Originally posted by Bearack
Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
Originally posted by Bearack
Examples being Beslan school massacre where negotiations were not an option at the expense 334 people, 186 were children.
Yes, many people died during the Beslan massacre, but that was due to the incompetence of the terrorists. They were standing on pressure panels
connected to bombs, and one of them detonated without warning. This is when Spetsnaz rushed in.
The theater seige was a tragic mistake though because of how many civilians died from the experimental knockout gas that the government used... but
think of the alternative. Sacrifice is necessary sometimes if you want to save them all.
Not to be argumentative, really, but that is what separates us from them. There is a general consensus with our men and women to do what ever it
takes to save lives. We've spent billions upon billions of dollars to advance our weapons technology to limit as much civilian casualties as
possible while in some cases, Russia still uses post WWII armaments that generally have catastrophic results to everything around them....including
civilian casualties.
Hmm, that is debatable. Yes, the US has spent billions of dollars to advance weapon technology, but not as you claim to limit civilian casualties but
to limit US casualties and to increase the chances of killing the enemy.
I really do not see the difference between an artillery shell landing in a populated area with the aim of killing the enemy, to a cruise missile being
fired in the effort to kill the enemy. Both might take out the bad guys, but both will probably inflict civilian deaths.