Violence - is it morally justifiable?

The movie's moral dilemma is whether violence can ever be justified. Bonhoeffer decides it can be justified if there is someone out there perpetrating particularly widespread violence (including killing) toward others - lots of others in Hitler's case.

In spite of Bonhoeffer's agonizing decision to conspire to get Hitler killed, I still am of the opinion that there were other more valid choices he or someone else could have made, that did not involve violence, and still attempt to remove Hitler from power.

Surely those who believe in Jesus would have a hard time finding a passage in the bible where he says violence is wrong unless you're up against someone like Hitler. And Jesus didn't preach "an eye for an eye."

I believe violence begets more violence, and the only truly effective way to stop violence is to stop doing it, and that means starting with ourselves. I believe it is important not to condone or perpetrate either physical violence including killing, or emotional violence - whether at home, in our communities, or on the world stage.

In the end, this movie shows a failure of people to come up with a more intelligent and nonviolent response to removing Hitler. Is there anyone out there who can use more thought and imagination than Bonhoeffer and his colleagues did, and think of a way that Hitler could have been stopped without attempting to kill him, and not perpetrate more violence? This is a particularly important question today for situations where people are dealing with those who have malevolent power over others.