JK2006 wrote:
"...political dissatisfaction should never and will never be a successful defence against murdering innocent people." So, Anon, killing Hitler (and saving the lives of millions) would not have been a successful defence?
I was speaking from a Christian point of view (though I am not one)since BR cited Christian ethics
in defence of his position, a 'true' Christian would not take up arms against another nation nor fight for the politics or align themselves under the flag of any nation. Jesus stated when standing before pontius Pilate, having been scourged.... King James Bible
"My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."hence confirming his political neutrality. There were many conscientious objectors on both sides during the war, many reasoning that they could not claim top be Christians whilst participarting in the death of their 'spiritual' brothers of another nation and many other innocent civillians.
A 'true' Christian would choose death over fighting in war as did the first century Christians. Of course, shortly after jesus death, the predicted wolves and false prophets would turn religion in to what we see today.
None of this means that a Christian may not defend themselves if attacked say in the home or on the street but 'self' defence and war are separate issues from the 'true' Christian point of view.

JK2006 wrote:
"...political dissatisfaction should never and will never be a successful defence against murdering innocent people." So, Anon, killing Hitler (and saving the lives of millions) would not have been a successful defence?
To add to my last post...
I meant that it would never be a successful defence in a court, murdering an innocent person because you are dissatisfied with government policy. Sorry for not being clearer.