You have a choice - To save lives?

You have the gift of foresight and one unit of the defence forces that must stay together to have the strength to control either of these situations (A) Rioting and looting will break out in your hometown, 50 people will die unless army is brought it to control the area (b) 3,000 people will die in a ethnic cleansing massacre in a far off country unless your army unit ( the only one available in the whole world ) is sent on an UN mission to protect the town. You are in charge of army unit, what do you do?

  • Protect your hometown
    Vote A
  • Go on UN mission
    Vote B
  • Just Nosey - See Results
    Vote C
Select a gender to cast your vote:
I'm a GirlI'm a Guy


Most Helpful Girl

  • Definitely the UN mission, sorry my hometown folks. 3000 people is a HUGE number, compared to 50. I mean, those fifty people are also human being too, but if compared, 3000 is a wayy lot more.


Most Helpful Guy

  • Depends. 3,000 is a huge number compared to 50. But when you compare the long term effects it may be different. 50people killed in a spree of violence in a historically peaceful town could very well destroy the town.. and depending on the town, and the nature of the riot, they could all be small children and innocent old people caught up in the surge, or they could be innocent shop keepers, or they could be a bunch of hooligans that the world is better off without.

    On the other hand 3,000 may seem large by many standards, it's pretty small as 'ethnic cleansing' standards go. And if a country is in such distress as to need outside help to stop ethnic clensing once, will it really stop it from happening again?
    In some parts of the world massive body counts like that are simply a regular occurance. It's horrible but true. And that's before you consider the larger ethical considerations of imposing your own view of what it right and wrong over the whole world. Sure ethnic cleansing is pretty objectivly evil, but if you interceed on that do you go in when there is a worker strike which get's violent? What about if they are euthenising people infected with a dangerous desiese?

    Suddenly there are far wider implications to consider, and it's not a simple numbers game.
    Personally though.
    I would probably save the 3,000.

    • Love the logical teasing out of the implications - Impressive

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 0

The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!

What Guys Said 4

  • Who are the people?

    Are the 3,000 people all wicked and evil?

    Are the loved ones that I have a emotional connection to in the 50 people from my hometown? I need more details.

    • Thanks for comment - For purpose of question it was a numbers game maybe one day I will ask question again with a few variables thrown in

    • The variables matter. Would you save 3,000 killers, rapists, and murderers from prisoners in Alcatraz or 50 innocent, young, church children?

  • My hometown could smoldering in a heap for all I care. I'd take the UN mission

    (This is awesome, by the way. I feel like I'm really making a difference here 😄)

  • A, because I care more about what can directly effect me.

    My list of giving a shit goes like this:
    My kids (don't have any yet)
    Me and then my wife (which I also don't have)
    People who are genetically similar
    Everybody else.

    • I would change "genetically similar" to "community" (meaning shared local culture and longterm interests), but I get your point.

    • Show All
    • Thanks for comment

  • Greatest good for the greatest number. I'm going with B