|
xcept, both are a fact of war. See Hiroshima and Nagasaki for examples. Also, please explain why one is evil and one is not? At what point does lose of life become evil? 10 innocents? 100? 1000? What is your personal limit. My guessing it is somewhere north of the number you have killed in active duty.
Neither was evil, ignoring ad hominem attack.
Wrong, your job is to protect the innocent people! One way to do so is to destroy the enemy. Are all soldiers this blood thirsty?
When in war you job is to destroy the enemy. Ignoring ad hominem attack.
Evil people like to think they are doing good things. Hitler thought he was doing good when he gased 6 million Jews too.
These people were not involved in the war in any way whatsoever. They were the the fall-guys for his obsession. He blamed the jews for his nations economic problems in order to rise to power.
The japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on the other hand, would have been contributing to the japanese war effort by making ammo and supplies and were contributing to the death of our soldiers in some way.
Only if they were stupid and wanted to die. Which they are not, so they would not nuke us.
More of a political argument but /meh.
Of course you do. You have successfully brainwashed by the propaganda. But here is a question for you. Why didn't we make smaller nuclear bombs and specifically target Japan's military over the next several months or years instead of targeting high concentrations of innocent civilians?
The technology was in its infancy, we used what we had at the time to end the war as expeditiously as possible. It would have taken years to develop bombs with the precision you describe, and the the campaign of attrition as we bombed their military targets? no thank you. We did that with regular bombs throughout the war with little to no effect. (and alot of civilian casualties i might add)
Japan attacked us in a sneak attack at Pearl Harbor.
Hehe, now who is naive...
But seriously. You both are WAY off topic.
|
|
Yes, I am aware our military disregards things like the Geneva Convention. It is this lack of morality among active duty soliders recently that has tarnished the reputation of the US in global diplomacy. As a citizen I find this disheartening that you would admit this.
You want to see disregard for the Geneva Convention? Look at the enemies we are facing. They saw peoples heads off, drag burnt bodies through their streets and strap bombs to themselves to kill indiscriminately.
Outside of isolated squad incidents our only violations have been the waterboarding of admitted terrorists. I am against this because we did pledge to follow the GC and in doing that we are not.
My references thus far have been to wars prior to the instituion of the Geneva Convetion, so there is nothing for you to be disheartened about.
And it is the evil person who rejects his morality in response to such atroscities.
War is kill or be killed. Survival is a dirty thing, but (coming back to where this whole argument started) Neutral at the worst.
You utter disregard for human life.
ignoring ad hominem attack.
What makes it "less evil"? I mean, you are a staunch believer that "evil" has some sort of objective definition. (I assume you believe "good" has some sort of ojective definition.) What are these objective definitions? (please be as precise as you can be)
"Necessary" is used when you can find no other choice and you choose to do the lesser of the two evils. I agree it's a way folks justify doing evil things.
If you don't get it, there is little point in me trying to explain it.
Because a nuke in N Korea would affect China as well (fallout). And China is N Korea's ally and would come to their defense.
Update to 2010:
China doesn't give a rat's patootie about the crazy aunt-in-the-cellar that is N Korea nowadays. China's holding the U.S.'s marker, remember? And a huge trade surplus. Closer together now than ever before.
Ok, this is fun and all but the vast majority in this thread have marked the OP's PC as evil, Most being NE.
So he has his answer, maybe not the one he wanted but, them the brakes.
|
Ok, this is fun and all but the vast majority in this thread have marked the OP's PC as evil, Most being NE.
So he has his answer, maybe not the one he wanted but, them the brakes.
You can't stop this seeker, it has reached critical mass. The only recourse is to post image macros until it gets locked.
When in war you job is to destroy the enemy.Only if you are evil.
To sum up, your belief is that ANYONE in a war, be it a group of paladins or anything like that, is evil then? ...Yeah, right.
In the D&D universe EVERYONE is evil by RAW as you guys say it, cause EVERYONE (at least every PC and hero character depicted) hurt and kills people. It says so by RAW as many of you have stated. That not only ilogical, it's irrational.
You can't stop this seeker, it has reached critical mass. The only recourse is to post image macros until it gets locked.Ok, this is fun and all but the vast majority in this thread have marked the OP's PC as evil, Most being NE.
So he has his answer, maybe not the one he wanted but, them the brakes.
Ya might be right, I mean I enjoy AL augments as much as the next guy, but we have already godwinned and now on on personal attacks...yay
|
|
Ya might be right, I mean I enjoy AL augments as much as the next guy, but we have already godwinned and now on on personal attacks...yayYou can't stop this seeker, it has reached critical mass. The only recourse is to post image macros until it gets locked.Ok, this is fun and all but the vast majority in this thread have marked the OP's PC as evil, Most being NE.
So he has his answer, maybe not the one he wanted but, them the brakes.
I stopped reading about a hundred posts ago myself. 'Tis the only way to remain sane!
Oh sweet, we're hitting a geopolitical argument that no longer has anything to do with alignment.
No wait this isn't sweet at all. What the hell is the matter with you people :|
Take this to other forums.
In the D&D universe EVERYONE is evil by RAW as you guys say it, cause EVERYONE (at least every PC and hero character depicted) hurt and kills people. It says so by RAW as many of you have stated. That not only ilogical, it's irrational.
Nope. Not even close. Because in D&D land you can outright target evil and evil only. You can even detect it!! And your D&D deity will even reward you for it!!
Please try to separate game from reality. They're not remotely similar in this discussion.
