posted on Sep, 18 2002 @ 07:23 AM
my answer is this: it depends upon your mindset.
i believe that violence must be avoided. as a principle violence is wrong. therefore i cannot justify the use of violence to stop violence. even
though it may save lives. ignoring or sacrificing your principles to uphold your principles is a fallacy in the extreme. it also what i think
america is doing and has been doing for the past year.
however, i would like to point out an alternative attitude. there are some on this board that defend the use of nuclear weapons towards the end of
WWII by saying that they saved more lives than they took. the statistics are debateable, but assuming that they stand the same principle can be
applied to this situation. in which case, the destruction of say, the white house, the complete annihilation of NORAD (if it was possible) or even
the levelling of the statue of liberty (including a full payload of sight-seeing civilians) could be justified in saving ten times as many lives
around the globe.