The Bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh Girls School in Minab, Iran

[John J.]

Reports from New Lines Magazine and Al Jazeera English determined that the girls' school was next to an IRGC base on Resalat Boulevard in Minab. An Al Jazeera report said the school had been "clearly separate" from the adjacent military site for at least 10 years and its targeting was "deliberate."

Merlyn Thomas of BBC Verify, speaking on PM, BBC Radio 4, 05 March 2026, from about 18 mins 25 secs into the programme (any transcription errors are mine, she spoke pretty fast)

...we've got new satellite imagery, and it- it's crucial to our understanding of what happened because it shows that the surrounding area of the school itself, and the IRGC base itself, show multiple strikes hit that area. Now the school is located right next to an IRGC base, and we can see that in these satellite images that the IRGC base itself was hit multiple times, the school building itself is partially collapsed, and a building in the IRGC base was completely flattened.
Now, when you combine that image with the verified videos we have on the ground, experts have said that this suggests that there were multiple simultaneous or near-simultaneous strikes in the area. It's worth saying as well that, some people have claimed that the IRGC base is next to the school, how separate is it, what we can say is a wall is visible from Google Earth imagery, is visible from 2016 that, that is separating the school from the IRGC base itself.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002s3g5

 

[Giddierone]

BBC Verify also says there was more than one impact site.

At least three columns of black smoke are visible in the footage: two closer to the entrance of the base, and a third further away behind the medical clinic.

The location of smoke plumes in verified videos correspond to where the damage is visible in satellite images.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yqqyly9n0o

 

[Ann K]

It would appear that the data they had on the school was outdated, and that old information identified it as a military location. I do not know if their mistake was related to the lack of experts, but Patel laid off a number of experts on Iran just before the attack began.

FBI Director Kash Patel fired at least a dozen counterintelligence staffers at the FBI mere days before the U.S. strikes on Iran, despite their relevant expertise, because they had also previously worked on the investigation into the classified documents at President Donald Trump's residence at Mar-a-Lago, according to a report by the New York Sun.

The ousted staffers included agents and personnel from a counterintelligence unit called CI-12 in the FBI's Washington Field Office, and the firings were ordered directly by Patel, reported the Sun's Daniel Edward Rosen, citing "four former officials familiar with the dismissals." Their work focused on "media leaks, global espionage, and threats that included those involving the Iranian regime."

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/t...n-mar-a-lago-probe-had-iran-expertise-report/

This, combined with the much-publicized layoffs a year ago this week, means that the USA has lost the expertise of some of the best experts on the region.

Employees at the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence were sent deferred resignation offer letters this week, according to three sources familiar with the matter.

POLITICS

'Not a buyout': Attorneys and unions urge federal workers not to resign

These are the first examples of the national security and intelligence workforce being included in broader efforts to downsize the federal government by the Trump administration. The move is causing panic within the broader national security community that years of experience, talent and secrets could soon be heading out the door from the CIA and ODNI headquarters in McLean, Va., and the NSA's in Fort Meade, Md.

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/05/nx-s...n-cia-nsa-odni-national-security-intelligence

AI, suspected to have been used in this bombing event, is only as smart as the work it reads from the human experts in the field. If they're not up to date, then AI is not up to date.

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

The "right" did not post that.
View attachment 88905
View attachment 88947
Source: https://x.com/NiohBerg/status/2028119242952921107

This post has been retweeted tens of thousands of times including by some very large American right-wing accounts who believed the claim in it is true and evidenced by the images it includes.

Including but not limited to Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Sebastian Gorka, Brit Hume, Eli David, Buzz Patterson, Erick Erickson, Steve Ferguson, Kurt Schlichter, Pamela Geller, Gerry Callahan. Regardless of whether you know who these are, these are not fringe nobodies.

 

[NoParty]

Well, it looks like PBS's work (arguing convincingly that it was a precise, high level targeting) has finally nudged the press to take some interest:

3/4/26 Reporter, to Karoline Leavitt: "Did the United States air strike a girls elementary school and kill 175 people?"
Leavitt : "Not that we know of ...I would just tell you very strongly that the United States of America does not target civilians..."

