tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9087565.post112370907456902696..comments2023-10-24T07:06:36.815-07:00Comments on Small Precautions: Technology and moral progressNilshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220861634503974376noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9087565.post-1123714832866865602005-08-10T16:00:00.000-07:002005-08-10T16:00:00.000-07:00You and Yglesias make a really important point. It...You and Yglesias make a really important point. It's one that could be taken too far, in the sense that if, for example, we ever do want to go and prevent a genocide somewhere, it's nice to know we've got precision weapons that could help.<BR/><BR/>One other thing is that the asymetry between the risk to our military and its lethality serves to delegitimize any military undertaking on our part in the eyes of the rest of the world, and to legitimize terrorist activity against us. Every time we destroy another country's military with little risk to our soldiers, we underscore to everyone in the world that terrorism is the only viable oppositional tactic. We didn't lose many soldiers in WWII compared with Germany, Russia, or Japan, but clearly it was a conventional war for all sides in addition to a terror war against civilians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com