How does a U.S. intelligence official decide when too many civilians are present to risk the strike? Although Obama is known for not tolerating civilian casualties the Obama administration has devised its own equation to help commanders determine how many civilian lives a military target is worth but especially in the case of ISIS, Washington has become increasingly willing to balance civilian lives against military priorities. "[The administration] has recognized the need to make difficult decisions about the value of a target and the risk of civilian casualties, and view it with an evolving perspective," said Rep. Adam Schiff on the topic of the war with ISIS.
I applaud Obama for trying to reduce the amount of innocent lives lost during the attacks but I personally find it a bit naive that he thinks he can fight a war without loosing any innocent lives. I know it's preferable to not kill those caught in the crossfire but sometimes it can't be helped. No one can escape a war unscathed or without loosing people in the war and that still counts now. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that human lives are little pawns to play with but you have to think about how many people you are sacrificing and how many people you could be saving. This reminds me of how hard it must have been to make the decision to drop the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki since those were both residential areas as well. Apparently, Truman thought the cause outweighed the lives of the civilians in the area. (Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying drop an atomic bomb either, I'm just referring to the tension and the situation of a dragged out war.)
Sources
Brenna Hale(6th period)
ReplyDeleteI hope that someday we can arrive at a peaceful method to detain the criminal wanted without risking and taking innocent lives. That is a day of which we will have to work hard towards.