"I was only following orders"

2008-08-13 02:37:42

#51

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

Vilham wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
Vilham wrote:

The one person in the thread who seems to know something.

And seriously enough with the "evil" bullshit already people. There is no such thing as good or evil.
Yes, there is good and evil. Not on a global level but on a personal one. I bet that you classify things as good and bad as well. You just don't think that your view is shared by all.
Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.

Good: Mandela
Evil: Mugabe

Good and evil does exist imo.

2008-08-13 02:49:28

#52

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6155|what

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Good: Gandhi
Evil: Hitler

Good and evil does exist imo.

Slightly changed.

2008-08-13 02:54:07

#53

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

TheAussieReaper wrote:
..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Good: Gandhi
Evil: Hitler

Good and evil does exist imo.
Slightly changed.

You could use so many examples to prove that good and evil does exist to some extent.

2008-08-13 03:02:44

#54

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6502|so randum

oChaos.Haze wrote:
lmfao ted, splendid job playing Devil's Advocate. Everytime convo turns down a notch, there's Ted to spice up the batch!

My favorite is when people quote you with angry remarks, without ever having a clue as to what you are doing.

danke

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2008-08-13 03:44:24

#55

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:

Yes, there is good and evil. Not on a global level but on a personal one. I bet that you classify things as good and bad as well. You just don't think that your view is shared by all.
Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.
Good: Mandela
Evil: Mugabe

Good and evil does exist imo.

There are some that would claim Mugabe isn't evil though. It's your opinion that he is evil, doesn't make him evil.

2008-08-13 03:47:12

#56

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6413|'Murka

Chrisimo wrote:
FEOS wrote:
There's a reason that (at least in the US) military members are taught the difference between a legal and a non-legal order. Eichmann's orders were clearly illegal and the burden was on him not to follow them. As soon as he made the decision to follow an illegal order, his guilt was manifest.
Under which law were his orders illegal?

At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-08-13 03:48:24

#57

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

FEOS wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
FEOS wrote:
There's a reason that (at least in the US) military members are taught the difference between a legal and a non-legal order. Eichmann's orders were clearly illegal and the burden was on him not to follow them. As soon as he made the decision to follow an illegal order, his guilt was manifest.
Under which law were his orders illegal?
At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.

What if your countries laws don't agree to that.

2008-08-13 03:48:57

#58

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

Vilham wrote:
..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:

Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.
Good: Mandela
Evil: Mugabe

Good and evil does exist imo.
There are some that would claim Mugabe isn't evil though. It's your opinion that he is evil, doesn't make him evil.

Chances are those who claim he isn't evil are his henchmen Anyone with a brain would agree he is an evil motherfucker.

2008-08-13 03:50:10

#59

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6502|so randum

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:
..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Good: Mandela
Evil: Mugabe

Good and evil does exist imo.
There are some that would claim Mugabe isn't evil though. It's your opinion that he is evil, doesn't make him evil.
Chances are those who claim he isn't evil are his henchmen Anyone with a brain would agree he is an evil motherfucker.

depends on perspective.

Example, before and during Hitlers government of Germany, the general population loved him - he brought wealth, development, infrastructure and power back to a previously quite impoverished nation.

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2008-08-13 03:50:55

#60

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:
..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Good: Mandela
Evil: Mugabe

Good and evil does exist imo.
There are some that would claim Mugabe isn't evil though. It's your opinion that he is evil, doesn't make him evil.
Chances are those who claim he isn't evil are his henchmen Anyone with a brain would agree he is an evil motherfucker.

Agreed they probably are his henchmen, but unless there is a unified consensus that something is evil is it really evil? Isn't it just a different view on matters?

2008-08-13 03:56:41

#61

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

Vilham wrote:
..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:

There are some that would claim Mugabe isn't evil though. It's your opinion that he is evil, doesn't make him evil.
Chances are those who claim he isn't evil are his henchmen Anyone with a brain would agree he is an evil motherfucker.
Agreed they probably are his henchmen, but unless there is a unified consensus that something is evil is it really evil? Isn't it just a different view on matters?

look at the definition

morally objectionable behavior

I suppose different views do apply since people have different morales but I think people in general agree that ordering the death of millions of people is morally wrong ergo evil.

2008-08-13 04:09:22

#62

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

True. There are certain cases where someone can be nearly defined as evil. But people in general isn't enough for evil to go beyond just being opinion.

The neo-nazi movements in the former soviet block certainly don't think Hitler was evil.

I would certainly consider someone evil if they considered themselves evil and I agreed with their appraisal, but "evil" people rarely view themselves as "evil" and having done wrong.

