This sort of destruction was a costly in lives
and material for the bombing power.
Much has been made about the accuracy so-called "precision bombing", and usually the claims are made by those dropping the bombs.
Let's consider the bombing of Germany during WW2. From statistics in the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey.
* 2,700,000 tons of bombs killed 300,000 people and wounded another 780,000; thus it took 9 tons of bombs to kill one person, and approximately 4 tons to wound a person.
By comparison, the well-known B-17 Fortress aircraft carried 4 tons of bombs on missions of less than 400 miles range, and 2.25 tons on missions of up to 800 miles range. Thus, at ranges over 400 miles, on average it would take approximately 4 fully loaded B-17 aircraft, each one with a crew of 10 men, to kill a single German civilian.
* Similarly, if we divide the total number of aircraft sorties (aircraft combat missions) 4,120,000, by the number of German civilian deaths, we arrive at approximately 13 sorties for every civilian death, or stated the other way, 13 aircraft, each manned by 1 to 10 highly trained crew, would have to fly into hostile airspace over Germany for every German civilian death.
* Bombing was costly in lives and material. There were over 158,000 Allied airmen killed in action in the bombing campaign, thus it cost the life of one aircraft crewman to bring death to two German civilians, most likely non-combatants, on the ground.
* In terms of lost aircraft (of which there were 40,000), for every 7.5 Germans killed on the ground, one Allied aircraft would be lost.
* 3,600,000 dwelling units were destroyed or heavily damaged, about 20% of the housing stock of Germany, and about 7.5 million people were made homeless. Statistically that means it took about 3/4 tons of high explosive delivered by air to destroy or heavily damage a single dwelling unit. For every 24 dwellings so struck, the life of one airman would be lost, and for every 90 dwellings, an aircraft would be lost.
To quote the bombing survey: "Of necessity a far larger tonnage was carried than hit German installations."
Modern bombs are of course no less deadly than the ones dropped 70 years ago; the principle differences are the targeting systems.
Whereas in WW2 a target such as a factory was considered to accurately struck if the bombs fell within 1000 feet, current technology allows bombs to be targeted within 50 feet, or even less. This necessarily means an enormous reduction in the number of bombs that must be carried to the target, because each bomb is capable of far greater accuracy and hence, far greater destruction.
Offer void in Muslim countries.
Target decisions become paramount.
Because of the greatly increased accuracy of modern bombing methods, it must be assumed that, absent an effective air defense or a major retaliatory capability, practically any installation in the world can be struck at will with aerially-delivered high explosive. Consequently, it is not the accuracy but the target selection that is critical, as shown by the destruction of the Amiriyah bomb shelter on February 13, 1991, in which over 408 persons were incinerated, none of them combatants.
The bombing of Baghdad had begun on January 17, 1991. The Amiriyah shelter, also called the Al-Firdos shelter, had been built during the Iran-Iraq war which ran from 1980 to 1988. The designers of the structure were a Finnish firm which turned over the plans to the U.S. military.
Felicity Arbuthnot visited the Amiriyah shelter in 2007 and interviewed a number of people who had witnessed the aftermath of the bombing. She reports:
The breast high 'scum' on the walls, was the flesh of those who perished. On the upper floor is the seared 'shadow' of a mother, holding her baby.
* * * When the fire engines arrived, the rescuers could hear the screams, until they began to fade away - but the great metre thick steel door, with airline type handles to seal it from the inside for safety, was glowing like a furnace, then as it melted, re-sealed itself. Dante, revisited. To have poured water from gaping missile hole in the roof, would have subjected those inside to boiling steam.The fire Chief, the toughest of men, who had seen the unimaginable and directed rescues over many years, faltered as he said, of the remains they finally brought out: 'We thought we were bringing out only children and wondered why they were there alone - then we realised the (adult) bodies had (contracted) to child size with the intensity of the heat.'
Apparently Dick Cheney was out signing his name on bombs the day before.
