Evil?

[A_Wanderer]

Since thats a loaded term thats abused so much these days thoughts?

Insurgents in Iraq detonated an explosives-rigged vehicle with two children in the back seat after US soldiers let it through a Baghdad checkpoint over the weekend, a senior US military official said Tuesday.

The vehicle was stopped at the checkpoint but was allowed through when soldiers saw the children in the back, said Major General Michael Barbero of the Pentagon’s Joint Staff. “Children in the back seat lowered suspicion. We let it move through. They parked the vehicle, and the adults ran out and detonated it with the children in the back,” Barbero said.

The general said it was the first time he had seen a report of insurgents using children in suicide bombings. But he said Al-Qaeda in Iraq is changing tactics in response to the tighter controls around the city. A US defense official said the incident occurred on Sunday in Baghdad’s Adhamiyah district, a mixed neighborhood adjacent to Sadr City, which is predominantly Shiite.

After going through the checkpoint, the vehicle parked next to a market across the street from a school, said the official, who asked not to be identified.

“And the two adults were seen to get out of the vehicle, and run from the vehicle, and then followed by the detonation of the vehicle,” the official said. “It killed the two children inside as well as three other civilians in the vicinity. So, a total of five killed, seven injured.”

Officials here said they did not know who the children were or their relationship to the two adults who fled the scene. They had no information about their ages or genders.

link

 

[Justin24]

Disgusting!!!! Those Mother Fuckers are not human and should be killed like Animals for this shit.

 

[BVS]

So exactly what is the point of this thread? Is this act of violence more evil because it involves children?

More evil than beating someone to death?
More evil than dropping an a-bomb?

 

[Justin24]

Maybe it's a thread where we can put the worst of humanity in for others to read?

 

[Diemen]

Disgusting!!!! Those Mother Fuckers are not human and should be killed like Animals for this shit.

And bring out the worst in ourselves, evidently.

 

[BVS]

Maybe it's a thread where we can put the worst of humanity in for others to read?

Please no, what would be the point?

 

[A_Wanderer]

I think so; killing a child is taking away more life than killing an adult.

Beating someone to death isn't inherently evil, dropping an atomic bomb has a cold rationale that is more amoral than evil - balancing death, and both interestingly enough move it away from the implications of the what it would mean for the "resistance" to gain control of Iraq through a precipitous exit; whatever happens there can't be any pleading ignorance about the nature of such groups.

 

[BVS]

Well then I guess it depends on how you define evil, for they all sound evil to me...

 

[A_Wanderer]

Is beating somebody to death in self defence evil?

Is dropping an atomic bomb when that action would kill fewer people than the alternative the more evil choice? I think because those situations involve guaranteed carnage the path of less death may not be good but it isn't evil (hence amoral).

 

[BVS]

Is beating somebody to death in self defence evil?

Is dropping an atomic bomb when that action would kill fewer people than the alternative the more evil choice? I think because those situations involve guaranteed carnage the path of less death may not be good but it isn't evil (hence amoral).

I can think of very few instances that someone has beat someone to death to defend themselves, but if it's truly self defense and it isn't hate that takes over the last few blows, then no it's not evil.

How can one GUARANTEE the amount of deaths would be fewer?

Once again definition would be key, for some of the definitions from dictionary.com fit under your amoral umbrella.

 

[A_Wanderer]

If by guarantee you mean 100% thats impossible since nothing in the real world is ever 100%. But if there are projections of death by ongoing conventional warfare weighed against the death required to crush an opponents will to fight with a nuclear strike then a choice could be made, it certainly has in the past and in that instance the results of prolonged conventional warfare would more probably have exeeded that of two atomic strikes.

 

[U2Man]

I think so; killing a child is taking away more life than killing an adult.

Beating someone to death isn't inherently evil, dropping an atomic bomb has a cold rationale that is more amoral than evil - balancing death, and both interestingly enough move it away from the implications of the what it would mean for the "resistance" to gain control of Iraq through a precipitous exit; whatever happens there can't be any pleading ignorance about the nature of such groups.

where do you draw the line between "a cold rationale" and "an excuse"?

terror is terror, regardless of whether you're blowing up kids in cars or dropping nuclear bombs over residential areas - filled with hundreds of thousands of kids.

 

[BVS]

would more probably have exeeded that of two atomic strikes.

Yeah, I've seen very little evidence of this "probability". But it does help a lot of people sleep at night.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The Battle of Okinawa extrapolated for the rest of Japan (not to mention other battles and bombings going on simultaneously).

>140,000 Japanese civilian losses
~72,000 US military losses
~65,000 Japanese military losses

versus

140,000 mostly civilians for Hiroshima
74,000 mostly civilians for Nagasaki

It doesn't make it a good decision or a moral decision; perhaps quantifiably less evil or as I said amoral is better.

But then this deals with megadeath which is much simpler and disconnected than regular death and murder because it's all numbers; as insignificant as the number of AIDS victims or starving kiddies.

 

[U2Man]

how about the consequences of radiation?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Associated effects were in the stats for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[coemgen]

"Let's pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere."
C. S. Lewis

 

[Ormus]

How about we stop all this "good and evil" nonsense? Terrorists are not some kind of demonic horde straight out of a Manichean wet dream; as despicable as they are, they are still human beings and this habit of dehumanizing our enemy has far more trouble than its worth. I believe that the Biblical virtue of "Love your enemies" essentially means that; you don't have to excuse their crimes, but you do have to recognize that you have a mutual humanity.

And studies have shown, indirectly, that this does further the cause of peace. As an example, in Lebanon, there was a project to see which culture(s) there had ties to the ancient Phoenicians. In the end, they discovered that everyone there, despite over 2,000 years of diversification, were ultimately from the same origin. Realizing that, when the public was polled, they started having a newfound respect for those that they previously thought of as "the Other." In other words, once people start recognizing the humanity of everyone, not just your allies, it is a small first step towards lasting peace.

So let's first call them by what they are--criminals, insurgents, terrorists, murderers....whatever--and deal with their crimes from there. There's no "evil" out to get you.

 

[Ormus]

"Let's pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere."
C. S. Lewis

Misanthropism is probably one of Christianity's worst traits.

 

[coemgen]

Misanthropism is probably one of Christianity's worst traits.

There is no misanthropism, just an admittance or understanding that we're flawed. That's what C.S. Lewis was getting at and that's why Christ came in the first place. Christianity doesn't teach hatred of the human race — quite the opposite.

You must be thinking about right wing "christianity."

 

[CTU2fan]

Can you really call them suicide bombers? The chickenshits jumped out & just let the kids die.

 

[INDY500]

Was Ronald Reagan wrong to call the Soviet Union The Evil Empire?

 

[Vincent Vega]

Well, he didn't know Bush's regime

 

[BVS]

Was Ronald Reagan wrong to call the Soviet Union The Evil Empire?

Yes.

 

[U2Man]

Yes.

 

[Diemen]

Yes.

qft

 

[indra]

Was Ronald Reagan wrong to call the Soviet Union The Evil Empire?

You have to ask? Of course he was wrong.

 

[financeguy]

You have to ask? Of course he was wrong.

No he bloody well wasn't.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I stumble myself upon seeing anything good in the Soviet Union.

 

[Ormus]

Was Ronald Reagan wrong to call the Soviet Union The Evil Empire?

Many conservatives claim that this speech was instrumental in bringing about the collapse of the USSR. Non-conservatives say that crediting Reagan's speech for that is like crediting the cheerleading squad for winning the game.

On this subject, I lean towards the latter. In other words, it was neither "right" nor "wrong," but, instead, unimportant.