Valkyrie

[Resurrexi]

DairyGirl, you might want to watch what you say, you don't want to get put on one of O.'s prospective terrorist lists

[sarcasmguy126]

think about it this way...if they hadn't tried it, more American lives would have been lost because the war would have continued, with Hitler still killing them.

So, I would say, yes, it was morally acceptable.

And yes, it is very complex.

[rkwright]

Kafka are you saying that if one new that their plot would involve some sort of deception, then because of the ends don't justify the means the plot would be immoral?

If the guard stopped you on the way in and asked if you were carrying a bomb (it was a failed bombing attempt to kill Hitler) and you lied the whole act would now be considered immoral? Honestly that doesn't seem quiet right...

I don't know how familiar you are with the actual attempt, but it was carried out by German officers. Not necessarily "the enemy". Still moral? Its one thing if you're at war with someone and they're a legitimate target as Hitler was. But what if your just a teamkiller?

[kafka]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1881558' date='Jun 2 2009, 09:42 PM']Kafka are you saying that if one new that their plot would involve some sort of deception, then because of the ends don't justify the means the plot would be immoral?

If the guard stopped you on the way in and asked if you were carrying a bomb (it was a failed bombing attempt to kill Hitler) and you lied the whole act would now be considered immoral? Honestly that doesn't seem quiet right...

I don't know how familiar you are with the actual attempt, but it was carried out by German officers. Not necessarily "the enemy". Still moral? Its one thing if you're at war with someone and they're a legitimate target as Hitler was. But what if your just a teamkiller?[/quote]
No I slipped up in my explanation. I was thinking out loud and erred a bit. The act of putting oneself in a position to kill Hitler would be immoral if it involved lying and deception. I guess I was trying to make the point that even though killing Hitler would be moral in that historical circumstance since

A) He took the government entirley away from what is good and just and reasonable, making the government unjust and in effect betraying the people, the citizens would have a right to rise up and kill him. They no longer had recourse to the government justice system to arrest and convict him. And since government is for the common good, the people can sometimes act for the common good, when government is usurped by a dictator, without formal authority.

&

B) He went to war against other nations unjustly, and was a dictator who was threatening any innocent lives in his own and in other nations, then the leaders of other nations would be justified in attempting to kill him.

even though it was valid and moral to kill Hitler, seperate acts leading up to the actual act of killing him such as lying, would not be moral.

If the plotting German officers were acting with good intention for the common good of the country they would have been justified in plotting against Hitler, though its clear some were in it only for political gain and their true intentions were made manifest after the failed attempt since I think a few of them committed suicide, or immediately changed sides back to the Nazi party.

Edited June 3, 2009 by kafka

[Groo the Wanderer]

In a time of war, the leader of a country's armed forces is a legitimate target. Therefore Hitler was a legitimate target, regardless of who targeted him.

[Brother Adam]

Groo beat me to it. Hitler was waging war against innocent people. As an unjust aggressor he was a legitimate target in the allied defenses position to end the war.

[kafka]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' post='1882851' date='Jun 4 2009, 08:47 AM']In a time of war, the leader of a country's armed forces is a legitimate target. Therefore Hitler was a legitimate target, regardless of who targeted him.[/quote]
he was a lawful target since the allies waged a just war. But the moral act we are discussing is a different act than justly killing the opposition in a just war. It was a planned revolt.

[quote name='Brother Adam' post='1882853' date='Jun 4 2009, 08:53 AM']Groo beat me to it. Hitler was waging war against innocent people. As an unjust aggressor he was a legitimate target in the allied defenses position to end the war.[/quote]


I think the matter is a bit more complex, since he was being targeted by his own officers & countryman. It was a revolt, and they had a provisional government set up to take the Nazi's place.

It is a different act than the allies targeting Hitler in the act of just war. It needs to be analyzed as a seperate act.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i really dont see how it's okay to kill hitler whle he's just on his rise to power, not in war, not in the process of killing someone, and it's not okay to kill the late george killer the late term abortion doctor, who even would perform so late in pregnancy that they were illegal. hitler wasn't even killing anyone earlier on.