3 ms·

Really gizmodo? Your adherence to the Betteridge rule made me gag a little. The question in the headline is abhorrent, even if the body of the article is somewh

Really gizmodo? Your adherence to the Betteridge rule made me gag a little. The question in the headline is abhorrent, even if the body of the article is somewhat sensible. It's honestly the worst line of investigation I could think of. Instead of this question, I think the best premise is to ask how we got the point where the image of constantly belligerent western militaries is distorted into a picture of humanity and outright magnanimous consideration for human life?

the8472 11y ago
> It's honestly the worst line of investigation I could think of. Really? You don't think investigating whether technological progress has (or hasn't) improved the damages caused by war is worthwhile? The issue that we somehow can't manage to stop going to war is a distinct one. Just because it would be preferable to not start wars in the first place asking followup questions about the effectiveness of attempts to reduce collateral damage and indiscriminate slaughter when we do seems reasonable to me.