# So is the war in Afghanistan a good war? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 6, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107 "2009-07-06T18:22:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/41 "2009-07-08T16:51:40Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > So how could they tell the funeral attendees were Taliban, then? One instance of not opening fire on a purported Taliban funeral doesn’t mean the killing in Afghanistan isn’t indiscriminate. Civilians dying in airstrikes because they’re simply in the wrong place at the wrong time is indiscriminate killing. Can you give us an example of a good (or justified) war in which civilians weren’t killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/42 "2009-07-08T16:53:43Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Civilians dying in airstrikes because they’re simply in the wrong place at the wrong time is indiscriminate killing. No, it is not. In this case it is collateral damage, and while ample criticism can be made of such mislabeling it as indiscriminate killing is simply false. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/43 "2009-07-08T16:54:52Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Wrong. The targeting of civilians in general is unacceptable; if the civilians are, however, clearly aiding in the enemy’s prosecution of the war or undermining your own efforts to prosecute, then they become valid military targets. :dubious: Seemed to be OK during WWII, the Allies targeted a lot of civilians. Nor have you shown that “Indiscriminate killing of civilians, on the other hand, is part and parcel of the US prosecution of the war in Afghanistan.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/44 "2009-07-08T16:59:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Can you give us an example of a good (or justified) war in which civilians weren’t killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? The War of Jenkin’s Ear, conducted entirely by warships of the respective antagonists. When may we expect an abject retraction and a blubbering apology? Or, alternatively, we may simply agree that its rather a silly question, a hypothetical offered to make someone look foolish and unrealistic. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/45 "2009-07-08T17:11:26Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The War of Jenkin’s Ear… Bad example - that “war” was absorbed into the War of the Austrian Succession, a conflict so extensive that it could itself be considered a world war. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/46 "2009-07-08T17:17:55Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] The War of Jenkin’s Ear, conducted entirely by warships of the respective antagonists. [/QUOTE] Um…that’s a really bad example. Just from memory I seem to recall that this became part of a larger war of succession in the 40’s (that’s 1740’s obviously) of one of the major European powers (ETA: On preview, Mr Moto says Austria, and here is a [Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Jenkins%27_Ear) article on the war). Also, IIRC, there were several battles that involved naval actions in harbors or ports, so, at a guess, at least SOME civilians were killed. And this doesn’t even count any privateer type actions, or commerce raiding by either side…which, again, would most likely involve at least some civilians. From the Wiki article: > [@](#): > > Capture of Porto Bello > Main article: Battle of Porto Bello > > One of the first actions was the British capture, on 22 November 1739, of Porto Bello a silver-exporting town on the coast of Panama in an attempt to damage Spain’s finances and weaken its naval capabilities. The poorly defended port was attacked by six ships of the line under Admiral Edward Vernon who captured it within twenty four hours. The British occupied the town for three weeks before withdrawing, having destroyed its fortifications, port and warehouses.[12] The battle led the Spanish to change their trading practices. Rather than trading at centralised ports with a few large treasure fleets, they began using a larger number of smaller convoys trading at a wide variety of ports. They also began to travel around Cape Horn to trade on the west coast.[citation needed] Porto Bello’s economy was severely damaged, and did not recover until the building of the Panama Canal more than a century later. > > In Britain the victory was greeted with much celebration, and in 1740, at a dinner in honour of Vernon in London, the song “Rule Britannia” was performed in public for the first time.[13] Portobello Road in London is named after this victory and more medals were awarded than for any other event in the eighteenth century.[14] The conquest of a port in Spain’s American empire was widely considered a foregone conclusion by many Patriot Whigs and opposition Tories who pressed a reluctant Walpole to launch larger naval expeditions to the Gulf of Mexico. > [@](#): > > The success of the Porto Bello operation led the British in September 1740 to send a squadron under Commodore George Anson to attack Spain’s possessions in the Pacific. Before they even reached the Pacific a large amount of the expedition had died from disease, and they were in no shape to launch any sort of attack.[15] Anson reassembled his force in the Juan Fernandez Islands, allowing them to recuperate before he moved up the Chilean coast, raiding the small town of Paita. However he reached Acapulco too late to intercept the yearly Manila galleon, which had been one of the principal objectives of the expedition. He retreated across the Pacific, running into a storm which forced him to dock for repairs in Canton. After this he made a final attempt to intercept the Manila galleon the following year. This he did on 20 June 1743 off Cape Espiritu Santo capturing more than a million gold coins.