Wagering in Life

Of all of my training in preparation to become an Infantry Officer in the U.S. Army* the single most overwhelming topic was that of "Acceptable Losses".  It is an uncomfortable topic, and rightfully so.  It is morally uncomfortable to consider that as a military leader, you may be forced to make choices fully knowing that American soldiers will be killed.  The mind doesn't want to accept that in combat situations, you may have to choose between options where no one solution is perfect and all choices will lead to casualties or other costs to their own troops.  For example, no matter how you sliced the cake, there was absolutely no way to avoid substantial Allied losses during the D-day invasion.

In some of the vignettes discussed, you try to perform mental gymnastics; ("there has to be some way to accomplish the mission without loss to friendly forces") but the truth is you are being idealistic and lying to yourself.  And when you find yourself in that situation, your lies will not change the facts, and they certainly won't bring back the dead.  Army leaders must make a choice, and then live with that choice on their conscience.

But these decisions are not reserved for combat situations.  Both political leaders and society as a whole must decide between options where no solution is perfect; often the decision is between human life and human liberty.

In regards to discussions involving human liberty and choice during the current pandemic, I have seen multiple viral posts scolding those who wish for more personal liberty to "quit bartering with people's lives".

As uncomfortable as it may make us feel, we already barter in human lives. Numerous choices in our society are based upon the quantification of the worth of human life.

Our society has determined that the privilege of Americans to drive a motorized vehicle is worth nearly 40,000 deaths yearly. We have decided the right to consume alcohol is worth 88,000 alcohol-related deaths, and nearly 10,000 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities annually. Our nation purchases tobacco rights with 480 thousand human lives and the liberty to consume fried chicken, soft drinks, and immeasurable amounts of fat and sugar is bought for nearly 80 thousand lives paid to diabetes, and 647 thousand paid to cardiovascular disease.

Believing that a small amount (or even a large amount) of deaths is a fair exchange for a right or liberty is not callous, heartless, or selfish. It is a simple assessment of risks to rewards. An assessment that we already make, constantly.

We would be wise to remember what Thomas Sowell taught us: "There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs."

*Opinions expressed are my own and do not reflect DoD or Department of the Army policy.