Was WWII the only major war under whih there was a clear good side and bad side?

[dead0man]

That's not fair to drugs.

[dead0man]

Just pointing out violence is evil no matter what flag its under.

Violence is not always evil and it kind of makes me sad that you feel that way.

[dead0man]

Stalin was worse than Hitler. Period.

Even if he was (by some silly attempt to objectively calculate such things), we didn't go to war with Hitler because he was "worse" than Stalin, we went to war with him because he was immediately threatening to turn the world into a smoldering ruin.

We went to war with Hitler because we were manipulated into it by a regime with Soviet sympathies.

We went to war with Hitler becuase GERMANY DECLARED WAR ON THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  I'm not sure why this fact has been removed from history books.
Dec 7-Japan attacks Pearl Harbor
Dec 8-US declares war on Japan
Dec 11-Germany and Italy declares war on the US, because of this, later that day the US declares war on Germany and Italy

[dead0man]

Just pointing out violence is evil no matter what flag its under.

Violence is not always evil and it kind of makes me sad that you feel that way.

Sick.

If you believed violence was always evil you wouldn't be a gun nut.

Self defense is evil?

Right....why did you agree with the "sick" part then?  And if somebody is beating somebody else with a baseball bat in the street, is it ok if I voilently push him over?  Should I just ask nicely?

[dead0man]

I don't understand how violence is evil when it can obviously be used for good.

[dead0man]

Well that explains it.

[dead0man]

Ahhh, well there we go.  That's not how I was defining "violence".  I was thinking any physical at of aggression with intent to cause physical harm to another is "violence".  But some words have more than one meaning, this is one of them.
link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So one can use violence in self defense.  Violence is not always "sick".

[dead0man]

I was saddened because a poster I thought enjoyed freedom would be against using violence even for a good cause just because, to him, violence=evil.

(or he hadn't thought it through or he had a very narrow definition of the word, both of which are sad too, though nowhere near as sad as thinking all violence was evil)

[dead0man]

I was saddened because a poster I thought enjoyed freedom would be against using violence even for a good cause just because, to him, violence=evil.

(or he hadn't thought it through or he had a very narrow definition of the word, both of which are sad too, though nowhere near as sad as thinking all violence was evil)

To me the American people are the good cause. I know that's a very rare thing to hear from me but I am against the sending of American lives to fight and die in defense of lands that are not their own. It isn't a popular stance, even as the public disapproves of intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, but they are mine and I will continue to hold them.

I'm not involved in that discussion.  I was just talking about violence in general and that it's not always evil.  I'm not making a judgement call of good/bad on any of our current military endeavours here.

[dead0man]

Well like I said, the definition of "violence" is subjective. To someone it could mean any act of physical force against anything, to someone else it could mean "an act of painful force with a nondefensive purpose".

If they wanted to hold a narrow and incomplete definition that would be fine, but they are going to have a hard time discussing it with people that don't know of their shortcomings.

[dead0man]

Well the second one can if it stops a worse wrong from continuing. 

Again, a man is beating another man to death.  You've tried talking to him, but he ignores you.  You, as a human, would have the duty to make it stop.  Violence may be your only option.  What if the one getting beat to death is a dog?  A Woman?  A child?

[dead0man]

That's great for full on hard core pacifists, but that's a very small percentage of the population.  For the rest of us, we have a duty to protect other, weaker beings when we have the ability to do it.  Sure, sometimes you won't be able to go help the victim being beaten in the street because you won't be able to stop the attack for whatever reason, but even then, a good human would at least try.  I'm not suggesting a person should risk his life to save an abused dog, but maybe to save a bus full of hijacked toddlers.