[16] > > Anson then sailed home, eventually arriving back in London more than three and a half years after he had set out, having circumnavigated the globe in the process. Less than a tenth of the force had survived the expedition, but Anson’s achievements helped establish his name and wealth in Britain, leading to his later appointment as First Lord of the Admiralty. > [@](#): > > In 1740 the inhabitants of Georgia launched an overland attack on St. Augustine in Florida, supported by a British naval blockade, but were repelled. The British forces led by James Oglethorpe, the Governor of Georgia, besieged St. Augustine for two weeks before retreating, abandoning their artillery in the process. The failure of the Royal Navy blockade to prevent supplies reaching the settlement was a crucial factor in the collapse of the siege. Oglethorpe then began preparing Georgia for an anticipated Spanish assault. > [@](#): > > The largest action of the war was a major amphibious attack launched by the British under Admiral Edward Vernon in March, 1741 against Cartagena de Indias, one of Spain’s principal gold-trading ports in their colony of New Granada (today Colombia). Vernon’s expedition was hampered by inefficient organisation, his rivalry with the commander of his land forces, and the logistical problems of mounting and maintaining a major trans-Atlantic expedition. The strong fortifications in Cartagena and the able strategy of Spanish Commander Blas de Lezo were decisive in repelling the attack, with heavy losses on the British side. In addition to the unfamiliar tropical climate, Vernon’s men succumbed in large numbers to virulent tropical disease, primarily yellow fever. While they aren’t naming specific civilian casualties, one can read between the lines here…if you are using naval forces to bombard port cities, or doing amphibious assaults on enemy towns, then odds are that some unfortunate civie is going to be in the way of a cannon ball or musket shot. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/47 "2009-07-08T17:20:31Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Um…that’s a really bad example. You owe me a Coke. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/48 "2009-07-08T17:22:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The War of Jenkin’s Ear, conducted entirely by warships of the respective antagonists. Got a cite for that? Seems like you are focusing on one action in the larger war, which lasted several years and was spread all over British and Spanish colonies. > [@](#): > > When may we expect an abject retraction and a blubbering apology? A retraction for asking a question? I don’t think so… > [@](#): > > Or, alternatively, we may simply agree that its rather a silly question, a hypothetical offered to make someone look foolish and unrealistic. Nope. I’m trying to understand the parameters being set down. If he wants to say that no wars are justified, that’s fine and that’s a debatable position. But he doesn’t seem to saying that, and so he seems to be setting too high a standard for this particular war. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/49 "2009-07-08T17:23:20Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > No, it is not. In this case it is collateral damage, and while ample criticism can be made of such mislabeling it as indiscriminate killing is simply false. “Collateral damage” is military doublespeak for indiscriminate killing. The former is the inaccurate label here. > [@DrDeth](#): > > :dubious: Seemed to be OK during WWII According to whom? I certainly haven’t argued that. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/50 "2009-07-08T17:24:31Z")
Also, Robert Jenkins (whose ear was cut off thus giving the war its curious name) was a British merchant captain, not a member of the Royal Navy. And since his ear was severed, this counts as a civilian casualty all by itself. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/51 "2009-07-08T17:25:36Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] You owe me a Coke. [/QUOTE] Conceded. Hell, I’ll buy you a beer someday. You think ‘man, no one will know what the hell the War of Jenkin’s Ear is’, so you try and post something really quick on it (having read about it in a fiction novel years before), only to find some 'doper has beaten you to the punch! 😉 -XT ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/52 "2009-07-08T17:25:40Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > “Collateral damage” is military doublespeak for indiscriminate killing. Please provide a cite for this novel view. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/53 "2009-07-08T17:31:10Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > "According to whom? I certainly haven’t argued that. Well, if we’re just talking your own personal opinion, then say so. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/54 "2009-07-08T17:39:35Z")
