Are laws more important than individual rights?

Post by **Lieva** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:44 am

hmm they maybe got the last bit wrong

My dad said the americans got involved in WW2 cuz we got involved in their war so kinda forced them into it

He said they joined cuz of money

Gandelf · Post by **Gandelf** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:49 am

Xest wrote:We don't go to war to protect our way of life. We do it for profit.

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

It's a long read, but enjoy, you might learn something.

Quite enlightening and very true. But, putting that all aside, could we have really turned a blind eye towards what Hitler and the Nazis wanted to do? Would it have been just in the interests of profit to allow the Nazis to take control of Europe, with their attitude towards Jews and their Eugenics programme? If they had not been stopped and the way of life they wanted to bring in, would the "free" West (even the "free" world) be what it is today, or would be living under a repressive regime?

So, is war really JUST about making profit? Are there really no ethical reasons for going to war? Is there really no-one who would sanction military action to protect their way of life, if that way of life was threatened by a regime that was clearly evil?

Kabane · Post by **Kabane** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:13 am

dont get me wronge here but if the nazis would of won the war then would it of really been that bad? we dont know with all truth it maybe that if the repressive regime had contuned we would not have Mass starvation through out the world and Mass unimployment with Billions in world dept, would not be pressant now also it would of elliminated a Lot of crimes (ie kids thefing etc due to compolsanery enlistment) hitler as a leader was a genuis but as a man he was a little over the top.
but back to the main question Are law's more important that individual right's? Yes they are as law are made to protect the mass population and at the end of the day the need of the many out way the need of the few.

Post by **Lieva** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:44 am

Gandelf wrote:But, putting that all aside, could we have really turned a blind eye towards what Hitler and the Nazis wanted to do?

We did do appt

We knew all about it.
Peeps say now its cuz no one could believe that anyone would be so evil but we DID know about what he was doing and turned a blind eye.

Post by **Lairiodd** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:26 pm

Kabane wrote:dont get me wronge here but if the nazis would of won the war then would it of really been that bad? we dont know with all truth it maybe that if the repressive regime had contuned we would not have Mass starvation through out the world and Mass unimployment with Billions in world dept, would not be pressant now also it would of elliminated a Lot of crimes (ie kids thefing etc due to compolsanery enlistment) hitler as a leader was a genuis but as a man he was a little over the top.

Hmm, at the end of the war, Germany was in ruins. That seems like a pretty bad result to me. Hitler would not have been so popular if he didn't go to war, so his leadership style involved doing things that weren't wise in order to cement his power base. You can't just look and say he was an effective leader, pity about losing the war and his politics. Fundamentally, his politics and leadership style were linked and involved ignoring the consequences to individuals.

Also, I don't see a Nazi world power caring much about what happens in third world countries.

but back to the main question Are law's more important that individual right's? Yes they are as law are made to protect the mass population and at the end of the day the need of the many out way the need of the few.

The "needs of the many" is made up of lots of "need(s) of the few" added together. You protect society best by protecting all the individuals that make up society.

Thandruil · Post by **Thandruil** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:05 pm

Not that i'm a nazi or anything, but kinda have to agree with what Kabane said. No1 will ever be able to do again what Hitler did 70 years ago. Being a foreigner in germany, he became the leader of the country, and millions of peoples followed him in his believes. Eventho they were wrong, if Hitler had won the war, we would now learn in school he was a great man and was right in everything he said. People would c him as a God who helped the world.

On topic again. Countries have their laws, some easy, others radical. Now there's a big commotion cause a muslim became a christian, and he's facing the death penalty for it.
Maybe all the people with closed eyes should have a look at the past and what christianity forced upon the world. Sending missionaries to the 3d world countries, forcing their believes on people. Taking women their virginity in the name of God. The Pope who didn't disagree with Hitler. Fighting wars in the name of God, and many more. <Won't even start about the raping of little boys>.
No offence, but in the end maybe a person should be shot cause he still wants to become a christian after all that.

Post by **Xest** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:45 pm

Gandelf wrote:Quite enlightening and very true. But, putting that all aside, could we have really turned a blind eye towards what Hitler and the Nazis wanted to do? Would it have been just in the interests of profit to allow the Nazis to take control of Europe, with their attitude towards Jews and their Eugenics programme? If they had not been stopped and the way of life they wanted to bring in, would the "free" West (even the "free" world) be what it is today, or would be living under a repressive regime?

