hahaha! you are quite the informed person. it is very admirable that you can call upon examples from american history. however, the situation from our point of view should not be about the trouble that could be caused later on. what itachi did was wrong no matter the situation. no doubt what itachi and Sherman did was to shorten the war and save lives, they both had brilliant military strategic plans. what they did was still wrong. would revenge be sought out? probably. but that is no excuse for killing innocent people just because you are afraid of the actions that they might take as a result of your own actions. think about it from an unbiased perspective from the point of view of the families. if they have the right to kill your clan to prevent war then you have the right to kill them in retaliation. this right to retaliate does not mean they should be condemned and killed, even though they may not retaliate. if you cant take the retaliation, as you just talked about, then dont take action and solve it some other way. dont justify actions based solely one side's point of view. both sherman and itachi did the wrong thing for the right reasons. i'm not saying i wouldnt have taken those actions, i dont really know, but i will not say that they are right. and i did not ask itachi to do the civilized thing in an uncivilized situation. i said his action was wrong. and in that statement did you not just agree with me? he did an uncivilized thing correct? the it was wrong no matter the situation. a bad time does not justify a bad action. rise above the time if at all possible
I'm very reluctantly going to disagree with you. I cannot say with complete certainty that Itachi was morally correct, and personally I cannot condone murder. However, I believe the Uchiha were going overthrow Konoha. The 3rd Hokage tried to resolve things, and the Uchiha were going to start their own civil war, the Uchiha were wrong. Shouldn't the wicked be punished? The massacre was their punishment.
I get the feeling you believe in non-violence, or at least resolving issues without violence. I do too. I can tell you non-violence only works if the enemy doesn't become violent. Jesus, Gandi, and MLK all used non-violence to bring about great changes. Those movements used non-violence to disarm their enemies; if their movements weren't violent then how could their enemies justify being violent against them?
Another thing those three have in common is that they all ended up being killed by their enemies.
The Uchiha were bent on violence. To not respond with violence would have been a disaster. If everyone did like the French and Swiss, Hitler would rule the world. If you remember Hitler rose to power because heavy penalties were levied against Germany after WW1. He promised them prosperity and they were angry at Europe for the WW1 penalties.
Even Jesus says the day of judgement will come. On that day he will separate the wicked from the righteous and condemn the wicked to hell. Is that morally correct? Eventually Jesus who said love your enemies, bless those who curse you, and turn the other cheek believes the wicked should be punished for their actions. Does punishing them make Jesus a hypocrite?