THIS is the end of the thread.
You need to link the batman one next, that poster is most relevant to the topic at hand.
|
|
THIS is the end of the thread.You need to link the batman one next, that poster is most relevant to the topic at hand.
You'll have to be more specific, there are plenty of Batman posters. :)
When I play good NPCs or PCs, they only kill in self defense of against things that have no sentience (oozes, vermin) or are not really alive (undead, constructs). When I DM, I inform players of this so most decide to play neutral characters, knowing they could become evil if they lack compunction. Plus, like I said, to destroy evil you must become evil. Nothing wrong with that in game.
Well, no one must play a paladin or a good character though, you can't kill an evil dragon, nor a demon nor an animal that attacks you... great, makes total sense.
|
|
So by that logic, 9/11, according to you, was also not an evil act. It was a neutral act.
We were not at war with the terrorists who did this. The people there were true innocents and were doing nothing to support any type of war effort. Again, the majority of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were supporting the war effort.
As to your comments about how many people i killed. I will address that. Not a single one. Not everybody in the military is infantry. My job was to fix the equipment that saved the lives of those injured in combat, both friendly and enemy. That being said, all military members are trained in how and when to use their firearms and if I was in the position of some of my fellow soldiers I would fight to protect both my life and their life. Does this mean any rational person, soldier or not, is going to mow down crowds of civilians because their might be an enemy combatant present? Of course not, but the terrorists we are fighting have no regard for human lives and sometimes US soldiers are placed in situations where there is collateral damage. While this is highly regrettable, it is part of being at war.
|
|
So you also think 9/11 was fine and dandy. Unless you think most Americans do not support the war of terror? Plus I'm sure the thousands of nuked children knew what the heck was going on.
You forget we were not at war when they blew up the towers...there was no war to support, it was a cowardly act, much like Pearl Harbor.
In the D&D universe EVERYONE is evil by RAW as you guys say it, cause EVERYONE (at least every PC and hero character depicted) hurt and kills people. It says so by RAW as many of you have stated. That not only ilogical, it's irrational.Nope. Not even close. Because in D&D land you can outright target evil and evil only. You can even detect it!! And your D&D deity will even reward you for it!!
Please try to separate game from reality. They're not remotely similar in this discussion.
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.
The bolded part states nothing of the kind "if u kill evil people than it's all right".
So by YOUR logic and by RAW as you people see it, killing and hurting is evil, period.
calvinNhobbes, you're still not giving a precise defintion of "good" and "evil" despite the fact that your entire argument is predicated on there being some objective definition.
Until you do so, this debate is going nowhere.
Agreed.
Well, no one must play a paladin or a good character though, you can't kill an evil dragon, nor a demon nor an animal that attacks you... great, makes total sense.Very few try. But it is possible, I jsut need to be very careful as a DM not to put them in situations that are too diffcult, and I constantly remind them what their actions mean morally.
Also, you skipped over the entire self defense thing, and of coruse self-sacrifice. I'm guessing because then your strawman woudl fall apart.
If an evil dragon attacks a town, then the paladin can fight to protect the innocent people. The paladin can even hunt the dragon down to bring it to justice, but if the dragon surrenders (which it will since it has high INT) then the paladin can not kill it. It must take it as prisoner.
Same thing with a demon, although I can't imagine a demon surrendering.
As far as an animal, only in self defense. I actually had a situation where a wolf that attacked the party due to hunger was injured and dying, the NG character walked up and coup de graced it. I had him switch to N. Good characters don't kill helpless dying animals, they heal them. Could you really imagine Jesus coup de gracing a dying animal? Exactly.
Hahahaha, so your entire argument on being good is "What would Jesus do?" That's funny, haha. Thanks for the laugh.
As far as an animal, only in self defense. I actually had a situation where a wolf that attacked the party due to hunger was injured and dying, the NG character walked up and coup de graced it. I had him switch to N. Good characters don't kill helpless dying animals, they heal them. Could you really imagine Jesus coup de gracing a dying animal? Exactly.
Just for the record, if said guy had no healing, the animal was suffering a LOT, it would be ok to let him suffer and not kill it, but would be wrong to put it out of it's misery?
Oh and demons are easy, devils however are sneaky bastards
|
|
LOL, you are SO naive. Do you know ANYTHING about middle east history or politics? And just so you know, war is like breaking up, only one person has to do it. Regardless if the US thought it was at war, the terrorist were, hence the US was as well.
They do not fight a conventional war by any means, and tbh we are not going to be able to make a dent unless we stoop to their level (which i do not advocate). But the fact remains our troops were not engaged with them in any way when 9/11 occured. Much like we were not engaged in war with Japan when they attacked Pearl Harbor.
Really? Do you really thing wall street money and tax payer dollars did not support the killing of people in the middle east? Really?
Our military was not actively engaged with the group (Al Qaeda) that was behind the attack.
Never said it wasn't part of war. And the fact you think it is regrettable means you are neutral because you have guilt about commiting an evil act. But that does not mean killing innocent people is not evil, during war time or otherwise.
So I'm no longer an Evil SOB? Awe thanks! I still disagree with you on it being evil, however.
|
|
Hahahaha, so your entire argument on being good is "What would Jesus do?" That's funny, haha. Thanks for the laugh.What would Jesus do?
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Matthew 10:34
Maybe it's a plastic sword made by playskool?
Let's not forget that his father (who is also him?) is a genocidal maniac that likes to kill babies and make people sacrifice their children.