Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I wish he was dying
up close and personal
tell me more
for weeks, and now he's trying to pull the plug on our whole operation.
Tbh I dont wish him any specific harm, but it'd be nice if his car wouldn't start after work and he had to wait for the RAC or something
that's admirably non-specific. Any old means of death will do.
you fucking rule.
only when I read the comments
Chance to rebuild society and that
But no specific person
But a little suffering would be good for some people
I reckon death is probably pretty sound, and there are quite a few people I'd like to never see again. Stupid pricks.
Everyone except my close friends and family were dead.
Only joking of course! I wish some of my close family were dead as well.
which is kind of the same thing. But dying has loads of baggage with it - funerals, they get remembered, people forget their bad points. So no.
in their sleep, after living long and fulfilling lives!
*audience "oh"s and chuckles approvingly*
to see if I was nominated
would achieve anything good ever. Kinda wish it would but nah no chance.
would achieve less harm to be caused than otherwise.......e.g. Hitlers death, or Saddaam husseins death.......obviously the time is important, them dying when they actually did was largely irrelevant, as it as at the end of things, if their death had occured before the actions that they pushed forward then obviously that would have been a good thing.....I know we could get all philospophical about it and wonder if worse would have unfolded, but that is the easy eastern aethetic buddhist daoist non interventionist view of the world......and, whilst it is true that we in the west have an overly interventionalist. materialist determinism (that is falsly justified by our flawed vast over-estimation of our analysis and logic) a balance needs to be struck between action and inaction.......alas, much of human argument and reasoning fails to find this balance, due to the binary nature of discussion argument and reasoning that tends to result with any debate.
'god) have intervened to have prevented hitlers rise? (intervention by one man often being easiest to execute by means of an assasination (at least as we plebby westerners believe) )
utterly destroy and enmisery many many people whom you know you could love if you knew them all?
taken hitler prisoner and incapacitated him. Same with all other baddies. Nobody actually needs to harm them.
it requires you to have a power that involves other people helping you to have that power (incorcerating them I mean) plus it might spur others to free them by forcing you with jeopardy to those you care about.........seriously, these people have an advantage over us, when it comes to having the same moral impediments to actions that we might have.
yeah I'm not saying it would be wrong to kill someone or harm them in any circumstances. just saying beyond incapacitating I don't think harming others ever really serves much purpose.
then one could even listen to Hitlers testiment and understand where and why he went wrong, and a supreme being could accomodate him......however, we are not supreme beings and our power is limited, people who gain power that exceeds their own personal amount tend to go 'a bit wrong' therefore the options would not include us 'containing' a wrong un, we lack the resources.....and yet everyday, people hear of awful awfulness, that they react to, and thus they search within their own reaches of influence (with a bit of exageration) and conclude that 'they would kill a baddie' (to prevent worse) ....it might be wrong, and is nearly always flawed, but I cant flaw the feelings that might drive their conclusions.....I just blame their lack of reasoning to moderate their conclusions, after all modern society living people do seem to self congratulate themselves on being 'civilised' (whatever that word means)
But yeah, I know what you mean, If my view were to hold sway then you end up with stupid over empowered people thinking that they can intervene.......I think that positive killngs are not so common as most countries seem to have the concept that 'killing a national ceo' is the one thing that is not to be tolerated...I'd rather that a ceo died, than bombing the fuck out of civvies and conscripts.
Of course I cheated there, you might say that there isnt just that choice, and you may well be right.......but I was convinced Sadaam's death would have served a good purpose.....before we sent troops to the first gulf conflict.....(I wasnt wishing death on him, just very scared that there was going to be a lot of horror, and the way to achieve resolution with minimal other deaths and horror, was this single death.....yes this was idealised....but then we are talking hypothetically)
I mean, its a good thing that he died.....If he were just imprisoned then isnt there a danger that he might be able to convince others to be worse? Did he help push Rose West (probably well damaged herself already) over the edge into actually 'doing' the shit that they did?
Remember that hitler did his mein kampf whilst IN PRISON.....unless you can guarentee that he would stay imprisoned then incarceration would not be good enough......(remember that there would not be the same resolve with which USSR USA UK And France kept Hess locked up in Spandau.....because you are dealing with them BEFORE, the major awfulness that comes about due to their actions)