Revenge is not only justified but is essential. As '' Bomber Harris'' stated whilst the R.A.F, and the U.S.A.A.F, were bombing the major cities of Germany, you have sown the wind, now you are reaping the whirlwind. If an aggressive act, of whatever description is left unpunished then the aggressor will invariably repeat the offence, usually with greater intensity that before. It would be highly immoral and cowardly to permit acts of aggression left unpunished.

I'll add an argument for both sides. When one looks deeper, one can see that the fact we even "want" to exact revenge in the first place indicates we humans have sense of "justice". If I was wronged, something should be done to correct/balance the wrongdoing (ie, punishment/compensation). If we were not moral, we wouldn't care about revenge. If you look at most animals, they do not exhibit revenge/vengeance. They are almost robot-like in how they treat a wrongdoing to them. They just walk away and continue on life as if nothing happened lol.

But to humans, we have a sense of morality, right and wrong, good and evil. And when someone brings us pain, we feel the need to return the favor because it only seems fair or just to balance the transaction.

Likewise, when someone does something nice for you, you feel obligated to return the favor. That's why the technique of those blind panhandlers that give you a free gift on the subway or bus, and then come back 1 minute later to collect a donation from you, almost always get a donation back. If you don't, you feel ashamed that someone gave you a gift and you were cheap not to return a kindness back. It's the human need to be consistent because we have morality or a sense of justice.

I think it teaches the other side a lesson. If they engage in unacceptable, harmful behavior towards others, there are consequences. The problem is, what is considered an offense worthy of pay back? It can be very subjective. There is legal revenge, ie, the court system and there is frontier justice- hang em high. Some people are petty and take offense at the slightest things, others would probably let the same things roll off their shoulders. The call is yours.

1) Revenge is an example where using the label "revenge" brings condemnation but performing the action of revenge itself under a different label is accepted or applauded. An eye for an eye is ugly revenge and rejected. But a punitive fine by the government is acceptable. A discipline of a misbehaving child by a parent is just a corrective action. A spouse sleeping around after their own spouse cheated is just an open marriage. A baseball team making a bad trade to get rid of a troublesome player is just conducting business.

2) Morality arguments usually have their basis in religion and the Judeo Christian branch of religions generally threaten eternal revenge on your soul (hell) unless you comply and say the right things now while you're living. It's hypocritical.

3) During wars, one or even both sides conduct many examples of revenge on the other side. And Christian philosophers even have a Just Theory of War where given circumstances can lead up to going to war and still being righteous.

4) Even going back to the traditional eye for an eye argument - if your attempt to take someone's eye out is related to self defense, meaning they just half blinded you and now you're doing the same to them to try to survive the attack, then most people would grant you're allowed to defend yourself. You can even perform eye for an eye and have morality on your side.

5) Finally, when society imposes punishments on criminals it's partly to demonstrate consequences to those who also may consider committing crimes. Deterrence. And whether or not you believe deterrence works, from an ethical standpoint it is a legitimate rationale for thinking some form of revenge is justified.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

There are definitely two sides to this debate, and both have their merits. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is definitely a legitimate statement to consider here. The tragedy of 9/11 REQUIRED revenge, it would have been immoral to "turn THAT other cheek"! Too bad the "revenge" cost 3 times as many (American) lives as the act, but, that's stupidity for you. In many cases revenge is NOT immoral, overdoing it is. That is exactly why I want to continue Obama's direction on the result of that screwed up revenge. Let others do it for U.S., and themselves. Trumps "scorched Earth" policies would cost the lives of MORE Americans, and innocents! Let's get our revenge, but not be stupid AGAIN!

revenge is mine!

sayeth the Lord.

for you and me, it depends. it may or may not be justified. if it is in accordance to God's Will than it is OK and not a sin. for example, I was just imprisoned like the early martyrs of the gospels, just for doing God's will. that's why every day in jail was fine and I was actually smiling the whole time!!! those who mocked me got a harsh lesson. you might call that revenge but it wasn't since they were mocking God when they mocked me since i am His Warrior.

I read the bible every day in jail for 83 days. I followed the "read bible in one year" plan in the back but since I read more than they suggested each day i managed to read it all twice during my time. it changed my theology somewhat, and I now know more of it is true than I thought before. i am looking forward to talking about theology and the bible here on cd.