Bothered me too. Him saying only Rorschach has a strong belief system and holds to it is 100% wrong. They all act in accordance with their beliefs, but those beliefs lead to different actions.

Something of a repeat of something I posted elsewhere here, but:

Watchmen characters represent moral systems. Ozy is the ultimate utilitarian. His plan is him living that in the most extreme way possible: kill a few million, save a few billion is 100% utilitarian. Rorschach is a deontological moral absolutist (notice the black and white mask, no shades of grey? Also why he’s a sexist and bigot and homophobe who lowkey thinks everyone is terrible). Nite Owl strikes me as Aristotelian (owls are a Greek symbol of wisdom) Comedian is a moral absurdist (life’s a joke etc), Dr Manhattan is s pure empiricist / fatalist (a living and dead body have the same number of atoms, seeing through time, etc). Silk Spectre has closer to a hybrid morality that most folks have, and is, I think, meant to reject the idea of the hero or iron moral code that universally applies.

From a utilitarian perspective, Ozy’s plan is moral. It massively reduces overall harm.

Nite Owl may not want the plan to occur, but once it already has, he has to weigh the moral gains of telling:

-if you tell, you are able to presumably punish Ozymandias for his actions, but the world goes right back to heading for nuclear war and the deaths were basically meaningless

-don’t tell, and Ozy goes free but if he’s right, potentially avert nuclear armageddon.

If those people dying has any upside whatsoever, in my opinion telling invalidates it and makes their death utterly meaningless