Killing innocent people?

Der Spiegel would answer that question "Yes" if you apply it to those killed by drones and other surreptitious activities conducted by NATO in Afghanistan. The basis of their answer is what they say is a group of secret documents the magazine was able to peruse. Their analysis shows that NATO didn't just target the Taliban leadership, but also eliminated mid- and lower-level members of the group on a large scale. Some Afghans were only on the list because, as drug dealers, they were allegedly supporting the insurgents. More discouraging is their assertion that "Only women, children and the elderly were treated as civilians." Thus, any man was subject to being murdered. Many of them were killed not on the basis of proof but of suspicion only.

Comments by Der Speigel

Can a democracy be allowed to kill its enemies in a targeted manner when the objective is not to prevent an imminent attack? And does the goal of eliminating as many Taliban as possible justify killing innocent bystanders?
A democracy that kills its enemies on the basis of nothing but suspicion squanders its claim to moral superiority, making itself complicit instead.