In part. Air power was new at the time, and there was legitimate strategic ambiguity around the military value of removing war factories’ workforces. (This is why Germany and Britain bombed by night while America bombed by day.)
The key point of distinction between the American and British approach emerged through what the British euphemistically referred to as "dehousing" - the idea that destroying German housing stock would disrupt the operation of manufacturing, divert materials and labour away from military use and demoralise the population. On this premise, civilian casualties were merely the incidental consequence of destroying houses.
Regarding Dresden, from wikipedia...
> United States Air Force reports, declassified decades later, noted as a major rail transport and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the continued Nazi German war effort