I've always really liked this one, because it does not deny that war can sometimes be not merely morally JUST, but morally OBLIGATED (this one ISN'T, as we're even seeing reflected in TRUMP APPOINTEES IN SOME OF THE CLEAREST POSITIONS TO KNOW resigning in protest and blaming #IsraelAtWarCrimes), yet still emphasizes the human cost EVEN WHEN IT IS.
From this more jus ad bellum perspective, down to the jus in bello issues of approving (or rejecting!) a particular strike, I've always held that ETHICAL leadership in the #ProfessionOfArms demands not merely COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW, but also--after that compliance has been shown--a frank reflection on whether the likely human cost on ALL sides IS WORTH IT.
As a Believer, I know that, on the Last Day, I am going to be called to account before my Creator for EVERY innocent life my decisions contributed to taking--however 'legally' (under MAN'S law) or accidentally. If I were ever recalled out of retirement to a strategic or operational role, I would ABSOLUTELY have this verse from the Qur'an framed and hung directly in front of my desk where I would see it every time I looked up:
"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land." (Qur'an 5:32)
Ya Allah, may my work always be a restraint on those who would "continue to commit excesses in the land." 🤲
