4 ms·
While I completely recognise the complexities, where there is real risk of killing innocents (or clear ongoing pattern of mistakes), this likely outcome should
by Gustomaximus 11y ago
While I completely recognise the complexities, where there is real risk of killing innocents (or clear ongoing pattern of mistakes), this likely outcome should negate the use of that method in my opinion.
There's no grey area in my mind here. It's disgusting to me that people could think its OK to accept killing civilians including children as collateral damage in occasional strikes, despite surely they are doing their best to avoid/minimise this. Even if stopping these strikes increases the risk to myself and my family I feel this is risk a moral society must accept. To do otherwise makes us terrorists too.
- notjoedimaggio 11y agoI'm guessing that the targets know this, and so surround themselves with civilians in order to complicate these decisions.
- Guthur 11y agoAnd so when a military patrol is moving down a crowded street are they surrounding themselves by civilians as well? To imply that because some "target" that is a member of a community is intentionally surrounding themselves with civilians for some sort of protection is a little disingenuous in my opinion.
- eanzenberg 11y agoWhen you're on the losing side of war you will resort to anything to win.
- jessaustin 11y agoThis statement needs more context. Who is "losing"?
- ionised 11y agoExcept they are not losing. They are more ubiquitous than ever.