Has Collateral Damage Gone Up Since the 18th Century?

[unriggable]

Has collateral damage gone up since the American Revolution? Some things to consider:

-We now have nuclear weapons and bombs. On the other hand:
-We now have GPS guided missiles.

What do you think?

[Colaalone]

[hecter]

Colaalone, how would you like to join, or become an ally of Spamalot? You could be known as "The Picture Spammer" or something cooler. Whaddya think?

[Anarchist]

yeah its gone way up!

instead of shooting once and reloading, or fighting a war with your sword.

Now we simply bomb a city into oblivion, then wonder why its not a paradise afterwards

[Jenos Ridan]

Has collateral damage gone up since the American Revolution? Some things to consider:

-We now have nuclear weapons and bombs. On the other hand:
-We now have GPS guided missiles.

What do you think?

The potential, yes. The case-by-case incidents, no.

Higher potential due not only to nukes, but also fighting in urban areas. In the 18th century, armies tended not to fight house to house. It was generally not to their advantage. Also, an artillery barrage tends to hit a wide area and go though other buildings on it's way in. That is changing now with cool stuff like Land Warrior, the NLOS Cannon w/Excalibur shells and Guided MRLS.

[Jenos Ridan]

yeah its gone way up!

instead of shooting once and reloading, or fighting a war with your sword.

Now we simply bomb a city into oblivion, then wonder why its not a paradise afterwards

So, if I gave you the choose between a katana and a M-60 GPMG, you'd take the.....?

[Anarchist]

in this day and age?

A F2000,

he was asking about collateral damage, not whats most efficient at killing lots of ppl.

A katana is less likely to hit a bystander

[Anarchy Ninja]

not to mention wars in the past were more largely concered with 'honour' and the such.

and out of katana and m60 id take the katana

[Anarchist]

Honor is something we no longer have, Its sad.
even something as sacred as killing(if life is sacred so is death)
has been degraded to point click kill. With a blade one had to use your force, not that of a machine.

my heart says the sword, though katana would be my second to last choice in style. (Chuttuval)

however today, men have no honor. A Knight would fall in a blaze of bullets, atleast you would have your honor.

[Anarchy Ninja]

and required more skill, although proficiency in firearms is required to be succesful today i think a lot more skill was needed in a duel with swords

[Anarchist]

alot more sweat and most likely blood too

[unriggable]

I meant damage outside the actual target. Collateral damage.

[Guiscard]

Its gone up a hell of a lot, we just haven't had a war on the same scale as WWII to test it out.

What about cluster bombs, land mines, missiles hitting the wrong buildings... or our own troops... We've got much more destructive weaponry and we haven't mastered firing it in the right place yet...

[fluffybunnykins]

There's no such thing as a battlefield anymore. I'm sure there would have been all sorts of shenanigans 'off the field' (sabotage, espionage, assasination, incitement, insurrection, etc.) in 1066 or whenever but it's all a lot more directed & focussed than 'drop a bomb on it'. However 'smart' a bomb might get, it still goes bang. OK, so it can hit a garage door from 200 miles away... is it only going to damage that one door?
Even if there are purportedly good reasons for bombing another nation (like dislodging a dictator/unstable regime, or whatever) it's still just bullying: "My bomb's bigger/smarter/faster/goes further than you bomb. Nah-nah de-nah-nah"

[MeDeFe]

The numbers are steadily on the rise, once dead, always dead. They won't get smaller.

[Jenos Ridan]

not to mention wars in the past were more largely concered with 'honour' and the such.

and out of katana and m60 id take the katana

And I gun you down, using the superior weapon. Since you were too occupied with having "honor" and a cool weapon, I choosed utility and won.

[Jenos Ridan]

in this day and age?

A F2000,

he was asking about collateral damage, not whats most efficient at killing lots of ppl.

A katana is less likely to hit a bystander

Last I checked, they didn't have the Geneva Conventions in the 1700's. That, and given the missions most armies are sent on these days, nukes will never be deployed. Barring WWIII, of cource .

[Anarchy Ninja]

And I gun you down, using the superior weapon. Since you were too occupied with having "honor" and a cool weapon, I choosed utility and won.

As far as im concered the M60 is not superior, its horribly inacurate and im a ninja besides do you expect i would face a gun in like a long hallway or something? That would just be stupid.

[Anarchist]

Nothing like sneaking up on them in the dark and putting a knife in their spinal cord