New budget proposal

[krashkart]

Originally Posted by redsocialist

My point being I do not see any difference in dropping a Mk84 bomb from 65,000 ft saying "Mark 2, drop", and a insurgent in the middle east running to a building, with an IED, saying Alluahakbar. In reality, the Mk84 bomb kills 10 times as many civilians. Thats worse than the so called "terrorist".

The idea behind a military air strike is to destroy a military target. Period. That being said, there are bombs in development now that pack a smaller warhead (and some without warheads) to cause localized damage to a military target, further reducing the chances of unnecessary civilian casualties.


The insurgent with the bomb strapped around his belly is trying to kill civilians. The point there is to kill civilians, with the hope that all the other civilians who hear of the event will not dare to oppose those who ordered the bombing.


Now let me ask you this:

If the US really wanted to kill civilians, then why is our military funding research into weapons that will hopefully reduce civilian deaths while still putting the hurt on the enemy?