Imagine at a time of war a soldier transporting supplies to fighting
forces, i.e. soldiers. How bad thing is it to kill a soldier transporting
the supplies, if you are fighting a war against the army he is serving?
Now what if the person transporting the supplies is not a soldier, but a
civilian? Does your answer to the question change? If it does change, if
it is worse (aka evil) to kill a civilian transporting supplies to
soldiers, then every fighting force fighting against good and decent
people should use civilians to transport supplies, because good and decent
people would not shoot civilians transporting the supplies.
What about supply depots, places where supplies are stored. If they are
located in a guarded separated territory controlled by the army and
surveilled by soldiers. Is it alright to destroy these supplies by
bombing? Is it wrong, if one is fighting a war against those people?
What then is the situation, if the people guarding the supplies are
civilians? Or does the situation change, if the supplies are stored in the
basements of multistore condos, where many civilian people live? Is it
worse, or evil to bomb an apartment building that is used as a supply
depot for army than to bomb a supply depot that is situated in a military
complex? Assuming the civilians know that their apartment building is used
as a military supply station? Assuming they don't?
If there is a difference and decent people should not do this in a state
of war, then everybody fighting against decent people is encouraged to
store all their munitions and supplies as close to the civilian population
and to do their utmost to force the conflict into where civilians are, or
to gain themselves the advantage of uninterrupted supply.
There are other reasons, why a military group might want to bring the war
to the areas where civilians will necessarily suffer and die, and they
deserve another post at another time.