Add Question

Question Title

Would you rather...

Blue Option
Red Option
 

 

Back to top

Would you rather...

60% Kill 5 innocent children yourself if it would end all bloodshed in the Middle East for 25 years

40% Have ongoing wars, terrorism and fighting in the Middle East

Would you rather...

60%
867,370 disagree
Kill 5 innocent children yourself if it would end all bloodshed in the Middle East for 25 years
40%
575,704 agree
Have ongoing wars, terrorism and fighting in the Middle East

Ending the Violence

added by Brian
Loading Comments…

Save thousands and thousands of lives (children's lives included) by getting your hands very, very dirty.

  • Meta Votes1,443,074 votes
  • Tags
Unmoderated: This question has not been reviewed by Either moderators. Content may be misformatted, offensive or inappropriate in nature.

1,363 comments

  • 501

    dsshorty89

    11 years ago

    It'd be hard, but it'd be for the greater good.

    • 175

      Paul

      8 years ago

      The greater good! Dozens/Hundreds/Thousands of innocent children die every year, would only make logical sense.

    • 215

      Hime Takamura

      8 years ago

      but it only stops it for 25 years. what if after that everything gets worse?

    • 187

      Jonneh

      8 years ago

      @Hime, 25 years of slaughter for 5 lives is a good trade.

    • 116

      Brandon Pickett

      8 years ago

      In the immortal words of Spock, as played by Leonard Nimoy... "Were I to invoke logic, however, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

    • 23

      Poképhiliac

      8 years ago

      I would do it anyway, at least this way everyone else gains from it.

    • 19

      furiouscucumber

      8 years ago

      hime, i would do same thing after 25 years.

    • 53

      rarity the unicorn

      8 years ago

      thats arguable. once that 25 years came to an end a total utter fucking shit storm would come out

    • 31

      Pjthebest10

      8 years ago

      Well, do you think that in the course of 25 years, less than 5 children die? It would indeed be a greater good.

    • 8

      Kevin S Burkhard

      8 years ago

      @Jonneh Not if after 25 years ever nation possess wmds and uses them. Something they would be unlikely to accomplish during wartime thanks to international attention.

    • 12

      Upbeatshadowchain

      8 years ago

      Don't give a fuck.

    • 35

      mohamed

      8 years ago

      I figure that all the shit in the middle east (I live in Egypt) is the result of human folly and stupid choices made by fucking psychopaths and idiots, it's not something beyond our power. so every human that dies in the middle east is his killer's fault. but if I were to kill 5 innocent children that would be on my head.

    • 29

      Arminage

      8 years ago

      People who voted red, you would rather have millions of innocent people die, including many kids over a period of 25 years rather than kill 5 children who would stop the deaths of thousands of innocent children.

    • 6

      remeg oediv

      8 years ago

      pokephiliac you are terrible

    • 4

      steve

      8 years ago

      they'll work it out

    • 0

      John Shepard

      8 years ago

      You sound like Dumbledore

    • 0

      nigg

      8 years ago

      bu tmore will die if u let war continue

    • 0

      Shaco Clone

      7 years ago

      War is only the guy with the bigger stick and my stick grows.

    • 0

      Victoria Kr

      7 years ago

      @Hime kill 5 more children

    • 9

      xXThe_Loop_HoleXx

      7 years ago

      everybody sayin what about after 25 years? well to make the sacrafices for the greater good im sad to say we have to kill 5 kids every 25 years.

    • 3

      Nalim

      7 years ago

      Cant stop 'Merica. They need them oil ...

    • 4

      jemm13

      7 years ago

      The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few!

    • 2

      JohnDoe

      7 years ago

      It says IF, so there's a 50/50 chance it might not do ANYTHING

    • 5

      Grant Gillespie

      7 years ago

      Sacrifice the few for the many.

    • 5

      Xethycutty

      7 years ago

      @Above Still, it's just plain wrong to kill children.