[QUOTE=Olentzero] “Collateral damage” is military doublespeak for indiscriminate killing. The former is the inaccurate label here. [/QUOTE] Sez who? You? The term [collateral damage](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damage) has a very specific meaning in military terms: > [@](#): > > Collateral damage is damage that is unintended or incidental to the intended outcome.[1] The term originated in the United States military, but it has since expanded into broader use. I think the problem here (besides the fact that you are letting your rhetoric get away from you), is that you don’t seem to understand what the word ‘indiscriminate’ means…or to understand the process by which the US military determines what is or is not a valid target, or how they arrive at this determination. While you might (probably would) not agree with how they make these determinations, or how they weigh the possibility of civilian casualties against the mission objectives, it is completely incorrect to use the term ‘indiscriminate’ in this context. To paraphrase the immortal words of Inigo Montoya: I dinna thin’ that word means what you thin’ it means, kimo sabe. -XT ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/55 "2009-07-08T18:25:13Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > “Collateral damage” is military doublespeak for indiscriminate killing. The former is the inaccurate label here.According to whom? I certainly haven’t argued that. No, collateral damage is military doublespeak for “the unfortunate and/or accidental killing of civilians”. Indiscriminate killing is wiping everyone out without regret or a care. We don’t do that. We do realize that there are going to be some civilians killed, particularly in a combat effort like this one where often combatants and innocents cannot always be easily distinguished from one another because of their appearance, and because the Taliban are smart…staying in the midst of their civilian population works in their favor politically and militarily. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/56 "2009-07-08T18:37:13Z")
Well, good, we have this wretched thing precisely defined. The parameters of linguistic perfection are expanded. The innocent still die, but now we can put exactly the right phrase in place to describe it. Happily,we have hard-headed and realistic men to advise that such is the way, it can’t be helped, darn shame about that. We never seem to run out of hard-headed and realistic men. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/57 "2009-07-08T18:38:23Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Please provide a cite for this novel view. Here’s an example from the war in Iraq: [‘US soldiers started to shoot us, one by one’](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/21/iraq.rorymccarthy/print) from the _Guardian_ on 21 May 2004. A wedding was being celebrated in the village of Mukaradeeb, near the Syrian border. > [@](#): > > “The bombing started at 3am,” [Haleema Shihab] said yesterday from her bed in the emergency ward at Ramadi general hospital, 60 miles west of Baghdad. “We went out of the house and the American soldiers started to shoot us. They were shooting low on the ground and targeting us one by one,” she said. She ran with her youngest child in her arms and her two young boys, Ali and Hamza, close behind. As she crossed the fields a shell exploded close to her, fracturing her legs and knocking her to the ground. > > She lay there and a second round hit her on the right arm. By then her two boys lay dead. “I left them because they were dead,” she said. One, she saw, had been decapitated by a shell. > > “I fell into the mud and an American soldier came and kicked me. I pretended to be dead so he wouldn’t kill me. My youngest child was alive next to me.” > [@](#): > > Among the dead was his daughter Fatima Ma’athi, 25, and her two young boys, Raad, four, and Raed, six. “I found Raad dead in her arms. The other boy was lying beside her. I found only his head,” [Ma’athi Nawaf] said. These are what the military call ‘collateral damage’. Multiply this by the hundreds, as it is most certainly _not_ an isolated incident. It is nothing but indiscriminate killing of civilians. There’s nothing unfortunate or accidental about it. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/58 "2009-07-08T19:05:39Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Here’s an example from the war in Iraq: [‘US soldiers started to shoot us, one by one’](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/21/iraq.rorymccarthy/print) from the _Guardian_ on 21 May 2004. A wedding was being celebrated in the village of Mukaradeeb, near the Syrian border.These are what the military call ‘collateral damage’. Multiply this by the hundreds, as it is most certainly _not_ an isolated incident. It is nothing but indiscriminate killing of civilians. There’s nothing unfortunate or accidental about it. These _are_ isolated incidents, which is what makes them newsworthy in the first place. They are not the norm. They happen far too often, but again: war is never fully precise, people and intelligence are never perfect. _These things happen in wars_, which is why no wars are “good” wars. Necessity isn’t always “good”. Collateral damage is literally unavoidable 100% of the time. I wish it weren’t so, but wish in one hand…it’s the nature of the thing. I don’t like civilians dying any more than anyone else does but to suggest the the US military as a matter of operating procedure deliberately targets civilians _on purpose_ is simply not true. Not today it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/59 "2009-07-08T19:07:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, good, we have this wretched thing precisely defined. The parameters of linguistic perfection are expanded. The innocent still die, but now we can put exactly the right phrase in place to describe it. > > Happily,we have hard-headed and realistic men to advise that such is the way, it can’t be helped, darn shame about that. We never seem to run out of hard-headed and realistic men. We don’t have a shortage of snarky, armchair quarterbacks whom have never served in uniform and don’t have a complete grasp of what it’s like, either. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2009, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107/60 "2009-07-08T19:08:50Z")
The only opinions that actually matter about that are the Afghans’, aren’t they? Would \*they \*think we’re being careful enough? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-is-the-war-in-afghanistan-a-good-war/502107.md?page=4)