2008-08-13 04:17:31

#63

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

Vilham wrote:
True. There are certain cases where someone can be nearly defined as evil. But people in general isn't enough for evil to go beyond just being opinion.

The neo-nazi movements in the former soviet block certainly don't think Hitler was evil.

I would certainly consider someone evil if they considered themselves evil and I agreed with their appraisal, but "evil" people rarely view themselves as "evil" and having done wrong.

Well what about when courts define criminals as evil or using the legal term malice(Nuremberg trials)?! That's more fact than opinion because verdicts have to be based on something.

2008-08-13 04:17:43

#64

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6413|'Murka

Vilham wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:

Under which law were his orders illegal?
At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.
What if your countries laws don't agree to that.

Are you implying that Germany wasn't a signatory?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-08-13 04:18:33

#65

Chrisimo: Member; +3|5754

Vilham wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
Vilham wrote:
And seriously enough with the "evil" bullshit already people. There is no such thing as good or evil.
Yes, there is good and evil. Not on a global level but on a personal one. I bet that you classify things as good and bad as well. You just don't think that your view is shared by all.
Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.

Let me repeat: There is good and evil. On a personal level. That means that you as an individual will classify things as good or bad and that this is your opinion only. Please try to understand what I have written before you give an answer.

2008-08-13 04:40:17

#66

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

FEOS wrote:
Vilham wrote:
FEOS wrote:

At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.
What if your countries laws don't agree to that.
Are you implying that Germany wasn't a signatory?

Indeed they were a signatory, however they had a dramatic change in political control making any agreement the ruling powers might have previously rather redundant.

2008-08-13 04:42:02

#67

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6768|UK

Chrisimo wrote:
Vilham wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
Yes, there is good and evil. Not on a global level but on a personal one. I bet that you classify things as good and bad as well. You just don't think that your view is shared by all.
Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.
Let me repeat: There is good and evil. On a personal level. That means that you as an individual will classify things as good or bad and that this is your opinion only. Please try to understand what I have written before you give an answer.

Even on a personal level I rarely see things as evil or good, there is far too much complexity in every day life to consider things so rashly. Sometimes as Teddy pointed out there are just plain evil things, like the Nazi and Soviet deaths camps.

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:
True. There are certain cases where someone can be nearly defined as evil. But people in general isn't enough for evil to go beyond just being opinion.

The neo-nazi movements in the former soviet block certainly don't think Hitler was evil.

I would certainly consider someone evil if they considered themselves evil and I agreed with their appraisal, but "evil" people rarely view themselves as "evil" and having done wrong.
Well what about when courts define criminals as evil or using the legal term malice(Nuremberg trials)?! That's more fact than opinion because verdicts have to be based on something.

There's always the winners dictate the history and what is right and wrong.

In the end it comes down to a personal choice, you can either view things straight up on your own moral code (nothing wrong with doing that), or you view things from your moral code but then consider the motive behind doing things, you don't have to agree with the motive but understand why someone did something gives you a much clearer view of good and evil and how it's not quite so simple.

Last edited by Vilham (2008-08-13 04:47:09)

2008-08-13 05:00:15

#68

Chrisimo: Member; +3|5754

Vilham wrote:
Even on a personal level I rarely see things as evil or good, there is far too much complexity in every day life to consider things so rashly. Sometimes as Teddy pointed out there are just plain evil things, like the Nazi and Soviet deaths camps.

Well, it's really a binary choice. Take a color table. A black and white one. At the one end there is white, at the other end there is black. Everything in between is grey. In almost all cases the choice/person/behaviour/whatever is not pure black or pure white but grey. 70% grey or 30% grey or whatever. But you draw a line at 50%. Everything above is black and everything below is white. Now back to real life. Let's take a sucide bomber for example. Evil? In my opinion: Yes. I realize that he may have had a miserable life and that he wouldn't be commiting such acts if it weren't for his miserable life. So he is not completely evil. But for me he still is. Other persons might see things totally different (yet they will still classify him as either evil or good, even if they do not consciously think about it). Classifying things enables us to act. If we would see all things as grey and make no distinctions we wouldn't be able to act because all possible choices would be the same.

2008-08-13 05:03:30

#69

Chrisimo: Member; +3|5754

FEOS wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
FEOS wrote:
There's a reason that (at least in the US) military members are taught the difference between a legal and a non-legal order. Eichmann's orders were clearly illegal and the burden was on him not to follow them. As soon as he made the decision to follow an illegal order, his guilt was manifest.
Under which law were his orders illegal?
At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.