    • 5

      InsanityKing

      7 years ago

      when 25 years goes :LVL 5 SHITSTORM COMING IN

    • 1

      howaboutneither

      6 years ago

      let the hunger games begin!

    • 3

      Red or Blue

      6 years ago

      Take one for the team.

    • 0

      Utah G

      6 years ago

      I'll just look into the future then kill the bad people when they were innocent children

    • 1

      hitlershenchman

      6 years ago

      Hitler said the same thing

    • 0

      Snow

      6 years ago

      The lives of many outweigh the lives of a few.

    • 0

      Somerandomwizard

      6 years ago

      @johnDoe the way it's phrased is correct, it would be sure to stop the war because it says if it WOULD. If balances on your choice. It would work like: would you high five me if I gave you an apple? It means that you'd deffinetly receive the apple. Wait, why am I red!? I would bucher those children!

    • 1

      Micah Philson

      6 years ago

      The taliban and associates have tried that tactic. Somehow, it only made more fighting...

    • 0

      Harrison Payne

      6 years ago

      But it never says in red that it cant end the next year. In red, you still have the possibility for both. Easy decision.

    • 2

      Nikosony

      5 years ago

      The Middle East is not my problem, whats going on down there, ( I live in Denmark ), is just not something i can do anything about, i know that terrorism is my problem, but atleast it wasnt my fault. i dont want to be blamed of killing 5 innocent children. i rather have many innocent people die by some asshole, than me killing them. Cause in the end we are all in this together, and the ones that have been the assholes will be jugded by either humanity or god, ( believe in what you want ). Thats why i voted red.

    • 4

      Branch Phoenix

      5 years ago

      I would not want to kill 5 innocent children. If you chose it, then you are a murderer. I think that I would want to not be tracked by the police

    • 1

      epaRi

      5 years ago

      after these 25 years end the world will have more war technology and even worse wars so if the wars end in lets say like 3 years there may not be more wars !

    • 1

      KakaKarrotCake

      5 years ago

      You are just delaying more deaths by doing the blue answer. You may think of it being bad but the psychology of the colors makes you think "blue" would be more peaceful. Switch the colors or just ignore them and it would be a decent difference. But still, the war happened for a reason, all wars do end. Stopping the war for 25 years would just cause more deaths in another time. It's almost causing even worse bloodshed.

    • 0

      Jacob

      5 years ago

      @dsshorty wouldn't be hard for me… I don't have a conscience to slow me down.

    • 0

      smartboy2006

      5 years ago

      You could kill the worst of worst kids

    • 3

      Dawnss

      5 years ago

      @smartboy2006 acually no it says innocent kids

    • 2

      Dawnss

      5 years ago

      and also there's the fact that you would get arrested or get a death sentence because murdering people is bad enough but children, just no that's sick

    • 0

      xXbruhtootLOL

      5 years ago

      nice man

    • 0

      Buzzbuzz

      5 years ago

      Who could say they personally stopped death for 25 years? After that is up, they're on their own. I did my part for humanity

    • 1

      Forgottenslender

      5 years ago

      Emphasis on INNOCENT... It's one of the worst ethical crimes to kill an innocent child, you couldn't live with yourself killing FIVE children...

    • 2

      Serena Sandham

      5 years ago

      GUYS!!! KILL 5 KIDS, SAVE THOUSANDS OF KIDS!! It's simple! Let 5 innocents die or let thousands of innocents die. Then, every 25 years, just sacrifice 5 children for the greater good of thousands of children. Would you rather have 5 children die for the sake of future world leaders or scientists OR let thousands of people die because you wouldn't sacrifice for the greater good?

    • 1

      thegingerbreadman

      5 years ago

      ...but it's better not to associate yourself with it cuz: You'd go to hell, it's only 25 years and you naturally won't feel good in you're self. So I don't think the lives of 5 children would be worth that amount of time. Just think about it.

