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

[JohnFKennedy]

So you believe that the "ends justify the means", just as Machiavelli did?

Please read Machiavelli before you randomly insert him into arguments as a negative association. You'll find that you probably agree with him on at least a few points.

[JohnFKennedy]

So you believe that the "ends justify the means", just as Machiavelli did?

Please read Machiavelli before you randomly insert him into arguments as a negative association. You'll find that you probably agree with him on at least a few points.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I totally cannot fault that logic...except I said read Machiavelli, not read wikipedia on other people's responses to Machiavelli - somehow I don't think he wrote that entry (The Prince isn't his only book by the way). It is good to know that I can judge a thinker's work by who reads them though so thank you for the tip (also, you should probably have kept the little 'Citation Needed' bit for the Stalin one, it's a bit dishonest to cite an unsubstantiated source and not make clear that it is unsubstantiated).

Aside from these various dictators, you might also be interested to know that Machiavelli's works exerted a fair influence on the American founding fathers and that the second amendment, in particular, has its origins in Machiavellian thought (via James Harrington and other English republicans).

[JohnFKennedy]

Do you deny that Machiavelli believed that the ends justified the means?

Do I deny? Have I been dragged before the Committee of Public Safety again? Well, to answer your question Monsieur Incorruptible, I would say that Machiavelli's beliefs are far more complicated than you give them credit for and thus he did not believe in quite such an unsophisticated notion as that which you ascribe to him. By way of illustration, I would point you to this note (number 62) to Peter Bondarella's edition of The Prince which may go some way towards explaining. The 'ends' Machiavelli speaks of generally relate to the preservation of the freedom of one's country. He also explicitly does not use the word 'justify' which, as Bondarella mentions in that note, would imply that the ends render the means to be just. The verb he uses is scusare which translates into English as 'to excuse' or 'to forgive', something entirely different from 'to justify'.

[JohnFKennedy]

Still, the fact that he believes that the ends excuse the means is just as immoral.

You're entitled to your opinion on that, although I think you would find many circumstances in which you believed the ends excused the means. For instance, if I were to attempt to infringe on your liberty - however you want to define it - in some manner, perhaps threatening you with a weapon, and you responded by killing me or wounding me severely then I think you would probably argue that the ends (the preservation of your liberty) excused your means (doing me harm).

Of course, all this is irrelevant to actual topic of discussion.