Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/springer-journals/the-gamble-of-war-precision-as-justification-N20YhIPzAT
References (14)
-
L. Roberts, R. Lafta, R. Garfield, J. Khudhairi, G. Burnham (2004)
Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample surveyThe Lancet, 364
-
Sahr Conway-Lanz (2006)
Collateral Damage: Americans, Noncombatant Immunity, and Atrocity after World War II -
Luc Boltanski, Graham Burchell (1999)
Distant Suffering: Morality, Media and Politics -
R. Carpenter (2003)
‘Women and Children First’: Gender, Norms, and Humanitarian Evacuation in the Balkans 1991–95International Organization, 57
-
M. Lewis (2003)
The Law of Aerial Bombardment in the 1991 Gulf WarAmerican Journal of International Law, 97
-
Colin Kahl (2006)
How We FightForeign Affairs, 85
-
J. Goldman (2006)
Ethics of spying : a reader for the intelligence professional -
G. Burnham, R. Lafta, S. Doocy, L. Roberts (2006)
Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample surveyThe Lancet, 368
-
Thomas Smith (2002)
The new law of war: Legitimizing hi-tech and infrastructural violence.International Studies Quarterly, 46
-
Bethany Lacina, N. Gleditsch (2005)
Monitoring Trends in Global Combat: A New Dataset of Battle DeathsEuropean Journal of Population / Revue européenne de Démographie, 21
-
Kevin Benson (2005)
The New American MilitarismMilitary review, 85
-
N. Wheeler (2004)
The Kosovo Bombing Campaign -
Ted Westhusing (2002)
'Target Approval Delays Cost Air Force Key Hits': Targeting Terror: Killing Al Qaeda the Right WayJournal of Military Ethics, 1
-
Michael Carlino (2002)
The Moral Limits of Strategic AttackThe US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters
- Publisher
- Palgrave Macmillan US
- Copyright
- © Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Nature America Inc. 2013
- ISBN
- 978-1-349-43727-6
- Pages
- 99 –144
- DOI
- 10.1057/9781137018953_5
- Publisher site
- See Chapter on Publisher Site
Abstract
[The idea of “clean war”5 first entered the public arena during the 1990s and quickly fuelled an intense debate. Western armies proclaimed it and reduced their losses (the “no casualty” doctrine), while at the same time claiming to inflict less suffering on civilians at the sites where they fought (there were fewer civilians killed than before, and fewer than there might have been). These two measures are often related, particularly in aerial warfare: the higher the bombers fly, the greater the risk to which civilian lives are exposed because of the difficulty of precise targeting from such altitudes.]
Published: Nov 9, 2015
Keywords: Global Position System; Armed Force; Military Personnel; Cluster Bomb; Civilian Death