    • 1

      Jbear50

      5 years ago

      sadly this is the greater good

    • 1

      Saint Deamon

      5 years ago

      *dons cultist robes* The greater good

    • 2

      [Unknown Person]

      4 years ago

      You kill 5 children, stopping 100+ kids from becoming suicide bombers...obvious choice...

    • 0

      moolook

      4 years ago

      since I already dont care about those wars... why should i do anything about it?

    • 1

      Richard Jones

      4 years ago

      "Greater good"? Hah! The concept that one life is less valuable than two lives is like the concept that infinity times two is greater than infinity. Life has no value because it is the medium on which all values are based.

    • 1

      PankanCola

      4 years ago

      Yep. I agree.

    • 0

      Midnight822

      4 years ago

      Wow i wouldent kill 5 children and i pressed the wrong button so ya lol

    • 2

      TRIXIESTAR

      4 years ago

      Moral dilemma aside, before doing anything to the children. I'd tell them why I'm going to kill them. Hopefully they can understand that their sacrifice will not be for nothing. And what if over those peaceful years the Middle Eastern Countries unite in a group alliance a La The Arab Union.

    • 1

      scott.peltier

      4 years ago

      well id do it to a kid who is about to suffer to death its painful but its an act of mercy oh undertale refrence

    • 1

      Scootastic XD

      4 years ago

      Who knows, It might be fun? .-.

    • 1

      Eddy

      4 years ago

      For Allahu Akbar? Fuck the Middle East! I hope they all will die in misery. How the fuck can u kill 5 innocent children to save the life of milions possible terrorists? Inshaallah

    • 1

      Elaena Stemann

      4 years ago

      You could also kill them in their sleep, it doesn't say you have to hold a gun to their head while there stare into your eyes with sad hoping souls.

    • 0

      Ntahnaiel

      4 years ago

      25 years to refine the world

    • 0

      BraZZers

      4 years ago

      you could end the dying kids

    • 0

      ThatOneKid

      4 years ago

      Greater good? I am your wife! I'm the greatest good you are ever gonna get

    • 0

      Khiemisop

      4 years ago

      What is the point of stopping the war if you become as immoral as them.

    • 0

      Kelran

      4 years ago

      I'm not the red side, because it would only stop war for 25 years. then it will be back. if you chose red, then you basically chose blue. Just without killing innocent children. It also didn't say WHEN it would end. for all we know, it could end it 2 seconds. So you might have just killed 5 children for no reason.

    • 0

      RimmyTim

      4 years ago

      didnt say it couldnt be orphans

    • 1

      Alcatraz

      4 years ago

      It could end before 25 years is up, so you would have ended 5 kids lives for no reason

    • 0

      Eshan Haider

      4 years ago

      yes it will be so just do it

    • 1

      I'll follow the sun

      4 years ago

      Can't humans just get along and love each other?

    • 1

      Master2All

      4 years ago

      but only for 25 years then after that they go back to the same old shit.

    • 1

      SgtFluffy

      4 years ago

      Eh why the fuck not kill the kids c:

    • 1

      Kupperz

      4 years ago

      ill just kill the asshole kids at my school

    • 0

      tjjmbros

      4 years ago

      It never said they were under 14

    • 0

      DjTurtlecorn

      4 years ago

      kill Justin, Sean, Arkye, Jamere, and Andrew. YAY LETS HAVE A HECKING PARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • 0

      shadowofdestruction

      4 years ago

      a few children wouldn't matter

    • 0

      Saltyspoon.

      4 years ago

      I'd love to kill 500 innocent children even if it were to do nothing, cause fuck kids amirite?

    • 1

      Jordan Jacobs

      3 years ago

      I think your a murderous ignorant arse hole, I'm sorry but you may as well be a terrorist or one of the people causing the very problems in the middle east...

    • 0

      Sgt.Reyna

      3 years ago

      would it really be hard?

