does anyone think genocide is a good thing?
596536
No, of course genocide was not a good thing.  \n\nIt's erroneous to classify God's destruction of Sodom and Jericho as genocide.  \n\nIn both cases, the "big picture" is God's victory over evil on behalf of those who trust and believe in Him.  \n\nOne thing I've found helpful in reading the Bible is not only to focus on the event being described, but the deeper meaning behind the event and the lessons from it that can be applied today.
663767
The worst things that have happened lately is in the country of Rwanda. A genocide in where 800,000 people, including women and children were viciously tortured, raped, beaten and killed.\n\nRwanda was a Belgium colony before being Rwanda. In order to have more effective control over their dominions they divided all people in two distinct social classes: HUTUS and TUTSIS, they are slightly different.\n\nThey cruelly decided to give TUTSIS all the priviledges, best posts, best housing, best everything, and the price was to be loyal to the Belgian authorities, they even were the Belgian police. \n\nAnd to the HUTUS they treated them like animals, by means of the TUTSIS.\n\nWhen the Belgians left, the country became chaos, ridled with Civil war between this artificially created difference in races.\n\nAfter the assasination of a HUTU president, all hell broke loose, the HUTU government, backed of by the Interhamwe, an illegal militia of killers, began sistematically killing every TUTSI they saw, and very viciously.\n\nBecause Rwanda did not have any important economic interests with no big power, and it did not have any major power country as a friend, no one intervened in helping stop this slaughter, even the UN and our country, the United States, turned their backs on them. NO ONE helped.\nYou can rent the movie Hotel Rwanda. It is very clear there what happened. \n\nThe United States did not want to participate do to the recent memory of what happened to the military personnel we had in Somalia in 1992 (you can see it in the movie BLACK HAWK DOWN), a terrible tragedy for us....\na big tragedy for US soldiers.
849705
For certain crimes, I believe it is beneficial.  I won't start a big rally here but if you look at countries and states that have capital punishment in place for violent crimes, their crime rates are incredibly lower than ours.  Eye for an eye......sorry.
648705
America has never stepped up to combat genocide, what makes you think that's going to change?
63498
Well, peace is always good since it prevents the unecessary death of others.  War would be good if you run a major corporation and can profit off it.
97158
Maybe it depends on who you're killing and who you are saving. Ulitmatley though I would say yes it is worth it. As the post above mine said 2>1, but that is not always the case in humanity. If killing someone that had something to greatly contribute to society would save a few people who had nothing to contribute I would say it would probably be better to save the one, because there's always the posibility that saving that one person could save 10+ lives somewhere down the line. \nFor example (This is a horrible example and is not very realistic but oh well) say that someone had discovered a cure for cancer, but some terrorists said they'd release 100+ hostages if you would turn him/her over. In that case I would say sorry for those 100+ people because ultimatley the cure for cancer would save more lives.\nOther than that scenario or one similar though I'd say it is best to sacrifice one to save many.
770948
Which govt are you talking about? There are almost 200 in the world. Some are involved in genocide. Sudan leaps immediately to mind. Iraq under Saddam tried. Many others have over the years. The only reason that I know of is that they are evil.\n\nIf you mean our govt, no. never has, never will.
274001
Genocide begins with the most mundane of things and builds from there.\n\nThe (enter your favorite racial slur here) has too many damn kids, doesn't respect anyone, makes more money than he deserves, thinks he's superior to us, has all the good and powerful jobs, etc. When enough people start to think that, or are convinced of this because someone else wants to deflect attention from what they are doing, then feelings of inferiority, hopelessness, frustration in the general population can be manipulated to believe there is a problem that needs to be solved. Eventually, the persons who claim they can SOLVE the problem will devise a "final solution." The general population will probably not know what that solution is, they just know the (ethnic slur) is obviously getting what he deserves. As time goes by, while the general population might start to become suspicious, the one thing they know is: I really don't want to know!
