> The USSR-Afghanistan left an estimated 2 million dead. Nigerian Civil War between 1 and 3 million. France-Algeria War about 1 million. Korean War between 1.5 and 4.5 million dead. Vietnam between 1.3 and 4.5 million. I could go on really.
That's peanuts, really. WW2 killed 70-85 million people, WW3 is projected from killing some 7 billion folks. No war between highly industrialised countries is a big win.
Factually? No discussion there. A dozen million is less then 70-85 million. That's how numbers work.
Morally? We are talking about the lives of human individuals. Concluding that a dozen million dead is "peanuts" and therefor a justifiable argument to defend the purported useful nature of nuclear weapons is reprehensible.
It's the exact same consideration made by military leadership when it comes to going to war or deploying nuclear weapons. It's a manner of thinking which should send shivers through anyone's spine. Why? Because it's a way of thinking that reduces the value of anyone's life to either "friend" or "foe" / "strategically valuable" or "without value".
Whether it's the sterile press of a button, or hand-to-hand combat, the end result is the always same: suffering.
That's peanuts, really. WW2 killed 70-85 million people, WW3 is projected from killing some 7 billion folks. No war between highly industrialised countries is a big win.