    • 2

      Mallory Kostovich

      3 years ago

      The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

    • 0

      NightWing4390

      3 years ago

      But the effect is only temporary. The children's' deaths would be in vain.

    • 0

      Y am i on dis web?

      3 years ago

      I live in Britain so it wont effect me or my family. I know I'm selfish

    • 1

      NoJoke.com

      3 years ago

      It's either five or thousands lives, you have to think about the greater good

    • 0

      justabluewhale

      3 years ago

      Those children would likely have lived longer than 25 years.

    • 1

      Evalgra

      2 years ago

      Fuck, I'd kill 5 kids for free

    • 0

      samantha gergory

      2 years ago

      you a sick fuck

    • 0

      jeffery

      1 year ago

      same man but those 5 would go down in history

    • 0

      Nxrthstar

      1 year ago

      No sacrifice too great...

    • 0

      Emma

      1 year ago

      If you killed 5 children, it migh end war for only 25 years, IT WONT END WAR FOREVER, THERE IS NO PIONT

    • 0

      Nikolaj

      1 year ago

      Yeah it would be for the greater good for the next 25 years, and then they would just restart it all over again

    • 0

      Gabriel

      8 months ago

      How would that be hard? It's not like the kids are armed

    • 1

      Gabsone

      7 months ago

      think about it. kill 5 children, or with the terrorism and stuff have tons more children sold into sex slaves and other gross things like that. It would be hard to do, but for the best

    • 0

      Kemény drogok

      5 months ago

      My weapon of choice is an STEYR-SSG-69

  • 45

    warface363

    10 years ago

    when it says debate, it doesnt mean just saying no. it means back up your decision with reasoning. i vote yes because if i weren't to kill those children, i would thereby still be responsible for the deaths of the thousands in the middle east. even if you dont do it yourself. you may not like it, and you say "theres a better way!", it doesnt give you that option. its either 5 kids, or ONGOING wars and terrorism, not something you can stop. so you would be dooming the region to endless death and hardship. way to go you selfish jerks.

    • 31

      Evan Glick

      9 years ago

      By that logic you are therefore responsible for 1 instance of every bad thing every charity you've never donated to is trying to prevent.

    • 17

      Void

      8 years ago

      evan glick you are a retard. Just retarded. Go away, just please go.

    • 3

      turlough

      8 years ago

      no ones say killing the kids is not tthe moral high ground but could you do it

    • 1

      DatsRandom

      7 years ago

      So killing kids is better? I mean they don't get a say in it?

    • 9

      mouwersor

      7 years ago

      Many more innocent lives will be taken, in this case: the cause justifies the means

    • 0

      Carolyn

      7 years ago

      And by voting yes you are therefor bringing peace. and I guess you might have heard this "when theres peace in the middle east the world ends". Go ahead kill 5 children for peace that will ultimatly bring death to BILLIONS. I just backed my $hit up.

    • 12

      Fus-Ro-Dah

      7 years ago

      @Carolyn: What? What does that even mean? you think that when the Middle East finally gains peace, it'll mean the end of the world? how? There is not an ounce, nor even an IOTA of sense in your argument, nor did you back your "$hit" up. Please feel free to come back once you've gained some sense.

    • 1

      Garora

      7 years ago

      @turlough yes I could, I might kill myself afterwards but it would so be worth it, you are the worst type of person, you dont have a problem with evil as long as you are not directly and soley to blame

    • 1

      Utah G

      6 years ago

      More than 5 children die annually in syria alone. If only 5 died and bloodshed in iraq and syria ended for 25 years then I would probably take it.

    • 1

      NODAK

      3 years ago

      You would absolutely NOT be desponsible for the thousands of continued deaths if you chose not to slaughtered 5 innocent children. If a terrorist threatened to nuke a city unless you killed 5 random, only the terrorist is guilty of his actions when you refuse to comply.

