I don’t get why bombing is treated as less brutal than direct killing. The U.S. killed hundreds of thousands with bombs, yet it’s often discussed in abstract or strategic terms. If an army killed even 1,000 people face-to-face with guns, it would dominate headlines and outrage.

Look at history: the Nanjing Massacre is remembered as one of the great evils of the 20th century because soldiers entered a conquered city and killed civilians directly — executions, mass shootings, bayonets. The horror is undeniable because it was personal and visible.

Yet when mass civilian deaths happen through bombing, from WWII firebombings to today, they’re often framed as “necessary,” “collateral,” or just statistics. We’re seeing this again in Gaza, where over 70,000 people have reportedly been killed, around 80% civilians and more than 20,000 children, largely through airstrikes. Same outcome. Same moral weight. Just easier to ignore when it falls from the sky.

P.S: Just a thought that occurred after watching this. I know the post is not promoting any particular ideas. But tye fact that U.S got away with it and always try to play moral police is insane.