Originally posted by: ricarleite
This is a ridiculous and silly example. Why would Hitler kill 4 billion Gandhis? How would he kill the 4 billion Gandhis, kung fu?? And why?? Why would Hitler go postal and kill everyone, if he had no one to support him?! He would have no army! Nothing to conquer! Just peaceful people to kill, and he would have their corpse and nothing more! See?
Why did he kill 6 million Jews? As to why would kill them: Hitler being who he is would try to inforce his will on all the Ghandis. The Ghandis being who they are would of course peacefully resist Hitler. Hitler would not like that one bit and would react violently and kill them. As to how, remember Ghandis do not fight back so assuming Hitler had a gun with enough bullets he could easily shoot them one by one. It might take 10 or 20 years but he could do it.
that is because he had others he could get to do his bidding. But, being that there was no one else other than the Ghandis, he would have to do it himself.
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Yeah, I was thinking that too. Hitler's biggest skill was that of being a wonderful orator who was able to convince others to do his bidding. Would he be able to convert 4 billion Gandhi clones into doing his bidding? Most likely not.
This is a ridiculous and silly example. Why would Hitler kill 4 billion Gandhis? How would he kill the 4 billion Gandhis, kung fu?? And why?? Why would Hitler go postal and kill everyone, if he had no one to support him?! He would have no army! Nothing to conquer! Just peaceful people to kill, and he would have their corpse and nothing more! See?
Why did he kill 6 million Jews? As to why would kill them: Hitler being who he is would try to inforce his will on all the Ghandis. The Ghandis being who they are would of course peacefully resist Hitler. Hitler would not like that one bit and would react violently and kill them. As to how, remember Ghandis do not fight back so assuming Hitler had a gun with enough bullets he could easily shoot them one by one. It might take 10 or 20 years but he could do it.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Yes it is. Besides, it would not be for myself, but for the future generations. As I've said, if it was to secure a safe and peaceful future for the rest of mankind and the following generations, yes I would give up my life.
So, you're telling me that you'd give up your life secure a way of life that was safe,peaceful, and without freedom? A life where future generations are enslaved? peace isn't worth that kind of future for mankind.
fine, you first. no? I didn't so. I don't know whatt the point of having humans on this earth is, but I don't believe that we are here to surrend our freedoms, rights, beliefs, and liberty to evil bullies. I think we should fight as little as we have and still maintain our freedoms and rights, and enjoy whatever little peace that comes along. Not much, but it is better than suicide or surrender.
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
No he wouldn't. Hitler never killed someone himself. He got others to do that. I don't think he could achieve that in a world with only Gandis. Hitler never even saw the death camps.
Yes it is. Besides, it would not be for myself, but for the future generations. As I've said, if it was to secure a safe and peaceful future for the rest of mankind and the following generations, yes I would give up my life.
So, you're telling me that you'd give up your life secure a way of life that was safe,peaceful, and without freedom? A life where future generations are enslaved? peace isn't worth that kind of future for mankind.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Wouldn't you? No? Hmn so why are soldiers dying anyway? Isn't that the porpouse of why THEY die? Only problem with their deaths is, violence will continue. No peace. Oh well.
The soldiers are trying to achieve freedom not just peace.
Ric, make a choice:
A)fight and die a free man, or
B)live peacefully as a slave
which will it be? I chose A.
but what kind of peace will it be? The kind where likes of Hitler and Stalin rule the world? That is not the kind of peace that I want.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
So, if that point of view is correct, than yes, there is no point of having the human kind on this planet and we should all die. That might sound a bit drastic, but, makes sense to me.
Wouldn't you? No? Hmn so why are soldiers dying anyway? Isn't that the porpouse of why THEY die? Only problem with their deaths is, violence will continue. No peace. Oh well.
The soldiers are trying to achieve freedom not just peace.
Ric, make a choice:
A)fight and die a free man, or
B)live peacefully as a slave
which will it be? I chose A.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Was that a question? I don't know which one is worth. Depends on how you see things being worse. You could count the weekly average body count of innocent civillians and see which one is higher. I have no idea right now, but I could look for the numbers and see.
true but as I said, the goal wasn't civil war, it was freedom. I was never crazy about the Iraq war, it is just that I'd like to see them and all people free.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Well, I've been saying that peace is achieavable and all we gotta do is stop resorting to violence, .
Was that a question? I don't know which one is worth. Depends on how you see things being worse. You could count the weekly average body count of innocent civillians and see which one is higher. I have no idea right now, but I could look for the numbers and see.
true but as I said, the goal wasn't civil war, it was freedom. I was never crazy about the Iraq war, it is just that I'd like to see them and all people free.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Well, I've been saying that peace is achieavable and all we gotta do is stop resorting to violence, .
but what kind of peace will it be? The kind where likes of Hitler and Stalin rule the world? That is not the kind of peace that I want.
Originally posted by: ricarleite
So, if that point of view is correct, than yes, there is no point of having the human kind on this planet and we should all die. That might sound a bit drastic, but, makes sense to me.
fine, you first. no? I didn't so. I don't know whatt the point of having humans on this earth is, but I don't believe that we are here to surrend our freedoms, rights, beliefs, and liberty to evil bullies. I think we should fight as little as we have and still maintain our freedoms and rights, and enjoy whatever little peace that comes along. Not much, but it is better than suicide or surrender.
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
No he wouldn't. Hitler never killed someone himself. He got others to do that. I don't think he could achieve that in a world with only Gandis. Hitler never even saw the death camps.
that is because he had others he could get to do his bidding. But, being that there was no one else other than the Ghandis, he would have to do it himself.
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Yeah, I was thinking that too. Hitler's biggest skill was that of being a wonderful orator who was able to convince others to do his bidding. Would he be able to convert 4 billion Gandhi clones into doing his bidding? Most likely not.
that is exactly why he would kill them, because they would refuse to do his bidding. That's the kind of guy he was.