  • 36

    Migusthornberry

    8 years ago

    I want to see the middle east destroy itself.

    • 4

      Yek Hes

      8 years ago

      then F*CK you.

    • 3

      Whalesy

      7 years ago

      Why

    • 1

      Anas Khaled

      5 years ago

      Oh like the way you destroyed your logic and proper human feelings?

    • 0

      Randomguy

      4 years ago

      @Anas Khaled Of course the fucking arab will be pissed,allahu akbar

    • 1

      Johnny

      4 years ago

      @Randomguy I see we have a idiot bigot here.

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      Why? Are you a Muslim?

    • 0

      Emma

      1 year ago

      WHY IS EVERYBODY SO RUDE TO EACH OTHER THESE DAYS? THEY MAY WANT TO SEE THE MIDDLE EAST DESROY ITSELF BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN YOU ALL HAVE TO BE RUDE DOES IT

  • 26

    GreenLemon

    11 years ago

    No

    • 20

      patrimac

      8 years ago

      that means that everybody that dies in the middle east for the next 25 years due to wars and terrorism would have been saved by you but you chose not to. The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few

    • 16

      yaritza

      8 years ago

      I will not be responsible for killing five innocent children. What i can't swe won't hurt me, I have not witnessed the terror in the middle east and as right now it isn't affecting me.

    • 18

      Yago Stecher

      8 years ago

      yaritza, please drop dead right now

    • 4

      Mike

      7 years ago

      lol @yaritza wait till you get to the real world my friend that will be really eye opening!

    • 2

      Calumfornia

      6 years ago

      While I voted blue I can see the merit with red. Killing 5 children would be the most tramatic thing to ever happen. It would make daily function extremely difficult unless you're a psychopath. Some people care about themselves and that's fine, that's human nature.

    • 1

      Mieuu

      6 years ago

      @Yago Stecher - what is wrong with you? Someone won't murder innocent children so they deserve to die?

    • 2

      Woo

      6 years ago

      @Yaritza American logic at its finest.

    • 1

      Carter Fitzsimons

      4 years ago

      Woo, It isn't American logic, it's human logic. The affects wouldn't be permanent, so it would still become a warzone again in the future. The only way to fix the middle east is to change the religious views, educational system, system of government, and others. To say it is for the greater good is moronic, for it only delays the inevitable and you just ended the life of five innocent children who didn't have a chance to live, you psychopath...

    • 0

      Lav Da Mermaid

      3 years ago

      you just let countless other children die :I

  • 23

    MarkTheGr8

    9 years ago

    First I was gonna go with killing the 5 children. But I remembered... OVERPOPULATION.. We're already growing too quickly. Someone mentioned something about dooming the middle east to hardships... Well, there's not enough resources in the world for everyone to have perfect lives. Some things are just not meant to be. It may sound cold, but in my experience I'd rather have more white and asian people than those of muslim nations. Racism? Probably. Now get over it. Furthermore, there is the chance wars would move from the middle east to somewhere else. History shows that if there is not war in one place, there is another. Lastly, another person said not killing the 5 children, would mean you're responsible for the wars, terrorism in the middle east. That is incorrect, as you cannot be held responsible for other's actions (in this case). Killing 5 children will get you behind bars, but to imprison someone for not killing 5 children? Good luck convincing the judge!

    • 5

      Cosmic Hawke

      9 years ago

      "Lastly, another person said not killing the 5 children, would mean you're responsible for the wars, terrorism in the middle east. That is incorrect, as you cannot be held responsible for other's actions (in this case)." No, you're incorrect about that. That's the whole point of the "would you rather" question, it bends reality so that you are responsible for the war in the Middle East (and the only solution killing 5 innocent children). Which is what makes it a hard, worthwhile and interesting question to answer. Also, fuck those sand niggers LOL.

