Very Hottest Photos

How do you justify supporting any US military action knowing innocent civilians will inevitably be killed?

Because when civilians are killed in a military campaign engaged in by the United States, it is by accident. This is opposed to al Qeada flying planeloads of innocent civilians into skyscrapers full of innocent civilians, or Hamas suicide bombers blowing up an outdoor café full of men, women, and children in Tel Aviv. Even in a word painted with shades of grey,, it is not always difficult to differeientiate the good guys from the bad by their actions.

I do run into some more uncomfortable issues while answering this question. Is there a greater good that might justify collateral damage? How much responsibility do civilians hold for the actions of whomever the united states is currently fighting? It is difficult to make a broad answer to those two questions, but as I have never felt the need to condemn a military action done by the United States, I have thus far accepted civilian casualty levels as an unfortunate consequence.

I have written in the past how I justified dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, which killed 100,000+ civilians, because doing so prevented an otherwise necessary invasion that would have certainly killed millions. That is a case of committing an immoral act for the greater good. It is uncomfortable to think about, but some enemies just will not let you keep to your principles. I do not condemn the act because japan’s militarism running unchecked would have been far worse.

When I say I have not condemned a military action, I am speaking in broad terms. I am not justifying the Mai Lai Massacre or torture at Aby Gharib because those were the criminal actions of a few.. The fact we are still as a nation appalled when incidents like those occur proves I am not alone in my rationale there is value in certain broad military campaigns even if certain immoral ascts have taken place and are rightly condemned for having been perpetrated.

The bottom line, and you may consider me naïve or cold if you so desire, is that we accept a certain amount of risk of loss in pursuit of our goals. In that case, it is the value of the goals themselves that ought to be weighed in calculating whether the potential losses are worthwhile.