I'm not accusing anyone here of defending them. But a study of the baleful history of the harm done to people who had never involved themselves in conflicts - civilians, women, children if you like - should at least persuade you to condemn them out of hand. We did that when Israel was using white phosphorus in Gaza, didn't we? If warfare expediently involves the use of weapons that can't help but target civilians, and target them for many decades to come, then we should condemn that use out of hand, not be discussing whether it might give one side or the other the advantage. Failure to condemn cluster bombs (not "munitions", not "ordnance") should cause us to question our own sanity.