> Then, ask if this bombing was part of group A or group B.

false dichotomies are a common rhetorical method (and sometimes useful) to argue your way to a moral justification, but that doesn't make them reflect reality

There is no A and B. You want to force a situation where B is pure good intent and we either have to choose that or choose A where there is only bad intent. The reality is, this war is about ego, power and money as much as it is about any "good intent". The decisions to start the war were made with a full knowledge of the risks and costs it would entail, with almost all of those being externalised to other people than those taking the choices.

Nobody taking those choices should get to just opt out of moral responsibility with some easy "A / B" logic.

We (US) are definitely in Group A. We killed and are continuing to kill more innocent people (including children) than everyone else combined but are always hiding under “oh, we really good guys here, just shit happens while we are bombing around the world for decades for no particular reason until we eventually lose and leave”)

Group A also include starting a war for bad reasons and then "accidentally" killing school children as a result.

Evil is commiting atrocious acts for self-interest. This is a description of US foreign policy (not exclusively, of course). Killing 150 schoolchildren is unfortunately but a fraction of a drop in the bucket of atrocities committed by either the US or Israel.

Good intents? Please.