webwit wrote: ↑I think they're still playing video games with their little drones, and when there's like a 10% chance the enemy is at a location, and a 100% chance there are innocent people out there, they press the button. In the meantime, US citizens are worried about their president trying doors in his bathrobe.
The average American does not concern themselves with the effects of our military operations on civilians in other countries. Plain and simple. It's become such background noise at this point in our history. Debates about bathrobes are more entertaining and less depressing.
On a related note, the president's personal habits are somewhat important, considering that personal habits have an effect on their decision making, which affects vast amounts of people. Although the bathrobe debates are simply a distraction.
seebart wrote: ↑vivalarevolución wrote: ↑That many people can get killed in Chicago on any given weekend. You all must live in a bubble.
That's no argument, every single human killed is too much. I'm sure we agree.
Okay, I agree, my argument is weak. Equating American gang-related violence with the Christmas market truck incident is errorneous. Different situations, different causes, different reactions. However, I find it fascinating that some violence is viewed as routine and non-emergency, even though it is a much more clear and present danger (for example, inner city gang violence), while low probability acts of terrorism must be stopped at all costs, including the often more destructive responses.
In fact, tit-for-tat is the nature of gang violence. So acts of terrorism and violent responses to it are essentially a fight of global, militarized gangs, competing for world turf and influence, with little concern for the collateral damage on non-actors in the field of battle.