I'm pretty sure that the Hague Convention isn't the highest authority for your soldiers. You countries laws are most probably a higher authority. It probably just so happens that your country's laws adopt the Hague Convention. But in case of Hitler's Germany, the soldiers weren't doing anything 'illegal'.

2008-08-13 05:09:42

#70

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6651

Vilham wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:
Vilham wrote:

Sorry but if you think the world is that black and white, you have a lot to still realise or you live an incredibly carefree existence in which nothing ever is in that massive grey region that is called life.
Let me repeat: There is good and evil. On a personal level. That means that you as an individual will classify things as good or bad and that this is your opinion only. Please try to understand what I have written before you give an answer.
Even on a personal level I rarely see things as evil or good, there is far too much complexity in every day life to consider things so rashly. Sometimes as Teddy pointed out there are just plain evil things, like the Nazi and Soviet deaths camps.

..teddy..jimmy wrote:
Vilham wrote:
True. There are certain cases where someone can be nearly defined as evil. But people in general isn't enough for evil to go beyond just being opinion.

The neo-nazi movements in the former soviet block certainly don't think Hitler was evil.

I would certainly consider someone evil if they considered themselves evil and I agreed with their appraisal, but "evil" people rarely view themselves as "evil" and having done wrong.
Well what about when courts define criminals as evil or using the legal term malice(Nuremberg trials)?! That's more fact than opinion because verdicts have to be based on something.
There's always the winners dictate the history and what is right and wrong.

In the end it comes down to a personal choice, you can either view things straight up on your own moral code (nothing wrong with doing that), or you view things from your moral code but then consider the motive behind doing things, you don't have to agree with the motive but understand why someone did something gives you a much clearer view of good and evil and how it's not quite so simple.

I was talking more about malice in courts rather than the Nuremburg trials..I just thought I'd mention it.

We could discuss this for ages...even Philosophers like Plato and De Spinoza differ when it comes to classifying good and evil..I guess it's a matter of opinion

2008-08-13 06:00:10

#71

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6413|'Murka

Vilham wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Vilham wrote:

What if your countries laws don't agree to that.
Are you implying that Germany wasn't a signatory?
Indeed they were a signatory, however they had a dramatic change in political control making any agreement the ruling powers might have previously rather redundant.

Unless they withdraw from the treaty or change their signing statement, they are bound by it, regardless of the regime in power.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-08-13 06:01:41

#72

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6413|'Murka

Chrisimo wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Chrisimo wrote:

Under which law were his orders illegal?
At a minimum, Articles 46, 50, and 56 of the Hague Convention of 1899 as well as the Geneva Protocol of 1928.
I'm pretty sure that the Hague Convention isn't the highest authority for your soldiers. You countries laws are most probably a higher authority. It probably just so happens that your country's laws adopt the Hague Convention. But in case of Hitler's Germany, the soldiers weren't doing anything 'illegal'.

Indeed it's not.

However, add the word "immoral" to the "illegal" part. Soldiers are required to NOT follow orders that are immoral and/or illegal.

Then there's that whole bit about Germany losing and the victors determining who broke what laws.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-08-13 06:24:31

#73

latinolink: plop plop flop flop; +11|6659|west liberty IA

The real question is if he ever believed all that Hitler has said. Was he and other superior officers value the ideals of Hitler to go as far as massacring all those people? Just based on the fact if that he said "I was only following orders" just means that he either respected or was fearful of Hitler to do an evil act and you just can't say that there is no such thing as a crime without a punishment when caught. So my opinion is tough cookies he had to see it coming has to pay the price.

2008-08-13 06:27:12

#74

Chrisimo: Member; +3|5754

FEOS wrote:
Indeed it's not.

However, add the word "immoral" to the "illegal" part. Soldiers are required to NOT follow orders that are immoral and/or illegal.

Then there's that whole bit about Germany losing and the victors determining who broke what laws.

But what is immoral? Morality is a personal matter. Some people do not have morals at all. Some people say it way morally ok to firebomb Dresden (because Germany started the war). Some think different. I think your last sentence says it all. Every person has his/her own morals. The morals of those with power however are those that count.

2008-08-13 18:21:40

#75

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6716|US

Sure you can debate moral relativity all you want, but in the end, society has rules. One of those rules includes not murdering several million of your own civilians without military purpose. Another rule of society would be that genocide is unacceptable.

Strike 1= death sentence/life in prison
Strike 2= death sentence/life in prison

questions?

BF2S Forums "I was only following orders"

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

oChaos.Haze wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Vilham wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Vilham wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Vilham wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Vilham wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Vilham wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Board footer