Add this to Hegseth & Rubio, etc., making extremely similar carefully-worded responses, that stress that we wouldn't do it on purpose,
but very, very notably not denying that we killed those little girls. The other possible malefactor, Israel, by contrast, has said they know
nothing about it. Our team has skipped denying that we did it, and is on to, essentially:
"...but we have strict policies against doing that sort of thing on purpose." That's why I said an hour ago, it's looking more & more like us.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1590382452176981

Yesterday, professional liar & gaslighter, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, scolded the press for asking for
answers about the horrific bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls school on the very first day of the new war. She said
that we don't know what happened (definitely need an investigation: this long after the incident...no, doesn't pass the smell test).

As the scolding continued, she sternly, accusingly, warned the reporters that they were the targets of malicious propaganda.

"THE CALL, IT'S COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!!"

 

[NoParty]

This post has been retweeted tens of thousands of times including by some very large American right-wing accounts who believed the claim in it is true and evidenced by the images it includes.

Including but not limited to Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Sebastian Gorka, Brit Hume, Eli David, Buzz Patterson, Erick Erickson, Steve Ferguson, Kurt Schlichter, Pamela Geller, Gerry Callahan. Regardless of whether you know who these are, these are not fringe nobodies.

As recently as yesterday (when this thread could tell that it was probably American bombs)
Ophir Falk, foreign policy adviser to Trump's great buddy Netanyahu,
said--about the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls school--on CNN's Erin Burnett OutFront:
"From what I understand, it's clearly an Iranian strike. It's a misfire from the Iranians." Bastard!

https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ebo/date/2026-03-04/segment/01

 

[Gary C]

The target information has to be in a database somewhere, either in DC or CENTCOM. The right person just has to ask the right office for it.
I seriously doubt anyone important in the administration is going to ask.

 

[NoParty]

New York Times headline today (3/5/26):

"Analysis Suggests School Was Hit Amid U.S. Strikes on Iranian Naval Base"
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/05/...e_code=1.Q1A.KNGH.AeazjGRqxQeY&smid=url-share

 

[John J.]

I'm certainly willing to give the gov the benefit of the doubt (which many others investigating this are definitely not!)
that the killing of many, many little girls was unintentional...

Are any identifiable credible sources/ investigators suggesting that the killing of the schoolgirls was intentional?

 

[deirdre]

Are any identifiable credible sources/ investigators suggesting that the killing of the schoolgirls was intentional?

i think anyone accusing (whoever iran/israel/america) that their attacks are breaking international law are saying it is intentional. but that's just my opinion.


Source: https://x.com/UNESCO/status/2028122523183845633?s=20

 

[NoParty]

Are any identifiable credible sources/ investigators suggesting that the killing of the schoolgirls was intentional?

Well, your mileage will vary: Let's be honest: For some people, the very suggestion that it was intentional,
will make them declare the source not credible. Similarly, it's an awkward question for me, specifically,
since I'm already on record as saying that I do not hold that particular view.

That said, I was thinking not just of UNESCO and others who were more questioning, but mostly Al Jazeera, who put up
a very detailed piece titled: Al Jazeera investigation: Iran girls' school targeting likely 'deliberate'

two days ago, after a deep ..."analysis by Al Jazeera's digital investigations unit of satellite imagery compiled over more
than a decade, as well as recent video clips, published news reports and statements from official Iranian sources."

Honestly, it looks like a precursor to the (similarly done) PBS & NY Times investigations, which also make it look
most likely that it was the US's bombs that destroyed that school.

Is Al Jezeera credible? Though hated by many Americans for a slant perceived (fairly, imo) as slightly against the US views,
more importantly, it usually gets things correct. The Media Bias Chart folks, for instance, while not giving Al Jezeera stellar marks,
rates it as less biased and more accurate than America's own Fox News. Al Jezeera has also won multiple Peabody Awards.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026...s-school-strike-as-israel-us-deny-involvement

https://adfontesmedia.com/al-jazeera-bias-and-reliability/

 

[John J.]

I'm certainly willing to give the gov the benefit of the doubt (which many others investigating this are definitely not!)
that the killing of many, many little girls was unintentional...

Are any identifiable credible sources/ investigators suggesting that the killing of the schoolgirls was intentional?

i think anyone accusing (whoever iran/israel/america) that their attacks are breaking international law are saying it is intentional. but that's just my opinion.