    • 6

      MarkTheGr8

      9 years ago

      Well, Cosmic Hawke. I'm talking from a legal standpoint. No court would deem you guilty in the wars, because you said NO to killing 5 children. I could kill the 5 children, sure. Not something I'd be happy about though. I also believe the 50% who voted kill 5 children to be hypocrites. If they were willing to kill 5 children to stop the wars, why are they not even doing peaceful work to stop the wars? Can't answer that one, now can they! :D Still though, from a legal standpoint, you cannot be held responsible for the wars because you won't kill 5 children. Legal standpoint is more important than whatever standpoint you're trying to pull off.

    • 3

      dflaherty1996

      9 years ago

      the point of the would you rather question is that you can only have one of the two. therefore, we cannot do the peaceful approach

    • 4

      Mustafa Ashraf

      8 years ago

      you know, Islam isn't a country, its a religion, there is already a lot of muslim asians and europeans/white people. you just probably meant the arab world, which isn't only muslim, it has a lot of people that are christians

    • 1

      remeg oediv

      8 years ago

      really you think millions of people should die in the name of overpopulation plus chickens have us outnumbered CHICKENS

    • 1

      MarkTheGr8

      8 years ago

      People are already dying from overpopulation. And you know what? There's also more bacteria and atoms in the universe than people. BACTERIA AND ATOMS. I know. I'm as surprised as you are.

    • 3

      Fus-Ro-Dah

      7 years ago

      @MarkTheGr8: so...not at all? considering that for every person, there are trillions of atoms that their matter consists of, it makes sense that there are more of them...

    • 1

      Neves

      7 years ago

      i love you

    • 2

      KAQ

      6 years ago

      MarkTheGr8, I understood what you were saying until you said that it wasn't a person's responsibility for the war. Although it's not a person's responsibility for starting the war, it is for continuing the war if they didn't kill the children. You're talking a legal standpoint, were talking would-you-rather standpoint. Legal standpoints are real, would-you-rather standpoints are fake, so you are ruining the whole point of the question. And you said that the people that chose blue are hypocrites because they are not doing work to help the wars. WE ARE TALKING A WOULD-YOU-RATHER STANDPOINT! The game makes you choose to do something, but that doesn't mean you have to--or want to-- do it. So yeah, I can answer that, and work on your logic skills a tad bit, buddy. -KAQ

    • 0

      I <3 NoBoom

      5 years ago

      That is true

    • 1

      Johnny

      4 years ago

      Overpopulation isn't the problem. Literally if there was a city where everyone on earth could live it would only be the size of Texas. FUCKING Texas! The reason this city doesn't exist is greed. It's greed. If the everyone on earth had the an average american home we would need 10 EARTHS!

    • 0

      DarvinostheGreat

      3 years ago

      I like structured responses.

    • 0

      milkshake8910

      2 years ago

      wrong

    • 0

      natebate3

      1 year ago

      omg i wanna change my answer now

  • 22

    Carlos Briseno

    7 years ago

    It wouldnt be worth 5 poor innocent kids for something that wont last

    • 4

      [deleted]

      5 years ago

      Those kids could might as well get killed in the war for all you know, and there are a lot more people that will go through a lot more suffering than those children if you choose the other option. Actually a lot more people would get murdered, though war, with your option, perhaps in more brutal ways than I'd choose. The killing of those children won't "last" either, unless you choose to become a serial killer

    • 0

      I <3 NoBoom

      5 years ago

      ikr

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      5 out of 5 million children, buster! Think of the greater good!

    • 0

      natebate3

      1 year ago

      there would be probably more children die if the thing goes on so yeah

  • 14

    Meadsey

    9 years ago

    Same shit is going to continue in 25 years.

  • 13

    cheylabob

    9 years ago

    Well they could be innocent terminally ill comatose orphan kids for all we know... Seems legit. Plus, for those religious people, then they get to go to heaven. Amidoinitrite?