Let's hear some of the wisdom of Herr Minister Rumsfeld on the Amiriyah attack, from his spew of of March 11, 2003:
For example, on February 13th, 1991, coalition forces fired precision guided bombs at the Amiriyah bunker in Baghdad. The bunker had originally been constructed as an air raid shelter during the Iran-Iraq war. But when -- the latter was converted into a military command and control center.
Unbeknownst to coalition forces, the Iraqi regime had told civilians that it was an air raid shelter, and admitted them to the top floors in the evening. Right beneath them was a military command and control center that was being used by senior Iraqi officials for military communications. We later learned that Saddam Hussein had decreed that all Iraqi military bunkers would also house civilians.
In short, according to Minister Rumsfeld, it wasn't the fault of the bombing community that all those people were burned to death -- no indeed, rather, it was a crime against humanity for Saddam to allow civilians to use air raid shelters in Baghdad, a city then under aerial bombardment.
The truth of the Amiriyah crime (yes, I think I shall call it that) has been shown in the twenty years since. No comparable target has been selected for destruction in any of the numerous wars our nation has been involved in since. That the Amiriyah crime was still on the minds of Rumsfeld and the other conspirators 12 years later, as they prepared their lies for another war against Iraq, shows their very great concern that this had been indeed a crime against humanity.
Afghani children wounded by U.S. bomb
attack, October 2001 (source)
The "efficiency" of modern bombing.
But crime against humanity or no, measured by the standards of World War Two, the Amiriyah bombing was a resounding success. Statistically, under WW2 standards, to kill 400 civilians would have meant lost of 200 aircraft crew, 50 aircraft, and would have required 3,600 tons of bombs. Here, only two bombs of one ton each were necessary, and there were no aircraft or crew losses.
The logical extension of this costless and therefore desirable (for the bombing power) war are robot drone attacks. Using this method, the loss of personnel of the bombing power is reduced almost, but not quite, to zero.
Consider the drone attacks on Pakistan. According to Wikipedia, between 1,667 and 2,614 people have been killed by the 273 drone attacks, or a minimum of 6 people per attack. There are no reliable figures on how many of these people are "militants" and how many not. But since the carrying of arms is almost universal among the men of the Pakistani tribal regions where the Drone Wars are being waged, practically every time a man is killed one could say he was a "militant." "Civilians" which in this context means anyone other than an able-bodied adult male, are also killed, precisely how many is a matter of debate, but the number appears to be significant.
If you trust Wikipedia, there have been a total of 9 CIA operatives and ground targeting personnel killed in the course of the campaign. Again, as with the Amiriyah bombing, the drone campaign is a resounding success for the bombing power. To kill the 1,667 minimum number of people claimed for the drone war would, by WW2 standards, have required the loss of over 800 air crew, making this drone war about 90 times less deadly for the bombing power (that's us) than the air war over Germany.
Destroyed and abandoned aircraft in failed
Iranian hostage rescue, April 1980.
Avoid hostage situations and related problems.
Another great advantage of the Predator drone is avoidance of a potential hostage problem from lost aircrews. Ever since the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-1981, the prime goal of every American presidency has been to prevent anything like a repeat. The domestic consequences of a disaster like the failed hostage rescue were driven home when the Carter re-election was essentially doomed from that point forward.
Conclusion: Bombs away!
The so-called "precision bombs" are valued not for their "humanitarian" targeting, but rather because the the bombing power can use them at a much lower level of risk to its own personnel.
Hence one sees the real attraction of "precision" bombing. One can kill quite a lot more people per bomb dropped, with a much lower rate of loss of air crews and aircraft. This creates the impression, which is basically accurate as far as the bombing power is concerned, that bombing is a bloodless business, and hence, highly desirable as a form of warfare.
The temptation to use this method of warfare, which necessarily focuses on civilian areas, almost ensures that large numbers of civilians will be killed. Check out the Air Strike Tracker at ourbombs.com if you need any confirmation of this. Hence the myth that more accurate bombing will reduce civilian loss of life.