&gt; He could rationalize it as saving lives in the end, in a way that most people would agree with, given the same context.<p>These entire peoples were dedicated to their cause, a cause that included looting and killing everyone that got in their way. There&#x27;s a reason why the women and children were there to be killed: they were traveling with the military and participating in military actions. If you read link at the top of the thread, the survivors were given permission by Caesar to depart, but they chose to remain with him because they were afraid of facing the revenge of the people who they invaded and killed.<p>In that context, it is difficult to see how they can really be identified as civilians in a meaningful way.<p>The article is somewhat misleading in that it makes it seem as though these tribes were just peacefully wandering around when they asked Caesar for asylum. They were invading, and after they invaded, they <i>then</i> asked for asylum from the man charged by the Romans to defend the area. Their &#x27;request for asylum&#x27;, by the way, was something along the lines of &quot;we can be allies, as long as you give us new lands or let us keep the ones we&#x27;ve invaded. Otherwise, just so you know, the only people stronger than us are the Suevi, who drove us from our homes. So watch out.&quot; Of course he said no.