Editing Collateral damage (section)

==Origins and usage==

The term "collateral damage" is often attributed to economist [[Thomas Schelling]], who used it in his 1961 article ''Dispersal, Deterrence, and Damage'' published in ''[[Operations Research (journal)|Operations Research]]''.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schelling |first1=T. C. |date=1961 |title=Dispersal, Deterrence, and Damage |journal=Operations Research |volume=9 |issue=3 |pages=363–370 |doi=10.1287/opre.9.3.363 |jstor=167568}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=In Memoriam: Thomas C. Schelling, 1921–2016 |url=https://www.wcfia.harvard.edu/in-memoriam/schelling |access-date=2024-11-16 |website=www.wcfia.harvard.edu |language=en}}</ref> In this article, Schelling discussed military strategies that inadvertently lead to the destruction of civilian areas, not directly targeted but affected by military actions intended to affect other strategic assets.  The term came into usage during the [[Vietnam War]] and over several decades became entrenched in U.S. armed forces jargon.<ref>{{cite book
| last1 = Rockel
| first1 = Stephen J.
| last2 = Halpern
| first2 = Rick
| title = Inventing Collateral Damage: Civilian Casualties, War, and Empire
| year = 2009
| publisher = Between the Lines
| isbn = 9781897071120
}}</reF>

During the [[1991 Gulf War]], [[Coalition of the Gulf War|Coalition forces]] used the phrase to describe the killing of civilians in attacks on [[legitimate military target]]s. According to Scottish [[Linguistics|linguist]] [[Deborah Cameron (linguist)|Deborah Cameron]],<ref>Deborah Cameron (1995). [https://books.google.com/books?id=1XYsOwXSVFwC&pg=PA73''Verbal Hygiene''. 2 – Restrictive practices. The politics of style. "Collateral damage" and the politics of discourse]. [[Routledge]], p. 72. {{ISBN|041510355X}}.</ref> "the classic [[Orwellian]] arguments for finding this usage objectionable would be that
* it is jargon, and to the extent that people cannot decode it, it conceals what is actually going on;
* it is a euphemism; abstract, agentless, and affectless, so that even if people succeeded in associating it with a real act or event, they would be insulated from any feelings of repulsion or moral outrage".

In 1999, "collateral damage" ({{langx|de|Kollateralschaden}}) was named the [[Un-word of the year|German Un-Word of the Year]] by a jury of linguistic scholars. With this choice, it was criticized that the term had been used by [[NATO]] forces to describe civilian casualties during the [[Kosovo War]], which the jury considered to be an inhuman euphemism.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://einestages.spiegel.de/external/ShowTopicAlbumBackground/a23795/l32/l0/F.html#featuredEntry |work=[[Der Spiegel]]|title=Ein Jahr, ein (Un-)Wort!|language=de}}</ref>