To be fair, most of the evidence is flimsy and conjecture that can't be proven. I also know that when that happens, it's a sure sign that someone is covering up an action.


In a pure world, people would be put on trial for the deaths of 300 civilians. It seems that in this instance, evidence is so loose and 'unattainable', that an entity will be held accountable because the act so large, and coverup done so poorly.