The airstrikes on Iran are clearly intentional, and some people think they break international law because it is armed aggression against another state conducted without a believable cover of it being in self-defence: There was no imminent threat from Iran that justified an attack on this scale.
Examples might be Professor Janina Dill, Institute of Law, Ethics and Armed Conflict, University of Oxford and Dominic Grieve, former UK Attorney General on the BBC News at Six, 05 March 2026 https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m002s5kh/bbc-news-at-six-05032026 (there are others in many countries, these two just happened to be on the last news broadcast I saw).

I was questioning whether any credible sources ("others investigating this") are claiming that the killing of schoolgirls was intentional, a deliberate act of mass-murder of children by the forces of the United States or Israel. I'm not aware of any.

Al Jazeera investigation: Iran girls' school targeting likely 'deliberate'

I wouldn't be surprised if the targeting of the school building was deliberate, by planning staff or aircrew who believed it was something else.
Other buildings in the immediate area were struck at the same time.
This is very different to anyone suggesting that the killing of many schoolgirls was deliberate.
This will be of no solace to the bereaved parents, and the entire event is grotesque.

 

[deirdre]

biased and more accurate than America's own Fox News.

why didnt you pick MSNBC?

Article:

The point is that not all Fox News content is unreliable and extremely biased to the right. Not all MSNBC content is unreliable and extremely biased to the left.

Source: https://adfontesmedia.com/all-msnbc-fox-news-content-not-same/

 

[deirdre]

I was questioning whether any credible sources ("others investigating this") are claiming that the killing of schoolgirls was intentional, a deliberate act of mass-murder of children by the forces of the United States or Israel. I'm not aware of any.

i see, you are asking if anyone NAMED the us or israel? as the perpetrators of the deliberate attacks.

 

[Gary C]

i see, you are asking if anyone NAMED the us or israel? as the perpetrators of the deliberate attacks.

No. He's pointing out the likely intentional failure of coverage to distinguish between "intentionally/deliberately" bombing a building and "intentionally/deliberately" bombing a girl's school. Al Jazeera for example could have made that clear but chose not to.

 

[John J.]

both no party and i gave you sources that are specifically talking about Shajareh Tayyebeh school .

Yes. And I was talking about Shajareh Tayyebeh school.
I was also making the point that some apparently suitably-qualified people think that the attacks on Iran break international law and that their viewpoint is not dependent on whether the bombing of the school was intentional or not. Believing that the attack on Iran is illegal doesn't necessarily mean that those people also believe the US or Israel deliberately attacked a school in the knowledge that it was a school.

If the attack on the school was intentional, planned by personnel who knew it was a functioning school, that would very clearly be a war crime, the men and women responsible, murderers. This would be the case regardless of whether the attacks on Iran more generally are legally justifiable or not.
(Edited to add: To be clear, I think it is extremely unlikely that anyone bombed the school knowing it was a school).

 

[NoParty]

The airstrikes on Iran are clearly intentional, and some people think they break international law because it is armed aggression against another state conducted without a believable cover of it being in self-defence: There was no imminent threat from Iran that justified an attack on this scale.
Examples might be Professor Janina Dill, Institute of Law, Ethics and Armed Conflict, University of Oxford and Dominic Grieve, former UK Attorney General on the BBC News at Six, 05 March 2026 https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m002s5kh/bbc-news-at-six-05032026 (there are others in many countries, these two just happened to be on the last news broadcast I saw).

I was questioning whether any credible sources ("others investigating this") are claiming that the killing of schoolgirls was intentional, a deliberate act of mass-murder of children by the forces of the United States or Israel. I'm not aware of any.

When I first got interested in the school story (feeling then and now, that it is getting inadequate coverage) I perused dozens of articles,
some of which began something like this: "The US probably did this to terrorize Iranians, and let them know that as long as they resisted
America's will, no one, not even little girls, would be safe from their cruelty & destruction." While I get the reasoning...after all, it's in the vein of
the well-known "shock and awe!" But I just felt that, as despicable as our current leadership is, they would not do that. Not because it's
beneath them (is anything?) but because they would fear that they'd pay too steep a price for it in the upcoming mid-term election.
So, I did not bother to read beyond the first couple of sentences of those articles. I wasn't entirely clear on how Al Jezeera was using "intentional," so I did not try to define or explain it. But I know that they are a respected "credible" news source for millions around the world.

