, they attacked the U.S. first. U.S retaliated in such a way that it prevented any kind of attack on them in the future. So, it ended their resistance and prevented deaths on both sides of the playground.
The religious myth is the most powerful device ever created, and serves as the psychological soil upon which other myths can flourish.
#32
Quote by neidnarb11890
That had more to do with the preventing the USSR from having a say in the reconstion of Asia than it did with defeating Japan. Japan was fucked anyway; they had no resources and the Soviets were about to enter the war in the Pacific.

That only supports my questioning. Is is better to destroy two cities full of people, or to have the American war machine roll on through, and decimate a country that was ill-equipped to fight back and unwilling to surrender in such a situation, on it's way to impress the USSR?
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
//////////////////////////////////////HEALTH
Last edited by sg255 at Dec 15, 2009,
#33
Quote by Nietsche
"Totally subjective"? That's a pretty big claim. You better have some sound reasoning to back that up boyo.


I've yet to see an objective source of morality. Feel free to prove me wrong, I try to keep an open mind, particularly on philosophical issues.
#34
I understand what all of you are saying, and that there's no real winners in a situation like that, but I still think it's a disgusting thing to have happened and the perpetrators should feel repulsed with themselves for all the death they caused.

They should have been tried in Nuremberg too IMO.
#35
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
I understand what all of you are saying, and that there's no real winners in a situation like that, but I still think it's a disgusting thing to have happened and the perpetrators should feel repulsed with themselves for all the death they caused.

They should have been tried in Nuremberg too IMO.


Considering how even the most sadistic and hardcore of Nazis had their sentences commuted to pittances, it wouldn't have mattered much.
#36
Quote by blackthought
I've yet to see an objective source of morality. Feel free to prove me wrong, I try to keep an open mind, particularly on philosophical issues.


Well first of all even if something can't be proven from a given set of premises that doesn't mean it isn't true. That is to say, even if we haven't found any definitive source of morality yet that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means that all our attempts have been in the wrong direction.

I'm pretty sure you're an atheist yes? You should be familiar with the concept of the burden of proof. Just because no one can prove either side of the God argument it doesn't mean that it's no more logical to take one side or the other because although it may impossible to prove a case either way the burden of proof lies with the believer.

We live in a world where everyday people go about their business acting within a framework of some kind of morality. Even if they don't believe in any kind of objective morality they will probably still follow a set of moral principles which they think are the best to live their life by. In my view this lays the burden of proof on the people who don't believe in morality, since it's clear that some kind of laws exist for determining good and bad interaction between people.

Now of course their are two objections. Firstly that some people don't act as if there was a morality, and two lots of people have different kinds of morality.

Well for the first question, lots of people act as if they were going to get some kind of divine reward in heaven. Does that mean they will? This could probably be turned against me - People act as if there is a god, therefore your atheism is under question. However people don't act in a way that would be logically necessary under the existence of a God, indeed we have no way of knowing what that would be, so it doesn't exactly work that way. They do act as if they were going to get a divine reward in some kind of afterlife which we know to be untrue since they don't act in a way that would make God logically necessary.

The second point can be contrasted with politics. Certain people think liberalism is the best system, others a minimal state based on constitutional democracy, others a democratic socialist state and still others an aristocratic feudal type system. Are they all right? The fact of an objectively correct set of politics is not contradicted by the existence of many schools of thought just as the existence of an objective morality is not contradicted by the existence of many schools of thought.
.
#37
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
I understand what all of you are saying, and that there's no real winners in a situation like that, but I still think it's a disgusting thing to have happened and the perpetrators should feel repulsed with themselves for all the death they caused.

They should have been tried in Nuremberg too IMO.


They should have been tried for war crimes because they ended a war with less of a death toll than any other reasonable option? Next thing you know, we won't even be able to kill people in war. The whole point of a war is to defeat the enemy, and that's what the US did.
#38
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
I understand what all of you are saying, and that there's no real winners in a situation like that, but I still think it's a disgusting thing to have happened and the perpetrators should feel repulsed with themselves for all the death they caused.

They should have been tried in Nuremberg too IMO.

As long as there are men there will be wars. I sure as hell don't like it, but the terrible fact about humans is that we seem to enjoy killing each other. Who's to blame, the guy who pushed the button, the President and the generals who gave the order, the factory workers and the scientists who developed the bombs, us Brits for letting the war happen, the Germans for letting the Nazi's into power, the people who caused the first world war... It goes on and on. And I don't think the cycles gonna stop repeating itself anytime soon.

I've gone and made myself sad now.
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
YOU WILL LOVE EACH OTHER
//////////////////////////////////////HEALTH
#40
Quote by sg255
As long as there are men there will be wars. I sure as hell don't like it, but the terrible fact about humans is that we seem to enjoy killing each other. Who's to blame, the guy who pushed the button, the President and the generals who gave the order, the factory workers and the scientists who developed the bombs, us Brits for letting the war happen, the Germans for letting the Nazi's into power, the people who caused the first world war... It goes on and on. And I don't think the cycles gonna stop repeating itself anytime soon.


I don't think that's necessarily true. I mean, I understand that it's difficult to completely remove all violent instincts from society but I think if we could restructure the incentives to make it so that there would be motivations not to go to war we could significantly reduce the amount of wars.

You'd probably laugh me out of the thread if I told you my theory on what incentives drive people to go to war though.
.
Page 1 of 3