Generally depends on the context of the "War" being fought, and (generally) I'd say the criteria would be those with the least agency in the situation that are

Generally depends on the context of the "War" being fought, and (generally) I'd say the criteria would be those with the least agency in the situation that are therefore the most convenient to lose without impacting higher level leadership or impacting the objective of the war. Actual war: line soldiers - higher losses are acceptable for critical objectives. See: D-Day. Against a virus: Workers - higher losses are acceptable for things deemed "Essential" for society to operate. See: Grocery workers. Profitability / Monopoly in tech: Privacy - higher losses are acceptable if another objective (revenue) is deemed critical. See: the current internet. Profitability in general: Employees - dissatisfaction and retention doesn't matter as much as revenue so it is easiest to push policies that hurt employees to help profitability. Customer satisfaction also sometimes sacrificed here. Hostile Take-over: Employees / Investors? Dunno what happens here but folks seem to be referred to as "on war footing" when this kind of thing happens.