Jeff Culbreath might not agree with Chief Joseph's statement above, but in the close examination of conscience and with a clear eye as to what was happening to his people, Chief Joseph made this promise. I think he was considering the same things Jeff writes about in two posts.
And the answer to Jeff's question is very simple--unless that little girl was walking into your house, country, public place, with a bomb strapped onto her back and the trigger in her hand, it is never licit. Collateral damage is one of those horrible Minitruth phrases that covers up the hideous reality. When we condone even the use of the term "collateral damage," we are complicit in depriving mothers of their children, fathers of their families, and innocents of their lives. The proper term is "civilian deaths and casualties."
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." Granted none of us are good, but surely some of us are good enough to recognize that the slaughter of innocents is not "collateral damage"--it is sheer evil dressed up as necessity. Any person who does not mourn when this happens has become a monster.
You guys finally found something to agree on.
Thanks for the mention, Steven. Although I am still, at this late stage, trying to get a handle on the application of Catholic morality to modern warfare, I can't agree with your statement here:
" ...unless that little girl was walking into your house, country, public place, with a bomb strapped onto her back and the trigger in her hand, it is never licit."
If that were the case - she had the "trigger in her hand" - then she would effectively be a combatant, even if under duress.
But suppose that innocent little girl is merely strapped to a terrorist of the same description: are we not still obliged to defend our families, neighbors, etc.? Or do we just roll over? "Collateral damage" is undoubtedly the most abused euphamism in modern warfare, as the present conflicts prove, but that doesn't mean that the killing of non-combatants, when probable but unintended, is always and everywhere illicit.
Dear Jeff,
You are correct, it can't be that categorical. But I would stipulate the cases you suggest are a very small number indeed, and they certainly appear to have little or no bearing on the picture you posted on your blog.
shalom,
Steven
Agreed.