4 ms·

Colloquially, I think it is well accepted that US launched the missiles. The question is whether they indiscriminately targeted civilians. NYT did an excellent

Colloquially, I think it is well accepted that US launched the missiles. The question is whether they indiscriminately targeted civilians. NYT did an excellent analysis showing that the US probably did intentionally target the building, believing it to be part of the nearby compound that received several direct strikes. This analysis is really good [1] The definition of war crime is not "Killed civilians" it is "targeted civilians" or "reckless indiscriminate attacks". My understanding of the NYT analysis is that this was very plausibly misunderstood to still be part of the iran national guard compound. Everyone gets their own opinion on this. There were 900 or so strikes in the first 12h, and only one school hit, and that school was actually part of the compound before. A horrific accident that was brought on by unnecessary hostilities, i think. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-missile-strike.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-m...

jvanderbot 14d ago
I'll add the definition from the Rome statute that, by my read, establishes a war crime when there is intent to commit the civilian strikes: Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. Still this is a legal defense that might plausibly be used during a trial, not necessarily a reason to skip a trial.
- toast0 14d ago
  From that text, it sure sounds to me that these attacks are going to be legal. The article describes them as 'indescriminate', but they were specifically targetted based on a mistake of fact. There's certainly evidence that the US was neglegent in relying on old information without verifying. That's serious and reprehensible, but I don't know that that rises to the level of a war crime. I'll add that it's not what I want my country's military to be doing and that if I had any power, there would be consequences for the people involved in decision making that led to this, as well as changes in procedure to reduce this type of mistake in the future, and a settlement paid to the people affected by this strike.
paulddraper 14d ago
To recap: A Iranian military structure was converted into a school. After conversion, the rest of the naval base remained there (< 100m away). Missile strikes hit both the base and the adjacent school. --- FYI, it's not unusual for schools to be part of military bases. The U.S. itself operates over a 100. [1] [1] https://www.dodea.edu/ https://www.dodea.edu/
- WarmWash 14d ago
  I think the dishonesty is that if the tables were turned, the overwhelming chorus would be "Why the fuck would you convert former soldier barracks, still located on an active base, to a kids school and never update the publicly available maps? How fucking dumb are you?"
- alistairSH 14d ago
  11 years ago. If we're operating on decade+ old info, that's pretty damning. Is there a "reckless endangerment" or "manslaughter" equivalent in the war-crimes sphere?
  - bamboozled 14d ago
    Is it me or is it reckless to leave a school in part of an old military complex ? That seems negligent to me, for this exact reason. Maybe it was intentional too ?
    - alistairSH 14d ago
      Under that logic, is the entire Barracks Row strip in DC fair game? It's across the street from a historic Marine Corp barracks, why would anybody put shops and restaurants there, right? Maybe if the schools was built recently there'd be a case. That's not the case, its as converted a full decade ago. We just didn't bother updating our maps and intel before launching missiles.
      - bamboozled 14d ago
        In my opinion, a more responsible government would probably not continue to using an abandon military base as a school for this reason. I'm sure the thought had crossed someone's mind that something like this might happen. I'm not trying to make excuses for the USA here, it's an abhorrent thing and I do agree, much more care should've been taken. No one is suggesting other kids schools are "fair game" so just calm down a bit?
superxpro12 14d ago
Hegseth's military had woefully outdated intelligence. And because he's a news host and NOT a war chief, he ended up ordering the destruction of a school full of girls so they could distract the news from the epstein files.
- jvanderbot 14d ago
  Your claim is that hegseth directed the US Navy to launch an attack on a building it knew to be a school full of kids for the negative headlines, because those negative headlines would distract from the Epstein files outrage?
  - drstewart 14d ago
    No no no, they didn't know that it was a school because they're incompetent, but ALSO knew it was as school because they're evil.
    - text0404 14d ago
      You seem to be confusing everyone's stances (incompetence vs malice). Some people in this thread believe it was incompetence and therefore not a war crime, and others believe it was malicious and therefore a war crime. I personally don't think stupidity is a good legal defense but what do I know.
watwut 14d ago
US army used to have unit responsible to unsure this dont happen. Guess who dismantled it due to being too woke and not lethal enough.
orwin 14d ago
The double tap to me is really what is cruel. I understand americans don't want to hear it, because they need to believe their military is moral, but a double tap to me show cruelty and willingness to target doctor, nurses, firemen and any person courageous enough to help. The US military and its sailors already showed me everything i wont to know about them when i saw the report on them shooting torpedoes at capsized boats. Like i said before, if any US person is on a boat and need help, i will still do it, because anybody not helping on the sea is an inhuman piece of shit, but i will keep my distance.
- jvanderbot 14d ago
  Do you resolve a difference between a double tap attack (one in which a delay is inserted to hit first responders) and just hitting the target twice in one salvo? What duration means "double tap" vs "ensure destruction of target".
  - orwin 13d ago
    To me, more than 20 minutes, less than a day. Which is what happened (40 minutes between the missiles and the bombs)

jvanderbot 14d ago

I'll add the definition from the Rome statute that, by my read, establishes a war crime when there is intent to commit the civilian strikes: Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. Still this is a legal defense that might plausibly be used during a trial, not necessarily a reason to skip a trial.

