This is just not true.
stevehobbes
joined 10 months ago
There are no good weapons for densely populated areas. Civilian casualties will always be high in populated urban areas unfortunately.
If that were actually true, deaths would be several orders of magnitude higher. They have the munitions and capability to kill significantly more people.
Bottom line is that anytime you conduct war in a dense urban area, or conduct a ground assault in a populated area, civilian casualties will be high.
They are what trump wishes he could do, and thankfully, has so far been unable to.
The unable to is the difference bub.
lol. Tell that to the autocrat that consolidated all the power.
Change doesn’t happen in that party unless Xi says so. Same with Russia and Putin.
Lemmy broadly is very group-think right now. There isn’t a large diversity of opinion yet; growth would be good - the real issue is when you have actually saturated a market, the only way to grow is through increasingly shitty things (see: reddit). Lemmy won’t have those same problems because the commercial model is so different (non-existent).
They’re wildly different wars from a population density per square mile perspective.
You can say that - but seemingly also can’t explain why the death count isn’t stratospherically higher if that was their goal.
Asymmetric warfare always sucks for civilians. The whole point is knowing who a civilian and who’s a combatant is intentionally difficult.
Hamas doesn’t wear uniforms, because they’re terrorists and not a government or regular army.