Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess 100+ plus drone strikes y/y with civillian casualties isn't en masse? Wasn't there a drone strike that killed over a hundred women and children at a school in pakistan? And lets not forget Falujah. It was pretty much turned into Depleted Urainium wasteland... and theres a WHO report on that. Sounds like those evils are brothers...
Suppose a Drone killed 3000 civilians with the intention of killing civilians (like Dresden or Tokyo bombings of WWII) then I'd say yeah, they're siblings but: Nah, civilians are collateral damage for drones, the goal was not to kill as many of them as possible and terrorize them. It was to eliminate particular individuals, so no it's not en masse. If we take your 100 women and children (heh, nice) and say they were…
Secondly, your entire argument attempting to justify what we did in Iraq omits the most salient point: the fact that we shouldn't have been there in the first place. So, nothing we've done there is justified, including the death and maiming of our own soldiers.
Thirdly, you conveniently omit the hundreds of thousands or more of the innocent Iraqi civilians who were killed. I would say that people of Iraq certainly died en masse.
Your ignorance might be forgivable if you weren't so arrogant about it, and not so cavalier about human suffering and death.