undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmikeash12y ago0 comments

You have that completely backwards. The means is what you do, and the ends is what happens after. The means here would be ceasing to kill and oppress. That is justified all by itself.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

voodoo12312y ago· 2 in thread

Right but you are justifying the terrorist means (killing civilians randomly) based on their ends (inducing political chance).

mikeashOP12y ago

No I am not. I'm getting righteously tired of this ridiculous conversational tactic, in which the other guy takes what I say, then speeds about six thousand light years in a random direction using a warp drive built on speculation and assumptions, then attacks whatever random space junk he finds there.

If you think I said it, then go find it and quote it for me.

voodoo12312y ago

You: "Wouldn't an outcome analogous to the modern-day UK and Ireland be great? People getting along well, no violence, reasonably stable governments? I don't see why you paint this as a bad outcome."

That outcome also included dead British cabinet ministers, civilians and infrastructure and decades of fear and hatred.

1 more reply

foobarbazqux12y ago

If you like, but it's not simply a choice between what you do (ends) or how you do it (means), it's both how and what that matter.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse