Home > Middle East > The systemic atrocity of Afghanistan’s occupation | Ross Caputi, guardian.co.uk

The systemic atrocity of Afghanistan’s occupation | Ross Caputi, guardian.co.uk

This distinction between collateral damage and murder seems to come down to the question of intent. Thomas Aquinas was one of the first to hone in on this distinction with his doctrine of double effect, which is still used today to justify collateral damage. It is believed in the west that some innocent death is excusable in war, as long as the deaths are not intended, and even if those deaths are foreseeable. But if civilian deaths are foreseeable in a course of action, and we take that action anyway, did we not intend them? I doubt Afghans would feel much consolation knowing that their family members were not directly targeted; rather, we just expected that our actions would kill a few people and it happened to be their family members – an unfortunate side-effect of war.

For more on this story, visit: The systemic atrocity of Afghanistan’s occupation | Ross Caputi | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

What is 20 + 25 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)
I footnotes