toast0 14d ago
From that text, it sure sounds to me that these attacks are going to be legal. The article describes them as 'indescriminate', but they were specifically targetted based on a mistake of fact. There's certainly evidence that the US was neglegent in relying on old information without verifying. That's serious and reprehensible, but I don't know that that rises to the level of a war crime. I'll add that it's not what I want my country's military to be doing and that if I had any power, there would be consequences for the people involved in decision making that led to this, as well as changes in procedure to reduce this type of mistake in the future, and a settlement paid to the people affected by this strike.

paulddraper 14d ago

To recap: A Iranian military structure was converted into a school. After conversion, the rest of the naval base remained there (< 100m away). Missile strikes hit both the base and the adjacent school. --- FYI, it's not unusual for schools to be part of military bases. The U.S. itself operates over a 100. [1] [1] https://www.dodea.edu/ https://www.dodea.edu/

WarmWash 14d ago
I think the dishonesty is that if the tables were turned, the overwhelming chorus would be "Why the fuck would you convert former soldier barracks, still located on an active base, to a kids school and never update the publicly available maps? How fucking dumb are you?"
alistairSH 14d ago
11 years ago. If we're operating on decade+ old info, that's pretty damning. Is there a "reckless endangerment" or "manslaughter" equivalent in the war-crimes sphere?
- bamboozled 14d ago
  Is it me or is it reckless to leave a school in part of an old military complex ? That seems negligent to me, for this exact reason. Maybe it was intentional too ?
  - alistairSH 14d ago
    Under that logic, is the entire Barracks Row strip in DC fair game? It's across the street from a historic Marine Corp barracks, why would anybody put shops and restaurants there, right? Maybe if the schools was built recently there'd be a case. That's not the case, its as converted a full decade ago. We just didn't bother updating our maps and intel before launching missiles.
    - bamboozled 14d ago
      In my opinion, a more responsible government would probably not continue to using an abandon military base as a school for this reason. I'm sure the thought had crossed someone's mind that something like this might happen. I'm not trying to make excuses for the USA here, it's an abhorrent thing and I do agree, much more care should've been taken. No one is suggesting other kids schools are "fair game" so just calm down a bit?

superxpro12 14d ago

Hegseth's military had woefully outdated intelligence. And because he's a news host and NOT a war chief, he ended up ordering the destruction of a school full of girls so they could distract the news from the epstein files.

jvanderbot 14d ago
Your claim is that hegseth directed the US Navy to launch an attack on a building it knew to be a school full of kids for the negative headlines, because those negative headlines would distract from the Epstein files outrage?
- drstewart 14d ago
  No no no, they didn't know that it was a school because they're incompetent, but ALSO knew it was as school because they're evil.
  - text0404 14d ago
    You seem to be confusing everyone's stances (incompetence vs malice). Some people in this thread believe it was incompetence and therefore not a war crime, and others believe it was malicious and therefore a war crime. I personally don't think stupidity is a good legal defense but what do I know.

watwut 14d ago

US army used to have unit responsible to unsure this dont happen. Guess who dismantled it due to being too woke and not lethal enough.

orwin 14d ago

The double tap to me is really what is cruel. I understand americans don't want to hear it, because they need to believe their military is moral, but a double tap to me show cruelty and willingness to target doctor, nurses, firemen and any person courageous enough to help. The US military and its sailors already showed me everything i wont to know about them when i saw the report on them shooting torpedoes at capsized boats. Like i said before, if any US person is on a boat and need help, i will still do it, because anybody not helping on the sea is an inhuman piece of shit, but i will keep my distance.

jvanderbot 14d ago
Do you resolve a difference between a double tap attack (one in which a delay is inserted to hit first responders) and just hitting the target twice in one salvo? What duration means "double tap" vs "ensure destruction of target".
- orwin 13d ago
  To me, more than 20 minutes, less than a day. Which is what happened (40 minutes between the missiles and the bombs)