How much “collateral” damage is acceptable?
The LA Times reports: U.S. Airstrikes Kill 20 Iraqi Civilians: BAGHDAD — Airstrikes by American jets and helicopters killed at least 20 Iraqi civilians and injured another 15 people during a weekend anti-insurgent military operation in the western city of Ramadi, according to interviews today with local police officers and a doctor who treated the injured. And the Boston Herald: U.S. says 70 insurgents killed in airstrikes; witnesses say 39 were civilians. See also the Washington Post on this issue here: Iraqis Say Airstrikes Kill Many Civilians.
Now, how much "collateral" damage is acceptable? Lets say they kill a terrorist who might in the future set up a car bomb and kill 50 people, would it be acceptable to kill him if you kill also 20 civilians? What would the press say if that would happen in the US and not Iraq? Or lets say a terrorist hides in a cultural or historic site, would it be acceptable to destroy that site in order to kill him? (just think whatever site you rate as the most important from your viewpoint) Or is a site more important then civilians? Not easy choices to make for whomever has to make them, what would you do if ya where in power to make those choices?