The so-called human rights community is already demonstrating that it prefers innocent people to languish under jihadi control (and prefers jihadis to survive longer and for the good guys die in larger numbers by denying the good guys firepower) than to let troops to quite legally fight the jihadis even when civilians die:
Calls by United Nations officials to halt the coalition air campaign in Raqqa, Syria, will only reinforce the Islamic State’s tactic of using human shields and put more civilians in harm’s way, U.S. military officials said.
Be prepared because we will see a lot more of this talk in Afghanistan in the years ahead.
The Taliban wield the best air defense system in the world--powered by idiot Westerners who revel in their so-called morality of protesting American air strikes while practically speaking counting on American success in these strikes to live their lives without too much unpleasantness at home.
Jihadis no less than Nazis should not be allowed to thrive because of false compassion:
That civilians are also killed is nothing new. During the allied invasion of France in 1944, the several months of fighting required to destroy the German armies in France also left 15,000 French civilians dead in the invasion area and more than that in the rest of France. The Germans did not normally try and hide among civilians, while Islamic terrorists do. The Germans knew they would be attacked no matter where they were. Islamic terrorists do sometimes get away because of the successful use of human shields (and because the order to fire is not given). This attitude ignores the civilians who die because terrorists escape to keep killing. Thus, in war, you can avoid killing civilians, but you do so at the cost of giving enemy personnel immunity that just gets more people killed down the road.
Indeed.
