You are correct, and my comment was dismissive. My issue, or maybe frustration is a better term, is that we are worrying about the potential future impact that the use of effective cluster munitions may have after the end of hostilities. This is a reasonable concern, but the genocide is a very pressing concern. It is extremely unlikely that the number of affected children who may theoretically suffer injury or death due to these weapons, can possibly match the number who are dying or being forcibly deported weekly in this conflict.

Cluster munitions are an effective way to improve the kill and disable rate of Russian soldiers, and do so more efficiently with less barrels and rounds fired. Since destroying the Russian military as a combat ready force is the only way to end the war, it just makes sense in the cost benefit calculation to accept a theoretical future risk in addressing an immediate existential situation.

So yes, there's a story, I just don't agree with my government creating diplomatic heat around vital weapon supplies.