"The morality of a war action is not determined by the numer of lives lost, but whether the action results in a net loss of lives or a net saving of lives."

This is absurd. Should Canada (supposing She had the means and will) go to war on us to take away all our fire-arms and put us all in prison camps and use as the justification: "If we pacify those violent americans, we will save more lives in the long run than they loose in the war?"

You ASSUME a calculus of of life in which the only value is human life- NOT culture or cultural values or ...

Sure, if you assume such a ludicrous model you can use logic to extract out your conclusions- but your model does NOT match to reality. Life is not the only quality of value in any moral calculation- People die and justify the causing of death EVERY SECOND OF EVERY DAY for values.

Additionally, even if your moral calculus was (pardon the pun) complete, you suffer from the 'veil of ignorance' Even with your unary value model, its nearly impossible to tell what will cause more or less premature death.

I strongly advise you to check your soul and ask: "what do I live/die for?"... I doubt you will find "life/death itself" as the only or even as the most fundamental answer.

Davin L.