On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 20:03:08 +0000, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<
[email protected]> wrote:
etc not be seen as a bit OTT?
Having a civilized war with morals?
==================
The Ethics of Bombing
The subject of air bombardment is seldom discussed objectively and
reasonably. It arouses all kinds of illogical antagonisms and
emotional responses. Even when used against a leaking and derelict
tanker aground near the Scillies, napalm bombs cause shudders of
horror.
These irrational feelings are strongest among the young and the
so-called progressives, and are usually directly proportional to their ignorance of the subject. When these people descend to the level of
rational argument, the commonest objection to air bombardment is that
it involves civilians in war, whereas they have a right to be treated
as noncombatants.
Civilian populations have always, to a degree, been involved in
hostilities. A glance at the history of war will suffice to make this
clear.
From the earliest days of civilization, cities and towns have been
besieged, bombarded, sacked, pillaged, and burned. Often their
defenders, and sometimes also their civilian inhabitants, were
slaughtered or driven off into slavery. Land battles are not fought in
deserts but over the countryside, across farms, houses, orchards, and
gardens, the property and homes of civilians who have to flee for
their lives.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/Directors-Select-Articles/The-Ethics-of-Bombing/
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)