The point of my parentheical remark, was simply that I was aware that not everyone would be as charitable as I.
At this point, however, given what we do & don't know, it does look to me not like murder, but involuntary manslaughter or
reckless homicide. The press should start asking "where does the buck stop, on this massive loss of innocent life?"
And I don't trust this administration enough to gullibly swallow the notion that--with a tiny fraction of the resources--PBS, CBS &
the NY Times were able to figure this out, while our massive state-of-the-art military was telling us nothing because it was so clueless.
We need an independent investigation into who knew what, when. This is, like, 6 days later, and they still seem to be struggling
to make up a story that pretends to be totally intolerant of innocents being slaughtered...but also explains how this tragedy happens.

"We Will Not Tolerate Innocents Being Slaughtered" -- United States, at Jan. 2026 UN Security Council

 

[Mendel]

Is Al Jezeera credible? Though hated by many Americans for a slant perceived (fairly, imo) as slightly against the US views,
more importantly, it usually gets things correct. The Media Bias Chart folks, for instance, while not giving Al Jezeera stellar marks,
rates it as less biased and more accurate than America's own Fox News. Al Jezeera has also won multiple Peabody Awards.

https://adfontesmedia.com/al-jazeera-bias-and-reliability/

That puts them on par with CNN and NBC news, but...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/

Overall, we rate Al Jazeera Left-Center biased, based on story selection that slightly favors the left, and Mixed for factual reporting due to failed fact checks that were not corrected and misleading extreme editorial bias that favors Qatar.

After the 10/07/2023 Hamas attack on Israel, Al Jazeera has been a valuable voice for the Palestinians as most Western media favors Israel. While most of its reporting has been factual in covering the conflict they have demonstrated one-sided reporting that tends to denigrate Israel.

They get about the same quality score as Sinclair does.

I think they do good work, but they have a few predictable blind spots, which means certain stories need a second opinion. They're very valuable providing that second opinion to Western media, because they're going to show you what the Western news story looks like from a fact-based mainstream muslim point of view, exposing our own biases. And they usually have better access to sources in the region.

---

I'd call the school bombing criminal negligence, but I'm not a lawyer. It doesn't have to be intentional to land you in jail, a reckless disegard for human life will do it. And the satellite pictures with the colored, very visible wall support that take.

 

[deirdre]

I was also making the point that some apparently suitably-qualified people think that the attacks on Iran break international law and that their viewpoint is not dependent on whether the bombing of the school was intentional or not. Believing that the attack on Iran is illegal doesn't necessarily mean that those people also believe the US or Israel deliberately attacked a school in the knowledge that it was a school.

yea i dont care a about a separate issue, i'm trying to understand your original question. the examples No Party and i gave were specifically about the school bombing, not the military operation in general.


but i acknowledge we have differing opinions on the matter. its cool.

 

[NoParty]

That puts them on par with CNN and NBC news, but...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/

Overall, we rate Al Jazeera Left-Center biased, based on story selection that slightly favors the left, and Mixed for factual reporting due to failed fact checks that were not corrected and misleading extreme editorial bias that favors Qatar.

After the 10/07/2023 Hamas attack on Israel, Al Jazeera has been a valuable voice for the Palestinians as most Western media favors Israel. While most of its reporting has been factual in covering the conflict they have demonstrated one-sided reporting that tends to denigrate Israel.

They get about the same quality score as Sinclair does.

I think they do good work, but they have a few predictable blind spots, which means certain stories need a second opinion. They're very valuable providing that second opinion to Western media, because they're going to show you what the Western news story looks like from a fact-based mainstream muslim point of view, exposing our own biases. And they usually have better access to sources in the region.

---

I'd call the school bombing criminal negligence, but I'm not a lawyer. It doesn't have to be intentional to land you in jail, a reckless disegard for human life will do it. And the satellite pictures with the colored, very visible wall support that take.

I should be clear: I'm not a big fan of the Media Bias Chart...but I know that some people, here, take it more seriously than I do.
So I chose Fox News as a comparison, since many of those who blindly bash Al Jezeera, would be Fox viewers.
Personally, I don't care much if a source leans far left or right: I can always compensate for that. What I care about, is do they get it right,
and correct themselves when they're wrong.

 

[John J.]

And I don't trust this administration enough to gullibly swallow the notion that--with a tiny fraction of the resources--PBS, CBS &
the NY Times were able to figure this out, while our massive state-of-the-art military was telling us nothing because it was so clueless.

