"Just doing one's job" doesn't justify anything.

santaClaws on 14/9/2001 at 14:34

As i consider this very important, I post this again, extra. I already posted it as an anwer to
heath_boys topic "Achieving moral balance while playing DX"
heath_boy states that in his opinion, the UNATCO and MJ12 troops don't do anything wrong because they're "just doing their job".
here it comes...

That's a very, very sensible point you're touching.
I don't know inhowever you from America (I presume) have to and do think about the happenings in the Third Reich 1935 - 1945 in Germany, Europe. Hitlers ill and devasting ideas and concepts could ONLY survive for that long (imagine: people suffered 10 long years!) because he had his SS (security squad) and an army who JUST DID THEIR JOB, as you're calling it.
No one can blame a soldier for fighting in war and killing the enemy, if he, had he refused, had been killed by his own neighbours, friends, chiefs.
As I said before: I don't know how much you try to seek explainations - but the way you present your opinion ("UNATCO aren't bad, they're just doing their job") explains a lot to me. It shows how the innocent, nothing knowing mass of people can be manipulated and conducted by a leader with enough carisma.

Think about what I wrote - especially regarding the war calls of your very own president after the World Trade Center desaster. I do in no way approve of those feindish, cowardice acts of terrorism. But this is by no means worth a THIRD WORLD WAR. Even if your soldiers (ore the NATO ones) "are just doing their job".

santaClaws
=======================
"Now let's kill that fucking band."
Visit (http://www.worldtradecenter.com) World Trade Center Homepage and be astonished by the judicousness shown there.

Shadowlurker on 14/9/2001 at 21:00

You are very correct. Just doing one's job is never an excuse to screw others over, even though it is the first phrase that comes to mind as a defense for many.

Bionicman on 15/9/2001 at 01:25

excuse me, santa, but i'm afraid your horribly mistaken. he does NOT kill unatco, but he DOES kill mj12. to quote denise from the original thread:

Quote:

Umm, I think you completely misunderstood what he was saying. He still kills the MJ12 troops, and offers your own misperception of his perspective as an example of the wrong way to go about it; you two would, in fact, appear to be in perfect agreement on the points regarding MJ12.
He's also saying that the UNATCO troops are being deliberately misled and as such aren't completely guilty. They have killed, yes, but they think they're killing terrorists, just as JC does in the beginning. They've been duped, just as JC was, and for that they don't deserve to die any more than JC did.

if you step on some bugs walking across the street, then later find out that they were your best friends bugs....is it still wrong? i don't think so. you didn't know, and therefore weren't intentionally doing anything wrong. it is your fault that they're dead, but i think that your best friend would understand. i think you guys are smart enough to realise what i'm saying without me having to put anymore examples.

santaClaws on 15/9/2001 at 13:25

:rolleyes:
That's just what I said!
No one's actions are justyfiable by the phrase of "just doing one's job", but they're not to be killed! I never said that!

That's exactely the reason why I love those sneaker games (thief, DX). You can triumph over your enemy without lowering you to his/her stage. You defeat them without them even knowing.
That's so f**king cool.

Bionicman on 15/9/2001 at 18:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Bionicman:
<STRONG>excuse me, santa, but i'm afraid your horribly mistaken. he does NOT kill unatco, but he DOES kill mj12. to quote denise from the original thread:

if you step on some bugs walking across the street, then later find out that they were your best friends bugs....is it still wrong? i don't think so. you didn't know, and therefore weren't intentionally doing anything wrong. it is your fault that they're dead, but i think that your best friend would understand. i think you guys are smart enough to realise what i'm saying without me having to put anymore examples.</STRONG>

wait a second...i didn't say that! i didn't post that! what the hell? i always put this at the end of my e-mails:

<IMG SRC="thumb.gif" border="0">

santaClaws on 15/9/2001 at 20:42

whats the matter with you anyway?*g*
and what's this duck thing supposed to be?guess i'm a little underinformed.

Bionicman on 16/9/2001 at 16:59

HERE IT IS! THE DEFINATIVE EXPLANATION OF BIONICMAN'S SIGNATURE!!!

most of you read it like this:

Mr. Ducks.
Mr. Not Ducks.
Oz Mr., c them wangs?
Oh, Mr. Ducks!

this is incorrect. for all you non hicks out there, this is the correct reading of it:

'Em are ducks!
'Em are not ducks!
Oh, 'es 'em are! C them wangs?
Oh! 'Em are ducks!

you see! it's so simple!

<IMG SRC="thumb.gif" border="0">

Homoludens on 17/9/2001 at 10:06

PCommish on 17/9/2001 at 17:54

Quote:

Originally posted by santaClaws:
[QBThat's exactely the reason why I love those sneaker games (thief, DX). You can triumph over your enemy without lowering you to his/her stage. [/QB]

Um, in Thief, your not exactly on the moral high ground. Garrett is below their level in most cases, not all. But, JC can very well take the moral high ground. But, it's not lowering yourself to kill in order to protect others. But, yeah stopping the enemy while their completely oblivious is sweet.

Airbag_Victim on 17/9/2001 at 18:21

I find it interesting that I never even bothered thinking about if I should really kill the enemy or not. If I knew that they'd shoot at me, I'd shoot 'em first.