On this forum, when I protested against the drone strikes in Pakistan which are killing innocent people, there was a comment from none other than the owner of this site that in effect considered it legitimate to kill the women and children just so it presumably makes the US citizens more secure.
To put it inperspective, 708 people have died in these drone attacks. 5 of them have been claimed by the US to be alQaeda. The rest, 703 of them, are collateral damage.
Here is an extract from someone who puts it better than I can, and this gentleman is no fundamentalist.
Killing innocent people (assuming people are still innocent until proven guilty) through the dropping of bombs on terrorist targets is still a problem as a general rule. The term "collateral damage" can dehumanise human loss, but it can't blunt the pain of the losses suffered by hundreds of families and dozens of tribes in Pakistan's north. One need not be a fan of that tribal society, nor of terrorism, nor of Islam, or even of basic liberal values. One only needs to be human to empathise with the feelings of people who lose family members in explosions that are not their fault. If the logic of that human sentiment applies to victims of 9/11, of Bali, of March 11, of July 7, of the 26/11 terror in Mumbai,
and if it applies to the deaths of the more than 2,800 shaheed soldiers of the Pakistani military, then it must apply to innocent victims of drone attacks
.When the news becomes news
Tuesday, January 05, 2010