Some collateral damage should be expected in any war. Is it right? Not really, but it's a matter of deciding whether their lives are worth more or less than the war that makes it an effecive moral equasion. Of course, many people think that moral equasions are fundamentally flawed in that there are no hard set rules of morality. Is morality just a numbers game, or is it more? Was Spock right when he said the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few? Kirk certinally didn't think so.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
When you 'far exceed' the UN estimate, which is not known for being 'conservative' in the traditional sense of the word, odds are you are in the 'pulling numbers out of our ass' school of research.
|
Fine, then what about the 15,000 Iraqi civilians dead? Instead of dodging a question by
suggesting it
might be exaggerated, maybe try answering this time.