  • 11

    isadora

    7 years ago

    It'd be a good trade, but i don't get to do that, to decide that.

    • 0

      Juuzou Suzuya

      4 years ago

      actually, the whole point of this game is to give you the ability to decide that.

  • 11

    Wyatt Greywolf Davis

    8 years ago

    Ending the Violence, my ass. This world will ALWAYS have violence. It's not just human nature, it's nature.

    • 1

      [deleted]

      5 years ago

      Every country may have some violence, but not every country has war, that's something arranged and human made

    • 1

      Malkallam

      4 years ago

      Dumbass, animals have wars for territory too. For food, for leadership, for everything you could imagine.

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      Ladies and gentlemen, we have a nihilist here.

  • 9

    kokodilla

    9 years ago

    who gives a shit about the middle east?

  • 8

    Felix KB

    8 years ago

    those kids need to take one for the team mate...

  • 8

    brokor

    10 years ago

    like i care what those brown people do between themselves. 5 or 25k it doesnt matter. i wouldnt kill anyone myself, but i would need confirmation that no nuclear war would take place. otherwise shotguns and napalm cant rly hurt me all ti does is rid the earth of overpopulation, which is a good thing.

    • 18

      Evan Glick

      9 years ago

      [Insert racist comment here] [insert comment no one reads after that first part here]

    • 5

      Evan Glick

      9 years ago

      [Insert racist comment here] [Insert part no one is reading because of the first part here]

    • 5

      Evan Glick

      9 years ago

      [Insert racist comment here] [Insert part no one is reading because of the first part here]

    • 8

      Ryan

      9 years ago

      Well, considering your choice would lead directly to thousands of deaths (including children, and probably a lot more than 5 of them), then you WOULD be killing people yourself; just not physically with your hands.

    • 0

      Neves

      7 years ago

      @ryan but theyre brown kids..

    • 0

      Sherman Witcher

      4 years ago

      Being a brown person myself I actually found that funny

  • 7

    InvaderSydney

    8 years ago

    I couldn't do it. I just couldn't!

  • 7

    MyNameIsKali

    9 years ago

    It doesn't matter if you kill one person or a million people... You're still a killer.

  • 7

    Sean MacLean

    9 years ago

    Either way innocent children are going to be killed. It's really a way up between losing five or losing a lot more than five.

  • 7

    youat2inthemorning

    9 years ago

    sacrifice one thing, receive a lot of blessings.

  • 7

    b1tchf4ce

    11 years ago

    Perhaps once I killed the kids, they would get their act together and start a civilization which excludes bloodshed in the future

  • 6

    clu97

    7 years ago

    The deaths, while horrible, are not my responsibility. I don't see any justification for murdering someone else besides saving yourself or a loved one, and I think that's also the view legally.

    • 0

      Mo_money

      5 years ago

      So saving millions of lives is not a justification for killing 5 peopl

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      Family matters, yes, but that is not an excuse to let millions die.

  • 6

    Jakub Bj Boukal

    8 years ago

    This one is really tough, but even if I would be one of that child I would sacrifice myself

  • 6

    CheesieOnion

    8 years ago

    Taking on for the team.

  • 6

    billmok

    8 years ago

    As long as I can eat what I kill.

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      WHAT? You are going to resort to cannibalism? And I thought suicide bombing is bad! (Just kidding; but I condemn cannibalism as well.)

  • 5

    em0

    7 years ago

    I don't give a shit about the Middle East.

  • 5

    jamésźźzz

    7 years ago

    I would rather bomb all the terrorrist headquarters than kill one innocent child!!

  • 5

    BrandonToddCarr

    8 years ago

    Don't postpone a problem for 25 years by killing innocent children.

  • 5

    Azer Faraclas

    11 years ago

    According to John Rawls it's what I you ought to do.

