^ This.
[MENTION=6877]Marmotini[/MENTION]: Acknowledging that something COULD be interesting if viewed in a particular light just means putting yourself into an imaginary position; it doesn't mean you agree with it, or would ever agree with it. I relate to how others in this thread have been able to detach in order to put themselves in that position. (Which isn't to say that I agree with everything they've said so far on this thread -- sorry, [MENTION=13260]Rasofy[/MENTION], but telling anyone to enjoy rape while it's happening is completely inexcusable.) I COULD do the same thing, and I COULD say that it would be interesting from a certain perspective -- but the thing is, putting myself in that perspective, like you've been saying, would be a really bad idea for any number of reasons.
Which is why, on OKCupid, my answer to that question was "no", with the comment "That would be viewing things more impersonally than I'm comfortable with." Acknowledging that viewing things like that is possible, but also acknowledging the moral aspects of the question.
So even though I generally agree with you, Marm, I'm posting here to say that there's a difference between acknowledging that possibility and actually being morally okay with it. Seeing things from another point of view doesn't necessitate sacrificing your own moral code.
I think it's because the emotive word "exciting" is attached to the premise that it bothers me, exciting denotes thrilling or fun to me I suppose, and while I can comprehend why 1930's Germans could be convinced to be Nazis (but am definitely not a Nazi sympathizer) or why present-day Russians could be nationalists (and am more on the fence about that; I don't like the neo-nazi extremist violence, but I've heard excellent arguments for why Soviet culture-wrecking was damaging to the Russian psyche in such an extreme way that cultural cohesion is something they need psychologically...and this is a Jungian perspective...)...but I don't agree with them.
Still. I can see why these people could morally justify their actions. I comprehend it even if I don't necessarily support it, or even condemn it in the big picture.
And I can't morally justify nuclear war being "exciting" in any light, it sounds amoral or sociopathic to me, but it is probably because it's something I have given so much empathetic thought to, and why I felt compelled to post photos of Chernobyl and Hiroshima victims...I wasn't trolling or trying to break the rules, I was trying to make a point.
EDIT: Interestingly I think it's because it violates some Fi value of mine so deep, something so entrenched in childhood, and it also is supported by Jung's idea that the J dom (Fi, Fe, Ti, and Te doms) can see the P dom (Ne, Se, Ni, Si...but especially Pe doms) as lacking morality because they can accept so much without it being passed through a J filter; since you're a Te dom and reject Fi, it's easier for it not to disturb your Fi and you judge it more objectively with Te, but still judge it as I would, just in a more logical way!!