You missed the point. It is not a matter of "being discarded because they are unable to fend for themselves". The innocent civilians killed in war cannot fend for themselves against modern weapons but they are not "discarded". Someone (group or individual) decided that it was in their best interest to allow those casualties as a consequence of their lives being better. My point is why are the so called "pro-life" people so focused upon life not yet manifested in this world and ignoring the innocent lives being disrupted and ended by war.
Abortion and war have similarities. They are both ultimately wrong because innocent life is lost. They both are justified by believing it will make life better for the one initiating them. We do not want someone else making decisions about war for us. Let the United Nations make decisions on war for us? Not likely. But we don't want to allow the same thing for women who have the responsibility of giving birth.
Abortion and war do have similarities.
Abortion has a child smack dab in the middle of the crosshairs.
Just war has uninvolved, and presumed innocent, civilians off to the side of the scope with unjust aggressors smack dab in the middle of the crosshairs.
That is about as similar as dissimilar can be.
It is not a matter of "being discarded because they are unable to fend for themselves".
Yes, it is. That's exactly the argument you made about when someone becomes a person. If you were consistent, you would argue that abortion deliberately robs innocents of life an is therefore more evil than a war that is not intended to harm innocents.
War, you would add, is also evil because it harms innocents unavoidably.