Muammar Gaddafi killed

[Guts]

But that was part of the very premise the Nazis worked on - removing those undesirables before they had a chance to commit the crimes they were accused they would commit.

You can't administer justice on what-ifs.

Please. What the nazis did has nothing to do with my example and I'm sure you know it. The jews and other people clearly didn't plan any heinous crimes against the good people of Germany.

Simple question, do you agree that it's better to kill one people to save one hundred people if that one person threatens the life of those one hundred?

[toythatkills]

Well, keep it simple. Would you want help in that situation? I know I would want a better life.

I imagine wanting help is more likely than not wanting help. I've not heard any of the people fighting the regime saying they don't want help. Quite the opposite, they seem to appreciate the help, without which they may of lost.

Would I want help? Probably. Does it then follow that they definitely would want help? Not in the slightest. They've been brought up completely differently to the way I've been brought up, and there's no way at all that I could get into their head and think how they would be thinking. I wouldn't even know where to start.

If they want help, it's fair enough, but it's wrong to assume that they'd want help just because you would.

[Dogg Thang]

Guts, I see where you're coming from but your own example also has little to do with the somewhat derailment that led to it, which was killing Hitler before the war. It started as ridiculous and, while your example isn't, that's what Marty had been replying to. It's all gone a bit pear-shaped as people rebutted posts that never existed. At least in this reality.

[MartyG]

Please. What the nazis did has nothing to do with my example and I'm sure you know it. The jews and other people clearly didn't plan any heinous crimes against the good people of Germany.

I never said it did, you weren't suggesting that we should have killed Hitler before he'd done anything - however, Hitler did kill the Jews partly down to what he suggested they would do if allowed to continue to live.

Simple question, do you agree that it's better to kill one people to save one hundred people if that one person threatens the life of those one hundred?

If there's a definitely threat then yes - I said you cannot apply justice on the basis of what-ifs. That's not the same thing at all.

[Guts]

Guts, I see where you're coming from but your own example also has little to do with the somewhat derailment that led to it, which was killing Hitler before the war. It started as ridiculous and, while your example isn't, that's what Marty had been replying to. It's all gone a bit pear-shaped as people rebutted posts that never existed. At least in this reality.

You're right, and in the Hitler case, I agree, you can't kill a person if he hasn't done ANYTHING (although if we would have a time machine like in Red Alert then killing Hitler would be A-OK in my book). I'm saying just that SOMETIMES killing is the only possible and logical choice to prevent bigger harm.

[Guts]

If there's a definitely threat then yes - I said you cannot apply justice on the basis of what-ifs. That's not the same thing at all.

I think we agree on the same things then, but probably got a bit mixed up.

[MartyG]

if we would have a time machine

Ah, but the time machine represents an entire paradox in itself - you at this point then need to question if it was the event of the time machine that altered the future from the past due to interference from the present

[Dogg Thang]

Really though, you'd second-guess yourself forever on that one so you're best just going back in time and showing people from the GameBoy age a Vita (which you collected from the future) and watch as their minds are blown.

[MartyG]

But then the vita would be invented before the GB and retail releases would be twice the price they are now.

I think perhaps though, that this is now the greatest tangent of any thread on Bordersdown ever (** NTSC-UK doesn't now count).

[Dogg Thang]

Well you're only showing to them. Not giving it to them. "Look with your eyes!"

[EDDIE M0NS00N]

Get back on thread topic please. I wanna see some mud slinging, name calling, rutting, hard man on the internet bragging & 'my opinion is the right one' comments so this thread gets locked down asap

[Dogg Thang]

Pretty sure any 'my opinion is the right one' wounds were self-inflicted. False flag attacks. Like the Reichstag.

Or 9/11.

*lights fuse and runs away, giggling like a schoolgirl*

[paul]

So this Madman stands up in court and says what, yes your honour i did have PC yvonne fletcher shot, yes your honour i planned pan am?? He's gonna get up and say this is an American and British dogs and rats and i am innocent , the rebels have saved a few $$$ on a stupid show trial that would prove nothing.

Erm, the idea is to show that the new regime respects the rule of law, rather than performing the kind of act that was typical of his own regime. I imagine the trial would have been about standing trial for atrocities committed against his own people for things he did to them. You know...those people matter as well.