This isn't a valid way to put it into context. It doesn't matter which countries the planes crashed in; the causes were the same and lives lost are lives lost. And air travel is so globalized these days that one crash anywhere can kill citizens of dozens of countries.
Yes, it doesn't matter which two countries it was, but it's fine to point out that many airlines in many countries didn't see these problems. The planes flew in many places every day with no trouble.
You are calling me out over nothing. This is uncharitable, to say the least. Why make trouble?
There were "only" two instances (which killed >300 people) before the plane was yanked from the air entirely. That means that, roughly speaking, it was only going to happen in two countries at all, or one really unlucky country. So there's no use in pointing out that it didn't happen in many more countries, because that would have required dozens more accidents with tens of thousands of deaths, which was simply never in the cards because the planes would've been yanked long before then. So there's no use in pointing out that it didn't happen in many countries, because that never would've happened.
You're explaining my own reasoning and then telling me how I'm wrong.
Talking about countries is just another way of saying that the plane was flying in many places all over the world and the risk of accident, despite these horrible accidents, was never very high. As you say, would never happen.
The risk of accident was very high relative to other airliners, by more than an entire order of magnitude. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make here.
