**NOTE:** This is **not** intended to be a politically biased question, only one where I want to be more informed about military tactics and the general guidelines surrounding combat. Thank you.
Is it actually possible for armies to reduce civilian casualties? Considering how effective weapons are (both missiles and chemical) and how dense civilian areas are, how do armies try to mitigate those casualties? What is the difference between an action that is considered a part of war or a war crime?
In: Technology
Absolutely. With technological advances, weapons are getting more and more precision and with that, less and less collateral damage.
The civilian casualties you’re seeing on Israel war with Hamas and Hezbollah is the testament of how much better it is now at reducing civilian casualties. For the scales of the operations Israel conducted, civilian casualties are remarkably low, even by the inflated numbers provided by the terrorists. And don’t just listen to me, go look up civilian casualties with bombings and ground invasions during Vietnam war or the two World Wars and see for yourself how far technologies have helped reducing collateral damages. If we still have the same civilian casualties rates during WWII era, 20% of Palestinian in Gaza would have perished by now.
Ofcourse, this is not to say any innocent casualty rate is acceptable, one is already one too many, but it is a whole lot better than it used to be.
Latest Answers