By rating my response to him "optimistic". You have a very bad habit of just clicking away at the post ratings without actually responding with any substantive argument against our posts.
Well you have a "very bad habit" of posting silly "optimistic" things I guess.
But since I seem to have offended your delicate sensitivities I'll clarify for you:
The US does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties. But when there's a war zone, it's not completely avoidable.
To say we do "everything" we can to avoid civilian casualties is a little disingenuous. We take what I would consider an appropriate level of precautions, but it seems there is an accepted level of doubt vs reward that will always end up with innocent lives being lost. Couple that with an unwinnable war that, imo, serves no purpose, I'd say your POV is extremely
optimistic.
If North Korea decides to bomb some place, guess what, a lot of innocent North Koreans will die. It won't be the fault of the US's and allies retaliation, it's called war and would be brought upon by Kim Jong Un.
Given the bombastic and completely undiplomatic twitter rantings of our president, I'd say it's
optimistic to assume we won't share a whole lot of the blame if the North Korea tensions come to military action.