So, what is the difference....

If those who are being targeted have not been proved to be active terrorists already, it is the same.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

If those who are being targeted have not been proved to be active terrorists already, it is the same.

Those that are targeted have been proven. The others are "colllateral damage". But, those that use human shields are the guilty parties here.

The other difference with the Nazis is sheer numbers, like 12,000,000 innocents verus 140.

[Elspode]

It isn't unusual for insugents or guerillas in modern warfare to hide amongst their own people. It makes them harder to find, and then, when you kill a bunch of innocents in the attempt to squish the guerillas, they get to tell everyone what a bunch of monsters you are...then fire their own missles at civilian targets of the other side, claiming that the other guys started it anyway.

Originally Posted by Rock Steady

Those that are targeted have been proven. The others are "colllateral damage". But, those that use human shields are the guilty parties here.

The other difference with the Nazis is sheer numbers, like 12,000,000 innocents verus 140.

They have been previously tried in a neutral court of law as proof?
Collateral damage? Numbers of dead as a difference? ... no.