I always feel annoyed when people "condemn" attacks on civilians during WWII. The thing is, it was a total war. In that context, the entire country's working force is employed in the war effort, whether it be in fighting or producing natural/manufactured resources for the war. When that is the case, what is fundamentally the difference between a "civilian" and a "soldier", when both are being used by the government in a war effort?

I'm absolutely not saying it's okay to kill civilians, far from it. But during the Second World War, this was the argument used to attack civilians. So it's very easy to condemn these actions "a posteriori", but you have to try to put yourself in the shoes of people at that time. And at that time, things were seen the same way as they are today.