Tweet
Yes, but under 1000 deaths is not war status, and if I do remember correctly about that stated conflict, casulties came No where NEAR 1000 deaths. More like a couple hundred.
-
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV) -
Just to speak about the 1000 death requirement for war, is it really that written in stone? For example, the trend in warfare - at least amongst the militarily advanced Western Nations - for war to be more robotic. Meaning smart weapons will be operated by operators at great distance away from the war zone. Smart missles are already in use. Much of the air warfare would become robotic, so there is no opportunity for death. Is this war? And as shown by Operation Allied force, war can be won by air power without the use of ground troops, so that possibility of casualties is cut off. Since there are smart weapons, civilian deaths would be minimized because of accurate and decisive targeting. If both side's militaries are organized in this matter, is the conflict between them classified as war?
Vitmore The Great"We should not go out and conquer the people, but give them no other choice in their minds but to be conquered." - MeComment
-
You can't really use Pakistan as an example of a democracy, even if it was officially a democracy. The ISI, Army and clergy are the real seats of power in Pakistan and civilian control over foreign affairs and military are bypassed by them (especially by the ISI).
------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@shivamail.com
Web: http://www.shivamail.com
ICQ: 17719980Comment
Comment