Bombing Tallinn

I still wonder why has the US Ambassador publically condemned the bombing of Tallinn by the Soviet Air Force in 1944. Americans have little moral right to make such declarations, and their opponents have at once reminded us of Dresden, Hiroshima and other cities destroyed by areal bombing. And it's known that the Allied leaders did consider such devastating bombings an efficient means of breaking the German population's morale. And their critics (as J. K. Galbraith) did not point simply to the immorality of such morale-busting actions, but also to the inefficiency and even counter-productivity of them. Has Mr Polt simply been not informed enough about these things or did he make an attempt to alleviate the fear and malaise of Estonian politicians about the security situation here? I wonder whether he wanted to stress the point that both in ideological and other confrontations between Estonia and Russia, US unhesitatingly supports the Estonian position. I still doubt whether it is wise to do it in this way, adding the American voice to the endless and obsessive historical disputes between the Estonian and Russian side. I feel we should leave history to historians and think more about the problems of the present day.