3 ms·
Not in my opinion, collateral damage appeared as the fire lethality soared. I'd say the US civil War was probably the first time you could really find collatera
by orwin 4y ago
Not in my opinion, collateral damage appeared as the fire lethality soared. I'd say the US civil War was probably the first time you could really find collateral victims. Once the fire became as lethal as the shock I'd say
- thatguy0900 4y agoThis doesn't really make sense. Genghis khan massacred entire cities. Soldiers don't just go home when the enemy army is routed. Historically, the first thing they want to do is pillage and rape.
- zardo 4y agoI guess to count as collateral damage they would need to at least pretend it was unintentional. Massacring cities that didn't surrender was a deliberate strategy.
- foxyv 4y agoCollateral damage before the ages of strategic bombing and artillery usually consisted of stuff like famine, fire, and exposure. Not that any of the militaries of the time really gave a flying fig. War back then was more along the lines of national scale murder rather than the extension of politics by force. Collateral damage is a new concept that originated during Vietnam. Before then it was just "War", "Burn the Heretic", and "Don't hurt the new slaves!"