Do "The ends justify the means"

[Toots]

Republicans and many Democrats seem to believe this. Torture an enemy so we can get information to save lives. Totally acceptable to Republicans these days. Assassinate an enemy to save lives, both Republicans and many Democrats believe this is justified. Assassination is murder, torture is torture, both are considered Bad by American LAW. Bad in the literal sense, as opposed to good. Is America to be known as a bad country or a good country. I believe all Americans would like to believe America is a "good" country. But is it? We have two previous leaders of this country openly bragging about committing torture, Bush* and Cheney. No one with any real authority is suggesting they be held accountable. We have the current Leader of this country saying it is all right to assassinate people. Trials are something frowned upon in this modern era. When I was young, which was uite some time ago, it was believed and in fact taught in school that the "ends do not justify the means" When and How did that change?

[Solly Mack]

1. I'm not vested in thinking America good or better or perfect...what I am

is, if anything, about doing what's right, of living up to the ideals we espouse, of trying to keep the promise we made as a country.

That means the ends do not justify the means. That means taking the hard look and never - ever - sugar-coating the wrongs ("mistakes were made", "good faith", etc.). Of fully acknowledging those wrongs without cloaking them in softer, ambiguous language. Of never speaking of those wrongs by adding the "but" of denial. "Yeah, we did that but we also did (insert a list of positives)" - as if those positives in any mitigate the wrongs. Because they don't.

I always get the feeling that people who do that are more interested in deflecting away from the wrong instead of addressing it. Though they'll claim they are addressing the wrong...and are just pointing out the good. Sending aid to a tidal wave destroyed country doesn't erase torturing people...it doesn't change it or make it better. You don't get to erase the torture of some people with charitable acts toward another.

I know people try and feel better about it all by telling themselves things like "We'll do better...next time" - but unless you honestly confront the problem - and never hide it behind feel-good phrases and words - and seek accountability(prosecutions, etc.)...then you're not going to to do better "next time". Or the next...or the next...or the next.

You don't learn from your "mistakes" if you refuse to admit that those "mistakes" were not "mistakes" at all...they were war crimes - intentional and calculated. The only thing you do learn is how much you can get away with...next time.

[GreenStormCloud]

2. That depends upon the ends and the means.

It is bad to push an elderly person. But what if the purpose of the push is to push them out of immediate danger, such as a falling object? The means, pushing, is justified by the end, saving that person's life. But what if the push itself is so violent that it kills the person?

The problem with using a means that is considered evil by most people is that you can never have an advance guarantee that the good end will actually be achieved. So if you choose an evil means you are gambling with someone else's pain and without their permission, that a sufficient good will come about that will be worth their involuntary sacrifice.

There are no easy, always true, answers. If killing Kim Jong-Il would solve the Korean problem, I would instantly agree to pull the trigger. But we don't know that. It may be that his successor, and be worse than Kim.

As Gandalf says in LOTR, "Even the Wise can not see all ends." It is because of that ignorance of all ends that we should avoid evil means as much as possible, while also realizing that sometimes life backs us into a bad corner.