4 ms·

I reject your notion that I have to add a detailed paragraph about those two different ways civilians get bombed, when my point was that they are getting bombed

by generic92034 2y ago

I reject your notion that I have to add a detailed paragraph about those two different ways civilians get bombed, when my point was that they are getting bombed, practically always. Also, "collateral damage" is on a spectrum, in my opinion. How much collateral damage is acceptable before you can call it an atrocity in itself? So, that is much less of a black-white distinction as it seems to be in your statement.

rendall 2y ago
Of course "collateral damage" (with scare quotes) is on a spectrum as is "consent". Those with sinister motives make sure to emphasize this "spectrum" in order to diffuse and confuse its meaning. They also reject the necessity to be precise with their terms. Collateral damage (no scare quotes) on the other hand, like consent (no scare quotes), has a very precise and important meaning with real, binary values. A civilian death is either collateral or intentional. Consent is either knowingly given or withheld. Let's live in a world where these distinctions are clear.