The argument over weapons that aren’t being used is distracting people from the ones that are
The scale and suffering caused by conventional weapons can be worse than nuclear weapons (e.g. Wieluń, Tokyo, Somalia bombing of Isaaq). The biggest mass murders in history tend to have be committed using conventional weapons. The problem is not simply the weapons but the intent to use them. More should be done to make parties accountable for murderous acts, especially against civilians. Concentrating on the potential for suffering at the hands of nuclear weapons is distracting from the suffering that is still wide spread around the world.
Genocides are a grim example of how destructive a murderous campaign can be even without conventional weapons. During the Cambodian genocide bullets were seen as too expensive to use on civilians, so farming tools and other unconventional methods were used to torture and execute a third of the Cambodian population. So this is not limited to aerial bombing, given the intent conventional and non-conventional weapons can be, and have been, much more destructive.