>Independent analysis of satellite imagery suggested that the school and the Sayyid al-Shuhada military complex had been struck near-simultaneously by air-delivered munitions.[39]
The objectionable part of double/triple tap strike is that you're killing rescuers or aid workers. Otherwise from a morality perspective there's no meaningful difference between 1 bomb and 2/3 bombs, especially if the actual incident was by all accounts caused by a targeting error.
I don't think it was an intentional decision to target a school. If targetting schools was a goal, there would likely have been many more targetted.
It certainly seems that there was an intentional decision to disband departments in the military last year that were intended to confirm targets are appropriate before a strike (although I can't find a reference now). There's also a lot of reporting that they used AI to do the targetting selection; if so that was an intentional decision to allow for poor selection; especially since it doesn't appear there was validation of targets. There's a lot of intentional decisions to make comments declaring 'no stupid rules of engagement' and such.
I think it's most likely that the intentional decisions led to the situation where the targetting of a school would not be noticed until after the school was hit and international outcry was made, but that doesn't mean it was not a targetting mistake. You can certainly hold people accountable for the decisions that lead to the targetting of a school, at least in the court of public opinion since there's an accountability vacuum in washington DC lately.
There are many examples of targetting mistakes that are excusable. I don't think this is one of them; but that it is inexcusable and was the result of intentional decisions doesn't make it necessarily an intentional act and not a mistake.
>It certainly seems that there was an intentional decision to disband departments in the military last year that were intended to confirm targets are appropriate before a strike (although I can't find a reference now).
On the Media recently interviewed somebody involved with that effort, and they discuss the bombing of the school.
The "proof" of the mistake is Hanlon's razor and the fact that the school was adjacent a military facility and the building itself used to be for military purposes.
>Footage from Russian state broadcaster RT has captured the moment a missile lands just a few feet from where its reporter was broadcasting in southern Lebanon.
What's this supposed to be proof of? That because a bombing happened near a journalist, that he must have been intentionally targeted? Does the US even have capabilities to track journalists in Iran, of all places? Given that journalists are specifically going into war zones, what even is the expected amount of journalists to get bombed, from pure chance alone?
Israel has a track record with the coincidentally anti-journalist ordinance. At some point you land a coin on heads twenty times and have to think maybe the coin is weighted.
At this point, Hanlon's razor should be considered a fallacy.
In fact, quite a lot of what looked like incompetence was malice. Intentional and proud malice. It does not mean there is no incompetence, but Hanlon's razor is no longer valid.
Second, army working group meant to ensure these mistakes wont happen was dismantled by Hegseth. All the while he framed such efforts as woke nonsense and praised lethality only. He was sending clear message about what matters to troops
The system was changed to allow and facilite errors like that.
I wonder if there is some kind of new law that we should be looking at drafting, in which we hold accountable folks who attribute bad actions to incompetence instead of malice despite the actors being explicitly malicious?
I think that covers a lot of western media in all the wars the US has waged in my lifetime:
it's always "a regrettable (but worthwhile) mistake" until it's a "horrific but unique war crime"... it's never "who the fuck said these vicious idiots could kill whoever they want and never face just and material consequences for their crimes".
This shit certainly seems intentional. Maybe the folks who are attributing things to "incompetence" are just projecting their own incompetencies in interpreting the world, but at this point I suspect that they to are complicit in this malice.
"Despite the war aims being nebulous, illegal, and ever changing, none of them would be advanced by bombing a girls school."
If the goal is to force the enemy into giving up? Many are willing to give their life to a cause, but way less are willing to give the lifes of their children.
This was not just some school, but a school where the children of the iranian leadership are going to.
And coincidently Trump himself said he would target the families of terrorists, if voted into power.
"The Shajareh Tayyebeh school in Minab is part of a broad network of schools structurally and administratively affiliated with the IRGC Navy.
These schools are classified as nonprofit institutions and are primarily intended to provide educational services to the sons and daughters of members of the IRGC Navy."
IRGC means leadership (I did not said highest leadership, they would be in Teheran)
I suppose it comes down to: is it about time for somebody to blunder into this and destructively mismanage the war, or shall we wait another forty years?
The reason people left North Korea alone while they were building nuclear weapons is because they weren't arming 5 terrorist proxies and they didn't have a doomsday countdown clock in their capital city.
True, Kim Jong Un is actually pretty chill, just likes testing some nukes towards Japan as a hobby. Are people genuinely retarded? Or is it the severe Israel bias?
