A moral distinction, eh? I have to think about this

According to the , more noncombatants were killed in Afghanistan by US and NATO troops than by the Taliban insurgents. While it's true that insurgents use civilians as human shields, you wonder if this whole exercise in "democracy" is truly worth it.

"Western military leaders argue that any comparison of casualties caused by Western forces and by the Taliban is fundamentally unfair because there is a clear moral distinction to be made between accidental deaths resulting from combat operations and deliberate killings of innocents by militants."

Since military leaders are supposedly making moral distinctions, they ought to consider the morality of going in there and bombing rubble in the first place.

See also Airstrikes kill scores of Afghan civilians: officials

Blast hurts 4 NATO troops in Afghanistan
-----
They are supposed to protect us, not kill us.
— Mohammed Reza, Whose brother was fatally shot by NATO-led troops

Honey, I'm so sorry. I never condoned of the invasion of your country even when I was shell shocked after 9/11. There was something terribly fishy about it since the terrorists weren't your countrymen. Why does Saudi Arabia turn out such unhappy Islamic fundamentalists? (rhetorical question)