Burning People? (2)

[A friend sent along a follow up on "Burning People?" I still can't comprehend how the American people can be so blythe about killing civilians in mass numbers, which is inevitable in Iraq as it was in Viet Nam where we simply unloaded bombs wherever when we could not complete a bombing mission due to weather conditions. Obviously scared soldiers are bound to shoot at whatever moves when they are under attack. The stories from Viet Nam were nightmarish of young mothers with newborns being blown to pieces at short range and we ended up with 300,000 undesirable discharges from that war -- drug addiction, hit superior officer, refused orders -- who were left to fend for themselves without support and often ended in jail, on the streets, or both. This war will see such mounting costs as well. With five times the number of the killed who are wounded physically and g-d knows how many psychologically messed up.

That is what war is. And our present leaders seem to be the ones that successfully avoided the last one, so do not know the costs. Ed Kent]

A minor but still important note on incendiary weapons, especially when used in firestorm tactics: They can kill also by asphyxiation, way beyond the reach of heat and flames.

The fires consume oxygen and the firestorm updrafts pull in air from surrounding areas. Also, the deadly gases produced by the combustion, especially carbon monoxide, can flow into areas not reached by the flames & heat.. Thus, even people in good shelters are at risk.

In ground level operations, the asphyxiation can be used to eliminate opposing forces who have fortified themselves or otherwise holed up. (A big risk in civilian areas is that non-combatants might be sheltering as well. But then, we aren't supposed to even think of that according to the chickenhawks playing tough guy warriors. As you may have guessed, I am not having an easy time being thankful for the current government, save that it could be worse.)

For what it's worth, Der Spiegel has a well done multimedia site regarding the Bombing of Dresden at

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,341327,00.html

The interactive map, although a high altitude view of the bombed city, has texts that indicate how the bombing campaign was done with the intent to kill many civilians rather than destroying strategic facilities. Area #15 is particular notable. It was the city's Grosser Garten park, which at the time had many refugees from earlier bombing. (Did the people think that taking refuge in a non-strategic area would be safer? Doesn't work that way in the "total war" concept.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort
to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
--

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights

http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/

http://www.bloggernews.net/blognews.asp