It is very possible that a person can simultaneously be a sympathetic victim and a *really* bad guy

[Stinky The Clown]

A guy who is hellbent to kill Americans and blow shit up who was later captured and tortured would be a good example.

Which is deserving of greater outrage?

[flashl]

1. Like this?

San Diego Police Rescue, Then Kill, Aggressive Man

A man who went overboard during a party cruise in San Diego Bay was killed by police Saturday night after he attacked the officers who had tried to rescue him, police said today.

Officer.com

[Stinky The Clown]

3. No

From that story the guy could be a two-time victim.

[bryant69]

2. Yes it is indeed possible.

I can feel sorry for a guy who has a shitty life and then turns to dealing as a way to make ends meet, for example. I feel sorry that he's in that position. That said, that doesn't absolve him of his crimes.

By the same token I can understand how our legitimate national fears over another 9/11 would lead us to support some terrible programs; but that doesn't mean we should be exonorated for our national stupidity.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[sui generis]

4. well in context

if our American guys are hellbent on blowing up foreigners and then are captured and tortured or beheaded . . .

I think outrage is out of place though. I can empathize with somebody whose children were killed as "civilian collateral casualty" hating ALL Americans. If I couldn't empathize with them, it would be hard to feel righteous about us losing 3000 Americans in a terror plot.

It's complicated by context. I don't agree with terrorism, obviously, but I can put myself in the mind of someone who thinks they have nothing more to lose, and no voice and no justice, making a terrible and unjustifiable decision to react with violence against the people he or she can reach.

Maybe it's the "walk a mile in their shoes" thing that might make us stronger and more responsible. I wonder how many people were simultaneously on our side before we destroyed their lives and are now a "really" bad guy.

We do have responsibility and nothing will change until we own it too. The Iraq war happened for oil, is happening for oil.

We can't lard that with patriotism for anyone but ourselves.

[Stinky The Clown]

5. I agree

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. How about a generally "good" guy who victimizes other "good guys"?

Such as guys who drop bombs on civilians because they're "just following orders"?

[Stinky The Clown]

7. That's pretty far afield from what was meant in the OP

There's also the matter of 'legal orders'. You and I may not like them, but, so far, they're legal.

There are many more to blame besides - or more to the point, before even getting down to - 'the troops'.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. I was attempting to point out that "really bad" and "just following orders" are very similar.

I'm pretty confident that the "terrorist" thought what he was doing was for a noble cause - i.e. protecting his religion and/or country.

Just as I'm pretty confident that the pilot dropping the bomb was doing much the same - protecting his country.


The result is much the same.

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Gandhi

“In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.” Gandhi