Rayven_Alandria

Yes, I would sacrifice myself for a greater good. Yes, I would sacrifice another for a greater good.

When it comes to people I love it gets more difficult though...I could not sacrifice my child to save the world. I just couldn't.

Astreja

No, I would not. A "bigger good" that requires collateral damage is not something that I would call good at all.

Even if the "good side" wins a battle, there is no guarantee that it's good from my POV, or that a sacrifice on my part will allow the good to persist. There is always another challenger, and yesterday's virtue quickly becomes tomorrow's villain.

Consequently, I prefer to conserve what life I have and use it for the "good" that is my own existence.

Reign_Cryogen

Here's the thing, akirk. You're over in Hollywood. You live in the U.S. According to some people on this planet, that simple point of fact makes you far more destructive and dangerous than anything I've done.

It's all a matter of perspective, my friend. At least I'm honest about it.

Red Expendable

That's why a hands off policy is the best policy for everyone.

The exception being, if someone fucks with you, you fuck'em back.
But if someone doesn't fuck with you, you leave them alone.

What 'some people' beliefs about me or anyone else is irrelevant, even if they don't like me or my culture, or whatever as long as they don't act on those beliefs to try to take my life, or whatever.

If someone has beliefs that me being an atheist means that I should die, is concerning to me, but I won't have to worry about being killed because of someones beliefs such as those, unless they have the power over me to act on those beliefs.

The question is: Is it necessary to attack those who have not attacked you in order to protect your life and freedom? I think not.

RedEx

King Bowser Koopa

If I was "called to die in Iraq so that terrorism can be stopped" I'd say that this has to be the worst counter-terrorism plan I'd ever heard.

Reign_Cryogen

That was more or less my point. I agree.

Unbeatable

Americans aren't called to die in Iraq. They're called to risk dying. AFAIK the only ones called to die in Iraq are the suicide bombers. That might make an interesting question there-- how many people would "martyr" themselves in pursuit of some greater good? I would not go to such a certain death, because I would see dying as self-defeating. Once I'm dead, then I'm no longer around to benefit from a world where terrorism has been stopped. So the action of dying to stop terrorism would be pointless; I would have no motivation to do it.

Besides, me dying in Iraq wouldn't actually stop terrorism. I'm not even convinced that terrorism can be stopped. But say I believed that it could, and that my death could achieve that end, and say what I was facing was actually the risk of death, not certain death. Would the belief that me risking death could somehow stop terrorism make me feel better? No. That belief alone wouldn't do anything, for the same reason explained above. A "greater good" isn't one if I'm completely excluded from the set of direct or indirect beneficiaries.

You mean, if I didn't die? I imagine so. I don't morally condemn the person who makes the decision to consider N casualties "acceptable" collateral, if that's what you mean. They for whatever reason believe that a particular end is justified. If that end is justified in their mind, then so must be some set of means, or else it doesn't make sense for them to think that that end is worth achieving in the first place. I don't consider it morally wrong for other people to do what they believe is correct. That doesn't keep me from being angry at the situation, though.

Liberty

No obviously not, but I also won't think think the guy that killed me is a murderer, I would probably understand his situation given time and reason (if there is an afterlife)

Dlx2

This would make more sense at a topic if there was a draft. However, everyone who is fighting in Iraq right now chose to enlist.

arkirk

If it is any of your business (don't come here with your machine gun), I live in a place called North Hollywood. I haven't got a clue how you know "some people on this planet " could get an idea like that. Is it the projection of U. S. military might all over the world? I didn't and wouldn't be doing this.

Your thinking is based on an outdated nationalism that pits national groups against other national groups in things called WARS. I only wish you guys could war with each other and not have collateral damage. That would be truly workable. Unfortunately, warriors pollute the land and water and air and hog resources for their killing games...and they also kill civilians.