So, you are arguing that an accidental killing is the same as an intentional one?

You do realize that the US killings were an accident, correct? Friendly fire...kind of like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman

Here's a friendly fire list on Wikipedia. Most probably don't get cataloged.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire

So, it's safe to assume it will happen again in every current and future war.

The point is that wars are very ugly and imprecise. Now, I'm pretty sure that it is a war crime to intentionally kill innocent civilians, so yes, if the US starts doing this, I expect the rest of the world place embargos.

At any rate, you are free to leave your comfort zone and make the world a better place. It's easy to complain and have all the answers. It's an entirely different matter to effect change. I'm sure at least half of those morons in Congress would have nailed you to the wall for making such a flawed case trying to prove your point.

[Edit] I guess I only focused on his first statement. I addressed the common statement "Why does it hurt to allow the export of a text editor" in another post. In short, it's easier to make a blanket law. gcc, for example, could be used for weapons software development. Emacs? Well, it can run a version of Lisp! :-) Notepad++? Never used it. Anyway, who has time to evaluate every piece of software for export restrictions. Yes, people can get around them anyway, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be speed bumps.

Ugh. We should forbid political posts on Hacker News. Such a time suck...