This is a defense of violence as old as war itself. “Sure, violence is bad, but if we do it MY way there will be less in the long run!”
Meanwhile people keep dying and somehow it’s never only the bad guys who suffer.
Meanwhile people keep dying and somehow it’s never only the bad guys who suffer.
Civilians become collateral damage.
A house becomes a base.
A wedding party becomes a meeting of terrorists.
Children become collaborators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wech_Baghtu_wedding_party_airs...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruzgan_helicopter_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_crimes#2003%E2%80%...
I'm going to stop there. When war starts, it's rarely the politicians who started it who suffer.
I'm not saying they are related, I'm just saying that the opposite is obviously not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal
https://www.vox.com/2014/9/1/6084029/hitlers-invasion-of-pol...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_foreign_policy_of_the...
or more to the point:
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/History/pol...
Note that the "Western Betrayal" has 2 very, very, very strong points in causing the war:
1) it factored heavily in Hitler's decision making to start the war, according to him, himself
2) it was correct decision making: the allies did not respond as they had promised, enabling further offensives with the well known consequences
But we're talking about extrajudicial termination of classified targets, in civilian settings, against whom war has not been formally declared. Some of them are US citizens or citizens of our allies. This is indefensible.