According to postwar foreign policy clearly that’s true:
Look at Libya and Ukraine for your most direct examples - give away your nukes, get invaded. South Africa is an odd example that proves the rule: they simply bend the knee to the west.
Nuclear deterrents and mutual assured destruction has been the key driver in preventing large scale conflict in the “postwar period.”
Everyone knows Israel has nukes it’s just a matter of when they can get enough public support to use them
Mutually assured destruction does seem to deter conflict, but even assuming it works, it always seemed like a poor tradeoff to me.
Significantly reduce the frequency of small to medium-scale conflicts, in exchange for an inevitable, possibly apocalyptic nuclear conflict at some point. Maybe not this year, maybe not for centuries, but one day, someone will press the button.
Not until they get nukes. Which is inevitable now, as we've shown Iran that until then, they are liable to being carpet bombed once a year by the imperialist powers that be. And then we'll have one more rogue nation in the world, hurrah!
Not really? The current conflict with Iran is entirely a joint venture where Israel is taking on a significant portion. In previous conflicts the US was marginally involved and even pushed Israel to stop fighting entirely. I don't think you have a good grasp on these events.
> Relax, go outside, touch grass. The sun will rise again.
Yeah, and don't forget, this is all about helping the environment and the Iranian people, freeing them from that pesky and unnecessary for life energy by releasing some much needed smoke. /
That 'touch grass' phrase is interpreted differently outside of America. It is yet another detestable Americanism. Just saying.
Besides, grass is part of the problem, particularly for the arid South West, where these ecological deserts known as lawns, golf courses and landscaping are grass, which is the only plant that grows when the place is covered with RoundUp.
I digress. However, man has a point. It would be easy to say Trump is a clown without a clue or a plan, however, we as I see it, we are switching over from the empire controlling the world with the petro-dollar, to controlling the world with bombs.
The empire can't blockade China directly as that would be an act of war, and the Chinese would have a right to respond with force, sinking all of Uncle Sam's battle ships with hypersonic missiles before you get to touch your beloved and utterly toxic HOA-approved grass.
However, just blow up the entire Middle East and cut the Chinese off from the oil that is needed for their manufacturing requirements. China has a lot of coal, solar and nuclear going on, plus they are best buddies with Putin, but we have a lot of the Russian shadow fleet going up in flames at the moment.
The grand plan has been going on from PNAC and 9/11. Iran is the last one to be ticked off in the Middle East, so you can see it as the finishing line. Iran just has to be destroyed and it seems that Satan and his little Zionist helper have plenty of experience at that.
The EU has been fully Stockholm Syndromed, so there is a true Iron Curtain between Russia and Europe now, only Hungary are allowed some of the good Russian hydrocarbons, Germany and every other country in Europe now has to pay in dollars for American LNG, or Qatari LNG, but that latter option has just gone.
Yes, the sun will rise again. Americans will be touching grass for the 'gram once again. Everything will be fine in the USA, although it won't be petrodollar dominance giving the exorbitant privilege, instead it will be bombs all the way. Note that Cuba is next, and DJT is going to Chy-naaa soonly and bigly. They should arrest him for war crimes, but you know they won't.
Any objectors or rabble rousers will be Charlie Kirked. It will just be another era of terror. This is the normal state of affairs.
Meanwhile, we have crazies in the WH wanting some Biblical End Times outcome to this. They are serious about Jesus coming back, which is not exactly likely, and, even if he did step foot on planet earth again, do you think he would save a single Zionist? As if!
Anyway, we will see if touching grass works out. I mean, in the UK, during the Blitz, people were touching grass all the time. I think the Andy Groves quote applies, 'only the paranoid survive'.
Civilization is ending and you took time out of your apocalypse preparations to make a new account here? To write this? Where are your priorities?
A couple years from now when you are shivering in a cave you aren't going to be thinking "I may not have hoarded enough ivermectin but at least I got the last word on that HN thread".
In the worst there will be some people dying, a lot of people get poor and maybe democracies will be replaced by feudal structures. It's still far away from the end of civilization.
People have already forgotten about Gaza/W bank and there is a ground invasion of Lebanon happening that no one is talking about. They are absolutely winning if their goal is regional dominance.
I’d be OK (and from a product perspective think it would be a win) if Optimus just mastered one high-value skill like clothes folding. Yet, here we are.
Edit: *triple tap.
reply