The thing is we aren't talking about morals and ethics. We haven't been. We are doing a deductive (and therefore flawed) analysis of benefits and costs. Case

The thing is we aren't talking about morals and ethics. We haven't been. We are doing a deductive (and therefore flawed) analysis of benefits and costs. Case in point: societies also (feel they) benefit from genocide. This doesn't make it right. But we're not talking about right. We're talking about gain and advantage. We could have a really interesting conversation about right and wrong. But that's not what we're talking about in this tree of the conversation. So nothing you are saying, as interesting as it is, addresses the conversation points.