but they not have problems dropping bombs to children's in other countries.
Do you have proofs? Anything comparable to killing 4 millions in Vietnam, 600,000 in Iraq (probably more), etc, etc.
a) picked the "high estimates" - really bad choice for the sake of an Internet discussion
b) you rounded it up!
c) you presented that number as civilians killed while it is total deaths on both sides
d) you tried to present that number in the context of children killed
e) you assume these were all killed by US, which they weren't
Considering grossness of the misrepresentation in your comment, I don't think it makes sense to argue with you. However, there's plenty of proofs for Russia not minding killing children in its war efforts as recent as 2014, including MH17 which had 80 children on board.
[x] https://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/
I'd also like to add
[1] https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/weapons-mass-migrat... &
[2] https://www.covertbookreport.com/weapons-of-mass-migration/
(Would you like to have fries with that?)
That said, the US should absolutely work to reduce its collateral damage, but let's not pretend that accidentally killing a civilian and bombing a city (because they are disproportionately critical of your dictatorship) are morally equivalent.
I would also expand this to known supporters and voters, but that can be next step.
So you would massacre tens or hundreds of millions of civilians because accidentally killing civilians is bad? This is the most heinous thing I've ever read on HN.
> Or at least judged by peers of their victims. Like for latest case I say ship everyone in chain of command and involved in manufacturing to Afghanistan and have the local government there deliver the justice they deserve.
Ironically Afghanistan no longer does trial by peers, they do door to door executions without any kind of trial (certainly not trial by jury of peers).
And of course, you're notably silent on deliberately targeting civilians in their thousands, which is what Assad has been doing and the Kremlin implicitly supports.
When you are killing children using rocket propelled explosives deliberately launched into crowded urban areas, from high-altitude unmanned vehicles, operated by professional soldiers an ocean away, on intelligence only you have, you are as far away from an accidental killing as is possible.
It you hadn't passed another law threatening the Netherlands with an invasion, you might finds yourself having to answer for it.
> So you would massacre tens or hundreds of millions of civilians because accidentally killing civilians is bad?