I decided to write about issue of collateral damage found after the poem by Hanan ‘Ashrawi. When I looked at the term collateral damage, I had a basic idea of what the word meant, but just to have a deeper understanding of the term, I went and looked up the definition. So in the case of the military, one type of collateral damage would be an accidental injuring or death of a civilian in the process of some type of military operation. Being that collateral damage is an accident, its hard to go around those sorts of things. Even here when we are about our daily lives, all sorts of accidents happen all the time. Like when we are driving around in our cars, people get into accidents every single day. But I find it interesting that when we get into accidents here, we have to pay the consequences, especially when we are the ones at fault. And if the person is killed in an accident, you can be charged with involuntary man slaughter, and worse penalties will come about if you try to flee the scene and not take responsibility for your actions. But this is not always the case when it comes to military conflict. Many times, nobody takes responsibility for these sorts of things. I can see how there could be more collateral damage when the conflict is some type of civil war within a country. Because then their battles can easily take place within towns and such, where more innocent lives are at stake. Then there is the collateral damage that is caused by one country fighting another. I don’t think that instance or the other is more justifiable. Just in my opinion, I don’t really see how the taking of an innocent person’s life, or the injury of an innocent person, accidental or intentional can be morally justified.
There is another type of collateral damage though. I think the worst is when innocent lives are at stake, its impossible to replace a loved one that has been lost. Then there is the type of collateral damage that affects buildings, equipment and so on. It’s a sad situation either way, and unfortunate but I can see where this could be more justifiable when it comes to the damage of non living things, and through time and effort these types of things that have been lost can be replaced.
In the event of World War II, there was so much damage done on both sides, and especially when it came to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands upon thousands of lives were lost in those bombings, not to mention the complete destruction of both of those cities. Some may feel that these bombings were justifiable because it helped to end the war. Some say that if the bombings were not done, that the war would have continued and more lives would have been lost. So the bombings did help to end something dreadful, but at what cost?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the short part about car accidents is interesting in your blog, I never would have thought about collateral damage in that way. It made me feel like maybe you were involved in a serious crash? I like how you tied that in to the responsibility that seems to be absent when you kill in a military situation. I agree with you when you say no loss of innocent life is justified nor moral, I think you couldn't be more right. Regardless of accidental or intentional this sort of casualty of war is simply unacceptable. I was lucky not to lose my brother in this war but I for a fact he killed a lot of people, who knows if they were innocents or not? And on that note, he did lose his innocence in way. A sort of living death occurs when you think of all the lives you've taken, I wonder if that's collateral damage too? Men go to war and come back physically but never are the same emotionally... Hhhmmm. I also like that you addressed the economical and monetary damage that occurs during military attacks. Often times the lasting effects of the destruction of buildings, crops, trade, etc can cripple the survivors and cause their eventual deaths too. I would think that loss of life would be considered collateral damage as well seeing as they wouldn't have died had there been no military there in the first place. As far as Nagasaki and Hiroshima I think those two occurrences were monstrous but like you I see the positive as well, it did help end the war but if we'd really considered why we were fighting in the first place maybe the war would have been unnecessary to begin with. I really liked your blog, very thought provoking.
ReplyDelete