1. At the beginning of the film, Paul places far greater value on protecting his family than protecting his neighbors. But as the film progresses his sense of obligation to his neighbors and his countrymen deepens. Indeed, rather than abandon the refugees he is sheltering, he sends his family to safety while he stays behind. Is his decision the morally right one? In making decisions, how much weight should one give to the welfare of one's family compared to the welfare of one's neighbors? How much weight should governments give to the welfare of foreign peoples compared to that of their own citizens?

The UN Colonel tells reporters that his troops are "peace-keepers," not "peace-makers." By UN mandate, UN troops were permitted to use their weapons only in self-defense. If the Colonel had disobeyed orders and authorized his troops to fire on Interhamwe fighters, would he have done the right thing?

What kind of person does Paul initially appear to be to viewers? Paul appears to be a very kind hearted and helpful person. He is an optimistic person, likes to see the good side of some of the worst situations. When Paul's neighbor is attacked at the beginning of the movie, he does not attempt to help them.

Answer Link

Parrain Parrain · Answer 2 · 2022-05-20T11:54:15+02:00

Morally speaking, Paul did the right thing when he decided to stay with the refugees. When making decisions, we should however put our families first unless there are extenuating circumstances.

Did Paul Rusesabagina do the right thing?

Normally, a person should put their family above neighbors but in this case, the neighbors were many in number and would have died if Paul abandoned them.

The government should put more weight on protecting its own citizens but should try to take care of foreign peoples because we are all human.

Find out more on moral actions at https://brainly.com/question/1326871.

#SPJ2