The debate turned mostly into whether righteous wars exist. Which was not my point.
I know it can be interpreted in multiple ways. Gandhi, a pacifist, loved the Bhagavad Gita and he interpreted Arjuna's enemies as mental enemies.
I think there's a difference between interpreting it to its best possible meaning to suit one's own needs and outlook, and examining the earlier context of what it was written. Since Krishna gave Arjuna a variety of reasons to kill that were specific to killing, and because the Gita is part of the much larger narrative epic of the Mahabharata, the context to me does seem to be literal in that regard, in addition to any metaphorical meanings that may be assigned or intended such as Arjuna representing the reader, his enemies representing mental enemies like one's own problems, etc.
And I know the Gita is mostly about spiritual matters rather than war. And I don't particularly view the entire spiritual message as a positive one. Some aspects I think are alright, and some I don't.
For example I don't agree with using the speculative idea of reincarnation to explain away death as not being a big deal and saying that the wise don't grieve and that Arjuna doesn't have to feel bad for his enemies that he'll kill because they'll be reborn. I don't agree with using tribalism, which is all too common in these sorts of texts, to morally praise believers and condemn disbelievers as fools on the basis of their belief with the person's claims. Good arguments are better than that. And I don't agree with how Dharma/Duty is often presented, in terms of how a person is born. "Doing one's duty" is a good thing, but this concept, along with the idea of reincarnation based on deeds in previous lives, can also be used as justification for things like arranged marriages (doing one's duty), being kept in a position of being a laborer one's whole life (doing one's duty, their previous actions determined their type of birth), etc. When ideas like that are taken on faith, I believe harm can arise, and considering that India has quite a bit of broad social/cultural problems when compared to many other countries, I don't think it's purely speculative harm.
The Gita is also culturally relevant, and a significant contribution to literature as part of the larger Mahabharata it's a part of. Its explanation of Karma Yoga as a way to merge the two seemingly opposed ideas of Dharma and Asceticism at the time, was a novel one, and a good contribution to philosophy.