The Fool wrote: > > > BTW, US-critical as we are over here, one thing that made the Dutch > news > > was a report that 25 Afghani civilians were killed when a residential > area > > was hit... > > Taliban propaganda. They also claim they shot down 6 airplanes. But > where's the proof? The taliban ambasador shut up when asked what proof > he had...
Where's the proof that the US strikes didn't hit civilian targets? -j- Me: It is, of course, impossible to provide. One of the basic rules of logic is that it is impossible to prove a negative. It is literally impossible to prove that no US weapons hit _any_ civilian targets. It is, however, trivial to prove that one did, _if one did_. The fact that the Taliban could not provide any proof means that it didn't exist. Beyond that, however, people need to grow up. We _are_ going to hit civilian targets. We're going to do everything we possibly can to avoid this, but we _are_ going to hit civilian targets. It _is_ going to happen. Anyone who says that the moral criterion is "no civilian casualties" is living in a fantasy world. It is absolutely impossible to reach that threshold of reliability. The most you can ask - all that the Geneva conventions ask - is that soldiers make all reasonable efforts to avoid hitting civilian targets. This we are, clearly, doing. Gautam
