Originally posted by riv6672if more good shit is achieved by the killing than bad shit then it is justified imo.
What do you mean?
good shit/bad shit are obviously subjective but i'm not bothered cause so is the taboo against killing.
think about killing some shitty dictator who is trying to mix things up hitler/napoleon style. maybe attacking his troops and killing his civilians can seem like self defense in some vague way when passed though a filter of nationalistic and political brainwashing, but in many cases it's more like preventative planning. those people aren't putting you in the position where your life is in imminent danger and thus you can't claim self defense. yet the fact remains that in some cases more good than bad can come from putting them down.