490157
it ended in 1945 and a genocide is an act committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.
185154
No! Peace is great for this world! There has been enough bloodshed!
543414
Id say the Sudan becuase of the EXTREME genocide and famine going on....
984308
I'm positive that popcorn is among the favorite snacks at the united nations. It's so light, buttery and full of cholesterol as to be flighty and devoid of substance on the one hand and yet harmful with a much heightened likelihood of stroke on the other.\n\nHaving studied the Rwandan genocide at university, I can honestly say that not only was the United Nations slow to respond, slow to say, ummm hmmmm... thousands dead.... maybe I don't know.... some sort of crisis is happening here, slow to condemn the racial cleansing, but reeeaallly slow in the head NOT to have seen it coming, (especially when plans were leaked on national radio, and even before that, in special reports).\n\nThe problem that then United Nations has managing slaughters like Rwanda, and the almost unheard of slaughter in Zimbabwe, is one of political correctness run amok. Basically, to the minds of United Nations bean counters, members of racial minorities (majorities?) cannot be racist, nor even hold racist views. Perpetually and universally disadvantaged groups, like blacks, cannot, no matter how many people they kill, be considered as oppressive as say, I don't know, whites.\n\nIn Rwanda, we had a circumstance wherein two racial divisions of what we would consider "black" arose, wherein animosities and divisions followed, (from years of preference and advantage for one group at the expense of the other), and wherein racist attitudes due to years of quotas and misgivings over favoritism, finally boiled over into genocide - the attempted eradication of an entire people. Kind of scary when you follow United Nations forced policies of affirmative action around the globe and specifically their impact here at home.\n\nAnd oh yes, Zimbabwe - the genocide no one cared enough to even report. This particular genocide saw the targeting of white farmers and whites in general, by both government leaders and mob mentality, by the predominantly black population. When white farmers were beat about the head with blood draining out their ears (and I'm not making a pun on corn), in front of screaming children, and from the United Nations, and our pathetic and fully indoctrinated media we heard little more than a peep, I thought to myself - pass the popcorn ladies you've done it again.\n\nThe framework for "progress" and "human rights" under the auspices of the United Nations seems to be: develop inequality by creating a "victim" group and then demanding legislation be developed to address the artificially generated problem. Once animosity has grown significantly, to the point of boiling over into violence, ignore and whereever possible, place callers on hold. When deaths become widespread and the crisis completely unmanageable, propose to do some window dressing to take the edge off, then wash, rinse and repeat.
641330
it's general practice to deny genocide, if they admitted it, they could be prosecuted for it.
412560
i think it depends on the case.  i think we should focus on more humanitarian aid rather than military intervention or military aid.  its probably fair to say every country has enough guns without us sending them some more for their cause.\n\nthe idea too that we are world's police implies that we are always fighting the good fight and, just ask south america, we are more often than not fighting for what we think will work out best for us in the short term.  there are numerous cases of over-throwing democracies either directly with our  military or through funding and channeling of arms, and setting up dictators in their place.  it would be much harder to say we shouldn't be policing the world if in fact we were fighting for what was best for the people of those countries instead.\n\nin cases of genocide i think we should be stepping in, and much faster than we have in the past, and doing whatever needs to be done to bring a stop to it.
484673
We study this subject and others to "never forget" the horrible things people can do to each other and to keep them from happening again.  But alas, in my life time the world has allowed these things to go on over and over again!  Africa - Bosnia - the Middle East!  Other countries don't want to get involved until it affects them in the pocket.  Sadly, most wars through the centuries have been politically motivated rather than for the cause of humanity even though that is what is used as the pretext.\nStudy well, and make a difference!
355274
Good, Evil, whatever. It's all a matter of perspective. Let's just hope that everyone gets killed, then we won't have to worry about it anymore.
398530
I have just one thing to say...LOOK UP THE WORD GENOCIDE.