So, is war really JUST about making profit? Are there really no ethical reasons for going to war? Is there really no-one who would sanction military action to protect their way of life, if that way of life was threatened by a regime that was clearly evil?

We couldn't have ignored it no, but the Americans certainly could.

They could have quite happily had their pacific war without ever bothering to join in with us at all.

Part the reason I don't think we should really worry about oppresive regimes here in Europe is that as has been said here already, no one could do again what Hitler did without a massive world changing event. I'd imagine if Al Qaeda set off a nuclear weapon in central Europe then you'd find enough hatred amongst the remaining people to build up a massive army in Europe and roll the Middle East. The other thing to remember is in the case of a country like Iran, who's rumoured to be building Nuclear weapons is that even if that's true I don't think we should worry too much, quite honestly I've got a lot of confidence that even if the West doesn't go to war on Iran, Israel will blow their Natanz facility sky high if they even get close to building nuclear weapons. Of course, this is all assuming that things like sanctions fail. I don't think Israel have a lot to worry about, they've proven time and again that none of their neighbours have a chance in hell of defeating them.

I should've probably expanded on my original comment, I wasn't terribly clear, when I say we go to war for profit, by we I mean the West in todays political climate, we really have no other reason to go to war in Europe/North America nowadays.

Cernos · Post by **Cernos** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:07 pm

Governments and religion are just different sides of the same coin, methods of social control and a convenient excuse for all the bad things people do to each other in the name of their country and/or religion.

The natural state of humans is to do inexcusably bad things to everyone and everything around them, whatever it takes to survive. However, most people won't take responsibility for their own actions, so they invent nations, governments and religions to legitimise the attrocities they commit. Much easier to claim you robbed and murdered someone for your god or country than admit you did it for purely selfish reasons - because you wanted to grab that persons possessions or territory for yourself, or because the inner savage in you got a kick out of it.

Of course not everyone is motivated by aggression, some governments and religions are born out of a need for defence or a desire for change. But inevitably such good motives crumble due to corruption and the fact that safety in numbers means that even the meek and mild will eventually decide they want a piece of the murdering, looting and pillaging action.

But what's the alternative to governments and religion? Anarchy and a slide back to savagery?

Post by **Xest** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:47 pm

Democracy can't really be likened to religion/other political regimes because in a democracy people are responsible for electing their goverment and hence can be held accountable, that's a contrast to religion and some other political regimes where people can blame their leader/deity to avoid accountability themselves.

Kabane · Post by **Kabane** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:56 pm

Lairiodd wrote:Hmm, at the end of the war, Germany was in ruins. That seems like a pretty bad result to me. Hitler would not have been so popular if he didn't go to war, so his leadership style involved doing things that weren't wise in order to cement his power base. You can't just look and say he was an effective leader, pity about losing the war and his politics. Fundamentally, his politics and leadership style were linked and involved ignoring the consequences to individuals.

aye but at the end of the war german lost, but say he didnt , and i want noone to take offence to this but he would of wiped out the jews then any other race/sect he took a dislike to and hency the world population would be no where near what it is today his armys would remain active to fight the rebels there for keeping ppl in work andbecuse german would be the world power and claiming 90% of it to tis self then there would be a Very low world dept. and if we had been brought up under the nazi rule then it wouldnt be wronge to kill "jews" as we all know right and wronge is just the current mass thinking at the time, Eg back in the 18/19 C it was fine to marry and have babysby someone who was say 12. but the current thinking is that its discusting and pedophillic.

Lairiodd wrote:Also, I don't see a Nazi world power caring much about what happens in third world countries

no they wouldnt they would just wipe them out and use the land.

Lairiodd wrote:The "needs of the many" is made up of lots of "need(s) of the few" added together. You protect society best by protecting all the individuals that make up society.

ok so you are the leader of country youhave hardly any defencive stand's and a world power comes along and offers you 2 choices they are, i want you to kill 100 of your ppl anyone of you choice Or i will use my power and distory your country and all the 100 billon ppl living in that country. Now you can eather kill 100 your self or you and your pplwill die youcan not fight the world power What do you do? do you takethe need of the many or the need of the few that help to make up the many?