  • 4

    Rodding Bigrod

    7 years ago

    This would be effective but people are right after 25 years it will proabaly be worse and i mean you can't argue that it wont because the goverment and humans in genral are greedy and competitive cunts. Ps. I'm an alien

  • 4

    Kuusou

    7 years ago

    For me it has nothing to do with getting my hands dirty. It just feels like a cop out for what should naturally end. 25 years is not and actual end to thing, just a cease fire. I would basically be killing 5 children in order to release a butterfly from its cocoon too early.

  • 4

    ryan

    8 years ago

    Just for the fun of it.

  • 4

    some jewish dude

    8 years ago

    only if those kids get a memorial or something

  • 4

    Morgan

    9 years ago

    let's say that abortion counts. Become a doctor. Abort 5 pregnancies. Save the world. Become successful. Profit.

    • 0

      MarkTheGr8

      9 years ago

      Abortion cannot count, as abortion is only legal within a timeframe wherein the fetus is a fetus, not yet a baby or human. A biological growth, so to say. That countries differ in this timeframe is not of importance. Also, most of the 50% who voted to kill 5 innocent children, are not smart enough to become doctors.

    • 0

      MyCotingaBird

      1 year ago

      OF COURSE ABORTION COUNTS, YOU DUMBASSES!!! Especially late-term abortions!

  • 3

    jerem

    5 years ago

    i wouldn't find it hard at all, all of you red fucks don't deserve to live

  • 3

    Ethan Sims

    8 years ago

    Once the 25 years are over kill 5 more kids. Loophole

  • 3

    Sam

    8 years ago

    You'd save more lives in that 25 years by killing 5 children. Letting the wars go on would only lead to the loss of a lot more lives.

  • 3

    Arthur

    8 years ago

    how could one choose red? you get to kill kids aaand do something good for the world :)

  • 3

    GareBear

    9 years ago

    If even one innocent life is taken on purpose then it is not worth it.

  • 3

    p01arb33r

    9 years ago

    by letting the wars continue, you slaughter more than 5 children and tons of other good people. red fails.

  • 0

    SOLAR

    2 days ago

    You gotta have a brain the size of peanut if you don’t understand thousands would die in the midst of war innocent soldiers dying. thousands dead or five dead but never forgotten

  • 0

    BlueRay

    1 week ago

    its not gonna stop it forever, not worth it

  • 2

    Kevin ANAL

    5 years ago

    You are a hero than

  • 2

    jenna

    5 years ago

    idk ohh man

  • 2

    Jakob Harnisch

    6 years ago

    There probably died 5 innocent children somewhere already since you began reading this comment.

  • 2

    Xavier

    6 years ago

    It would have to be done :( but quickly! ;)

  • 2

    Yomama

    7 years ago

    In 25 years millions have died in the Middle East so 5 kids wouldn't make a diffrence

  • 2

    Marcus Panico

    7 years ago

    I'd just pick really annoying horrible children. GIMME ICECREAM, GIMME ICECREAM!!! Stab him in throat.. Shit, fuck the people in the Middle East, I'll do it anyway.

  • 2

    Jessie Reyna

    8 years ago

    They have to end it themselves

  • 2

    Eerin

    8 years ago

    Meh, I personally don't like children anyways.

  • 2

    Darryl Bobbie

    8 years ago

    This was the hardest decision of my life lol

  • 2

    Adam Ripberger

    8 years ago

    Lawlz who cares about the middle east, let them clear themselves out.

    • 0

      Epic_Abdallah

      4 years ago

      I can read your future, i see i see someone burning in hell with nails in his mouth saying "ARABIANS SUCK ARABIANS SUCK LISTEN TO ME TOOO MEEE!!!" That person might be you

    • 0

      Jad

      3 years ago

      What the hell adam ripberger Middle East is my home and it might seem as though there is not a lot of killing there but millions of people get killed in these wars!!!!!!!

  • 2

    actionjump

    8 years ago

    Just nuke the middle east. Screw ee

Load More