No, I'm not saying the fault lies 100% with the city. MOVE made no effort to live as good neighbors, barricading their houses and brandishing weapons at people living in the neighborhood, young and old (in the definition of pointing them in threatening fashion). They lived without concern for the filth and garbage that built up on their property over time because they were a "back to nature" movement. They had the opportunity to move out of the city and locate on rural property offered to them by well-meaning people but they refused because they wanted to go "back to nature" in the middle of a city. In short, MOVE and its members were a bunch of scofflaws who lived like pigs.

But, for all its shortcomings and propensity for violence, the city had no real cause to be so foolhardy as to drop a bomb on a row home in a city. They had no idea what was inside that house. They held fire department equipment back from the area until it was apparent their actions were resulting in the destruction of several square blocks. But, MOVE started things and they should shoulder a good portion of the blame for what happened. So, I would say MOVE is 35 to 40% to blame for what happened. The city's responsibility I would place at 60 to 65%. Because there was no pressing need to end the stand off right then and there, that afternoon. They had the place surrounded. They could have shut off power and water to the dwelling. They could have easily arrested anyone coming out or trying to enter the dwelling. They decided, for whatever reason, the siege had to end that afternoon. Their actions resulted in deaths of 11 human beings and the destruction of several square blocks.

You may disagree with me, and that's fine. But those are my thoughts on the matter.