[jdm]

Someone please tell me how a potential human in early development, not yet manifested in this world is more important than a human being, with a history, a family, a promising future who is killed in war.

You're assuming that families who are killed in wars do have a promising future.

Case in point: Before we invaded Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban, did young girls and women there have as promising a future as they do now? Were they able to go to school just like the boys? Were they able to learn how to read, to write, to show their face in public?

In addition, prior to March 2003, did children in Iraq have as promising a future under Saddam, Uday and Qussay as they do now or will in the not-too-distant future?

This is why you have to pick and choose wars carefully (if you're even granted the privilege of choice).

Sometimes (many times) the grand benefits of going to war don't reveal themselves until years later. That's just the way it is.

[Semper]

I agree with your points regarding Afghanistan and I can confirm that your facts are correct since I was there. However, the situation there is still fragile and can go either way. Afghanistan is a very primitive country and it has an economy based greatly upon heroin production. History may reveal that the lives lost there were not worth it.

A similar argument could be made for an abortion decision which resulted in either much good or much bad.

But the extreme "pro-life" position is that the results make no difference. Abortion (and why not war?) is wrong so it should not be allowed no matter what the result.