This is an intriguing position since it relies on knowledge not in evidence at the time of the decision. It also de facto states that a jus ad bellum can only be decided after the fact in a state of complete knowledge. I wonder if he would extend this principle of a requirement of foreknowledge to other areas. For example, if it can later be shown that the HTTs would have made a material difference in the number of Iraqi civilians and US troops killed but an insufficient number of them were deployed due, in part, to Gusterson's actions, would he then becomes liable for charges of accessory to murder?

Something to think on...

Marc
What I want to know is if this guy has a blog or Anthro Today has a comments blog that we can ALL go to and spew like sick buzzards all over his scribbling....

Tom