I was thinking about this on the way to work ... the 20th century is possibly the bloodiest century in the history of man. It is really a dark century.
But for most of the 20c, the deaths were caused by major wars (I and II), and attrocities (Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot). But what I was really thinking of when I posted this morning, as far as ongoing blood letting, are all the petty third-world dictatorships, revolutionaries (if you can use that term fairly for them) and other sorts of evil people in poorer nations. I do think the more advanced nations have turned a corner in the last 20 or 30 years about how we conduct war. That may yet prove to be a bad thing (not being tough/strong enough), but for now I applaud our ability to strike with precision. It is a more humane way to fight a war. I hope we continue to extend that technology. Maybe some day we won't need the technology of war of any sort, but for now we do and I hope we continue to build it and refine it and refine our notion of how to humanely fight a war. H. ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- from: "Will Swain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:55:23 +0100 >To be fair Howard, most of the civilian casualties in the 20th century were >probably in WW2. > >There may or may not be more barbarous groups out there, sadly many of them >are states and not terrorists. > >will > >-----Original Message----- >From: Howard Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 02 April 2002 17:42 >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >There's a logical disconnect here ... you say more civilians are being >killed ... a point I don't dispute ... but you don't say why that is ... >that's because there are more barbarous groups out there, not because >countries such as the US or Britain, etc. are targeting civilians. > >H. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:32 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >why then is it a fact that in general MORE civilians die in conflicts and >wars now than did at the start of the 20th century? > >That is one of the acknowledged shifts in the nature of conflict through the >20th century. I can point you in the direction of plenty of supporting >reading material if you like. > >will > >-----Original Message----- >From: Howard Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 02 April 2002 17:23 >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >Civilized nations and peoples do not target civilians. > >And as weapons become more advanced, civilian causalities decrease. Look at >Afghanistan as an example. There are neighborhoods where all but one house >remains untouched. That one house, all of the residents say, was occupied by >a known Taliban or Al Quada member. It is utterly destroyed. The neighbors >say no other homes were damaged and no other people hurt. Just that one >house. That's what advanced weaponry will do for you. > >As I said, civilians will inevitably be hurt in killed in a war zone. I >don't think there will ever be a time when that is 100 percent unavoidable, >but the difference between a civilized nation (such as Israel) and an >uncivilized one (such as Palestine) is who they choose as their targets. The >civilized ones pick military and government targets. The uncivilized ones >pick civilian targets. > >H. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:10 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >Interesting point.... are you saying that a terrorist is someone who attacks >civilians? > >generally in the past, civilians have not been targeted in time of conflict >or war. For example, in WW1 about 5% of all causalities were civilian. >Obviously this has changed during the 20th century, maybe partly due to the >changing nature of weapons, and of conflict itself. > >will > >-----Original Message----- >From: Howard Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 02 April 2002 17:01 >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >Illogical and wrong. The colonists attacked military and government targets. > >H. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 7:53 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: Re: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >Agreed. I'm the colonists that rebelled against England were considered >terrorists at the time. Probably still could be. > >Todd > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mark Smyth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:42 AM >Subject: RE: Why (Re: They invaded! 0_0) > > >> >They (the Palestinians) are the terrorists. >> >> Surely the issue of whether they are terrorists depends on your >perspective >> of the situation? I'm not condoning anything, its just an observation >> > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
