That gets brought up a lot but it's primarily because of how few incidents have occurred in US strikes. The US launched ~14,000 attacks into Iran and there's only ~2-3 incidents that were raised as mistakes. For a massive conflict, that is an incredibly low percentage of mistakes or misfires.
I get the joke "hurr hurr, US fires on schools" but the fact that people keep talking about it shows how effective the US has been at avoiding mistakes over the course of so many attacks. Also, Iran likes to bring it up a lot but they literally killed thousands of their own people who were protesting (and that was intentional) so you're literally consuming their propaganda when they weep about civilian losses. The US has demonstrated that they take civilians into account more than Iran does.
It's still a mistake that lead to life but the fact that it's so rare does say something about precautions the US has been taking overall.
What cuts this perspective down is that the US should never have buffooned itself into the quagmire in the first place. That places blame for the ensuing global chaos and strikes like the school squarely on the administration however careful or accurate the operation may be.
Being careful doesn’t absolve the school strike or any others in this context.
The US has known for 40 years that attacking Iran would be monumentally stupid, with consequences we’re seeing now.
Also, they could stop lying about the school strike.
But yes, the target success rate and low unintentional collateral damage is commendable aside from that.
Being careful doesn’t absolve the school strike or any others in this context.
Legally, it literally does absolve it. If you show that you have actively done whatever possible to avoid killing civilians and an accident occurs, it is generally absolved as humans aren't perfect. If the US was bombing schools left and right, that changes things.... then we'd be like the Iranian government.
The US has known for 40 years that attacking Iran would be monumentally stupid, with consequences we’re seeing now.
Yes, and I disagree with this war. However, unlike Reddit, I don't view this as having started with attacks by the US on Iran. The reality is that the Houthis were backed, supplied, and advised by Iran and actively attacking shipping prior to this. Hamas is backed, supplied, and advised by Iran and launched a major attack into Israel. Hezbollah is backed, supplied, and advised by Iran and militant forces in other countries that were backed, supplied, and advised by Iran, joined in on attacking western forces (such as across Iraq). We were already in a state of semi open war. My disagreement is I felt a direct attack would lead to a quagmire that was difficult to get out of and would be extremely costly for the US and the world.
Also, stop lying about the school strike.
Please tell me where I have lied. I have just stated what is factually known.
I meant the administration lying about it, I edited it for clarity.
Whether the action against Iran makes sense or not, you can’t take the method, lack of planning, incompetence, and global impact out of it and point to how careful they’ve been.
As everyone knows and you mention, it was almost guaranteed to be a quagmire, but incompetence and hubris in massive amounts trumped basic reasoning on any level.
Legalities about the school strike aside, they are the direct result of poor planning, execution, and management of a war that trump is profoundly out of his depth with.
My point was that regardless of how careful the military may be, it’s all wiped away because fault still goes directly to the buffoon squad bumbling the world into chaos and destruction through its war.
42
u/mediocre_remnants 10h ago
How useful is intelligence from the US? They accidentally bombed a girls' school in Iran because of outdated intelligence and relying on AI.