That argument doesn't hold water. You don't need to be an intended target or a country for something to be an act of war.
If North Korea drops a nuclear bomb on China, and the nuclear cloud does collateral damage in India, that's still damage from an act of war.
Acts of war are excluded since insurance is designed to spread cost for isolated events. If my house burns down, everyone chips in to rebuild it. You can't reasonably insure widespread events. If an entire country is demolished, whether by war, flood, or other large-scale natural disaster, insurance would just go under.
Things are murky here. But not for those reasons. We can start with there not being a war, continue into covert ops not really being the same as war, and keep going for a while. I do think insurance SHOULD pay for this one. But it's not that simple.
Comments
That argument doesn't hold water. You don't need to be an intended target or a country for something to be an act of war.
If North Korea drops a nuclear bomb on China, and the nuclear cloud does collateral damage in India, that's still damage from an act of war.
Acts of war are excluded since insurance is designed to spread cost for isolated events. If my house burns down, everyone chips in to rebuild it. You can't reasonably insure widespread events. If an entire country is demolished, whether by war, flood, or other large-scale natural disaster, insurance would just go under.
Things are murky here. But not for those reasons. We can start with there not being a war, continue into covert ops not really being the same as war, and keep going for a while. I do think insurance SHOULD pay for this one. But it's not that simple.