Chad Irby wrote in message . ..

Every time technology gets cheaper, we get more adept at
exterminating each other...

No doubt.

Lotsa doubt.

The folks who are using the high-tech stuff are showing that you can win
wars while killing a lot less people, while the low-tech killers are the
ones racking up body counts in the millions...

I think you are taking a little bit different track then what the
original poster was suggesting. It is true that the US is trying to
leverage technology to minimize death during war, however, the
availability of cheap technology also allows such things as remotely
detonated bombs, and improved communications between insurgents or
terrorists to coordinate their attacks. A distributed organization
like Al Queda could not have existed 10 years ago because the
communication necessary to maintain control was not cheaply available.
So, in that sense, as technology gets cheaper, we get better at
killing each other.

Now, back to your point. Relative to WWII, technology has done a lot
to minimize death and destruction. If we were still using WWII
technology, we would have had to level Baghdad with massive carpet
bombing. Instead we were able to destroy what really needed to be
destroyed without wiping out huge chunks of the city. Nevertheless, we
still killed a very large number of people in the process, many of
whom did not deserve to die.

Your statment that the low-tech people are "killing by the millions"
is a bit off. The US has lost about 800 people since the start of the
Iraq campaign, while killing somewhere in the neighborhood of
10,000-15,000 Iraqis.