General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama less popular on DU than war-making [View all]DissedByBush
(3,342 posts)When deployed in conflict, our soldiers tend to be completely separated from uninvolved civilians except in clearly known cases, such as guarded checkpoints on roads.
A mortar strike on our soldiers over there pretty much guarantees the enemy will only kill soldiers. We tend to carry only soldiers and involved civilians in our vehicles, so a targeted roadside bomb will not likely kill uninvolved civilians. An enemy can easily strike us with a very high confidence that uninvolved civilians will not get hurt. This is a war, and our soldiers are fair game. A car bomb at a checkpoint with civilians present means that the enemy purposely targeted civilians in addition to soldiers, and they do tend to do that, but we shouldn't lower ourselves to that standard.
Our problem is that the enemy purposely hides among civilians. They appreciate the propaganda value of their kids who were killed because they were kept in close proximity to armed combatants.
It's hard to fight against such an enemy without killing kids, no matter how hard we try otherwise. The only other thing to do is not fight, and of course to lose if we choose that.
Of course, instead of blaming the killing on us, you could blame the killing on those combatants who purposely put those children in harm's way.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):