[The Saucepan Man]

I think that what Frodo and Sam achieved is worth slightly more in comparitive terms than shooting someone in the back.

But yes, when the fate of the entire world is at stake, the objective is more important than the road taken to get there. After all, you might otherwise just as well say how awful it was that Aragron and co murdered all those poor midguided Southrons and Easterlings at the Pelennor.

The end does not always justify the means, for example when it is for personal gain, and there are some "means" that would be unacceptable. For example, I don't think that Gandalf would have had much sympathy if he had suggested offering up Merry and Pippin in sacrifice, even if this did achieve Sauron's defeat. In that situation, we would wonder whether the means being used was any better than the evil it was intended to remedy. But distracting Sauron's attention while Frodo and Sam sneak through Mordor to destroy the Ring can hardly be described in these terms.

In any event, there was really very little hope of Frodo and Sam ever succeeding in their task (Gandalf recognised the hopelessness of the situation from the outset). If they had been caught they would almost certainly have died horrible deaths. And what they achieved involved terrible hardship and personal sacrifice on their (and particularly Frodo's) part. In those circumstances, I think that their endeavours can be described as pretty heroic.

I really don't see any issue here. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[ October 16, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]