Have we become too accepting of collateral damage?

Question

No American likes to accept American casualties of war, but it appears we are more tolerant of deaths when they are Iraqi, Afgan, African, etc. The media often gloss these deaths over as if their (people of other than U.S. heritage) lives are of less value. Do you think our war planners accept a much greater collateral damage risk if that damage is to foreigners?

Answer 1

I could not agree more...

Nobody seemed to bat an eye when Zar.. was recently killed and they found the bodies of a woman and small child in the mess afterwards.

Makes me sick how we don't seem to give a rat's fanny as if it is anyone other than an American.

I was discussing us bombing Hiroshima and Na.. once with this guy and he said, "who cares that 2 million died, they weren't Americans." I just went speechless.....

For some reason, and I have no clue whatsoever as to why, we believe we seem to have all the 'right' answers, know the 'right' things, and that everybody else from any other country is not worthy enough to make decisions at our level... therefore devalueing their lives.

We have lost our sense of humanity to an expontential degree!

Answer 2

No, in fact, I think its the opposite. We've gotten to the point where fighting a war can get you sent to prison if you make the wrong decision in combat. We have former soldiers in prison for putting drawers on an enemy combatants head. I'm not saying putting drawers on the enemy's head is right, but does it warrant prison? We live in a country where the public condemns soldiers before investigations are complete. Time Magazine claimed there were photos proving a massacre of 11 in Ishaqi, when in fact none existed. Let's also remember that the Marines accused of the crimes in Haditha are still innocent until proved guilty. The US public has them hanging already, and if they are guilty they should be severely punished, but the US public is so afraid of collateral damage that they don't stand a chance.

Answer 3

I'm in Australia. A bloke I go to university with is from Iraq. His family is still over there.

I was shocked at the difference knowing him made to the way I viewed those events. They were no longer numbers on the news, they were people my mate might know.

I think it's easy to view those deaths in an abstract fashion when you're denied the human connection with them. (When they're US soldiers you would a human connection with them since they're your countrymen.)

I think your military planners accept higher numbers of Iraqi casualties than they would US casualties, but then why would they place a greater importance on the natives than on their own troops? Should be equal importance of course, but then their decisions become harder to make...

Answer 4

Certainly, historically in every war this country has been in our military leaders and soldiers has been hardened to the enemy and in doing so have hardened themselves to the general population of the hosting country . After seeing the horrible deaths of there buddies even hatred for the citizens spills over so that at times collateral damage is welcomed.

Answer 5

Political correctness clouds your vision, the current world military conflicts have actually killed far less civilians than in any other major conflict of the 20th century. WWI: Shelling, Unrestricted Submarine Warfare WWII Carpet Bombing, Atomic Bombs, Unrestricted Submarine Warfare Korea: Shelling, Carpet Bombing Vietnam: Carpet Bombing, Shelling, Napalm ect.

B52's with conventional payloads don't discriminate, but these new laser guided bombs do.


The extreme political correctness is nearly sickening, you can't even fight a war effectively now a day without someone back at home completely safe critisizing our brave men and women.

Answer 6

The fact is that we are not accepting of 'collateral damage.'

Every time an American soldier kills an Iraqi civilian it make the headlines. Think of how rare it is for you to see those headlines.

The really sad fact is that it is the enemy killing the Iraqi civilians. And apparently all of those who wish to criticize the troops seem to think that this is ok.

Answer 7

good joke, we have gone to extreams to cut down on collateral damage. If this was WW II that would have been a bombing run with about 100 b-17's dropping tons of bombs wiping out the whole villiage and every thing around it for miles. even in gulf I we dropped more iron dumb bombs then the new bombs. Check it out if you like.

Answer 8

Collateral damage is an unfortunate fact of life and one must accept it as an unavoidable part of war (regardless of where it occurs).

Answer 9

it fairly isn't stressful except you've a President that makes use of each loophole and excuse he can locate to do in spite of he needs foiling Congress' and the kind's assessments and balances. I have not heard or seen any the position that those Presidential killings are constrained only to killings in distinct international locations. there is talk with reference to the legality of those killings in distinct international locations, yet no discuss of an illegality of Presidential killings on U.S. soil. really the develop into attentive to of the 16 information superhighway website memo (which I have not learn) is “Lawfulness of a perilous Operation Directed adversarial to a U.S. Citizen who's a Senior Operational chief of Al Qa’ida or An appropriate pressure.” this would not state any area hardship. There also would not look any hardship on what an "appropriate pressure" is. would it not likely be any progressive employer terrorist employer spoke of through ability of the authorities? What ability terrorist agencies were spoke of through ability of interior of sight land safeguard practices? also, the object aspects out that the memo "states that U.S. officials would evaluate in spite of if an tried grab of a suspect would pose an “undue threat” to U.S. workers in contact in such an operation. if so, U.S. officials would opt to make sure that the grab operation of the targeted American would not be a threat, making it lawful for the U.S. authorities to order a killing fairly, the memo concludes." this may look to justify the "branch Davidian" and "Waco" moves through ability of the authorities. Nowhere does it say in the different case. and local land safeguard practices presented a million.8 billion rounds of .40 ammunition in the previous 6 months. 35 million rounds in protecting with state. And Obama needs to diminish gun possession. And institute uncomplicated historic previous assessments. A digital gun registration that throughout one of those a Presidential declared nationwide emergency, guns would nicely be really got here upon and confiscated as they have been in Louisiana after Katrina. it really relies upon on how the President translates the memo.

Answer 10

i wonder how many german civillians died during ww2 in the bombings. there has always been collateral damage in all wars. its the media that plays it up.my advice is if you live in a war zone you may want to relocate.

Answer 11

It seems funny that nobody has mentioned the WTCs, where over 3000 Americans died. If it takes 50 enemy combatants to die per day, so be it. If it takes 5000 enemy combatants to die per day, so be it.

Nuke 'em till they glow