I agree that the fate of a tank engineer being struck by an anti-tank missile is not great, but when comparing the scenarios of having a tank be disabled and it

I agree that the fate of a tank engineer being struck by an anti-tank missile is not great, but when comparing the scenarios of having a tank be disabled and its crew dismembered with the devastation that said tank will bring to civilians and civilian buildings, I'd much rather have the tank get disabled. The sad reality is that the tank operators will probably operate a tank to commit some atrocities some time before the anti-tank missile will be able to commit it's own atrocities upon the tank. I think pointing out that weapons of war are bad is like saying that water is wet. However, comparing the power of destruction between the tank and the anti-tank missile launcher, both can disable each other, but the damage one can do to humans and infrastructure is just disproportionate - it's ultimately a moral good to destroy a tank.