I do not believe we were alone in this:

As many as a hundred people were killed when US and British warplanes bombed and destroyed a hospital in the western Afghan city of Herat. Nurses and patients were said to be among the dead.

On the 13th and 14th of February 1945 the British and Americans bombed the city of Dresden, causing a firestorm which killed 30,000 people, many of them refugees

In March 1945 the British dropped more bombs than in any previous month. The town of Wurzburg was 80% destroyed with over 5,000 people being killed in one night.


The accidental bombing of a commuter train and a tractor convoy was plainly the result of pilots being ordered to fly too high to identify their targets visually. Yet Nato said that the deaths were "really" caused by Mr Milosevic's ethnic cleansing. Asked to justify the conflagration of a civilian chemicals factory, the Defence Secretary, George Robertson, merely said it was no worse than Mr Milosevic's burning of Kosovan villages. Explaining the attempt to kill Mr Milosevic at night in his family home as an attack on a "command and control centre" was spin worthy of Mr Milosevic himself. I still cannot believe that the Prime Minister approved it.

from http://www.zoran.net/afp/text/times/manner_in_which_we_conduct.htm

and there's more. We share the blame on many accounts I believe.


>They dont have too much regard with who or what they target. The last time round the civilian water & electricity supplies were deliberately targeted.
>
>As far as I know, your professional soldiers get paid for doing their job.
>
>>
>>>Can you explain why your government, which is so insistent on Iraq complying with UN resolutions, is not taking the same approach with Israel. Why is your government (backed by mine), not trying to get weapons inspectors into Israel to find & destroy its weapons of mass destruction.
>>
>>For a number of reasons, the top ones being:
>>
>>1. Israel has not used its weapons of mass destruction as Saddam has:
>
>Good reason for the US not being allowed to have weapons of mass destruction then.
>
>> a. Against Iran - a war he started, by the way
>
>The US manouevred Saddam Hussain into power solely to start a war against Iran.
>
>> b. Against his one people - the Kurds
>
>OK, I'll have to accept that one. But then the support for Turkey, who similarly want to destroy the Kurds. There is a lot of concern that if Turkey is used as a base for attack from the North, then the Turkish army will mount their own attack on the Northern Kurds in Iraq.
>
>There's quite a few other dictators supported by your governments who have attacked their own people, with weapons supplied by yourselves.
>
>>
>>2. Israel, despite having these weapons, has not used them, despite being attacked by their neighbors repeatedly.
>>
>>>How far would you go to regain your homeland if it were invaded by a foreign country ? How would you view the citizens of a foreign country living on your land, moving you into ghettos in your own country ? If the UN said they had no right to encroach on your land, but they still did so, would you feel compelled to use force to take back what the international community says is yours ?
>>
>>I can tell you what I wouldn't do: I wouldn't recruit teenagers to blow up innocent civilians. It is nothing short of ludicrous that you condemn the US military, which goes out of it's way to try and avoid civilian casualties, but seem to have no trouble defending those who deliberately target them.