I'd agree that both the US and Israeli governments are almost certainly aware of which units (probably which specific aircraft) are responsible.
Revealing those facts might not be operationally sensible. Suppose an airman/ woman of the same squadron were taken captive?

Realistically, neither government is going to have a transparent investigation into targeting decisions, intelligence failures or "incontinent ordinance" while fighting is ongoing.

 

[deirdre]

(feeling then and now, that it is getting inadequate coverage

do you have any idea how many children are killed and/or murdered around the world who receive "inadequate coverage"?

Finding out the U.S made the mistake is not going to magically bring those children and teachers back to life. The media tearing it's hair out because "trump bad trump bad, obama bad obama bad" isnt going to bring those children back to life.

It's also not going to stop the military operation.
I am sure whether americans launched the missile or not, they are doing the best they can to remedy/prevent the situation as far as it possibly happening again. As you said, ts an election year... noone wants this bad press.

Take a breath. We will find out eventually.

PS you really need to start providing links.

 

[John J.]

but i acknowledge we have differing opinions on the matter. its cool.

My opinions on the Minab school bombing are that it was a tragic accident or act of negligence. I don't believe that there was a deliberate plan to murder schoolgirls. It is highly likely that either US or Israeli forces were responsible.

I don't think I've expressed any other personal opinions about the conflict, though I briefly referred to the comments of a couple of experts in international law.

 

[Mendel]

Personally, I don't care much if a source leans far left or right: I can always compensate for that. What I care about, is do they get it right, and correct themselves when they're wrong.

Yes. And the Poynter people found that, sometimes, Al Jazeera doesn't.

 

[NoParty]

Yes. And the Poynter people found that, sometimes, Al Jazeera doesn't.

Which, they explain, is why Al Jezeera is only A LITTLE better than Fox News...

 

[deirdre]

I'd agree that both the US and Israeli governments are almost certainly aware of which units (probably which specific aircraft) are responsible.
Revealing those facts might not be operationally sensible. Suppose an airman/ woman of the same squadron were taken captive?

Realistically, neither government is going to have a transparent investigation into targeting decisions, intelligence failures or "incontinent ordinance" while fighting is ongoing.

i dont think people want the government to name names, they just want " we mistakenly bombed the school as our intel had it marked as a bunker with weapons of mass destruction" < that's my way of saying that sometimes intel get things wrong.

 

[deirdre]

My opinions on the Minab school bombing are that it was a tragic accident or act of negligence. I don't believe that there was a deliberate plan to murder schoolgirls. It is highly likely that either US or Israeli forces were responsible.

i know.

i'm talking about your question.
you seem to think that al jazeera and unesco are just using sloppy wording, right?
i think they mean they think the school was targeted deliberately knowing it was a school.

thats the opinion of which we disagree. (unless im still misunderstanding you)

 

[NoParty]

I'd agree that both the US and Israeli governments are almost certainly aware of which units (probably which specific aircraft) are responsible.
Revealing those facts might not be operationally sensible. Suppose an airman/ woman of the same squadron were taken captive?

Realistically, neither government is going to have a transparent investigation into targeting decisions, intelligence failures or "incontinent ordinance" while fighting is ongoing.

I'm not asking for anything like that. But saying you don't know what happened (when you almost certainly did, on day 1) erodes trust...

 

[deirdre]

I'm not asking for anything like that. But saying you don't know what happened (when you almost certainly did, on day 1) erodes trust...

as if your trust could be more eroded.

i think most people know we dont get answers to this stuff quickly, esp without video footage etc.

add: they may know which missile dropped but they are going to want to investigate the chain of "how exactly did this mistake happen" before going to the press because that is what the press is gonna ask about.

 

[Mendel]

Which, they explain, is why Al Jezeera is only A LITTLE better than Fox News...

well, I looked at the two failed fact checks, and they're minor with respect to what Fox news does.
One was using a photo showing a muslim family fleeing from anti-muslim violence in 1947 India that wasn't taken where the unrest that the article was about took place, but rather 2 provinces over.
The other was citing numbers from a government report in a TV panel show, and the agency has since revised the report because it was misleading.

Al Jazeera is much less biased than Fox News.

 

[John J.]

thats the opinion of which we disagree. (unless im still misunderstanding you)

Yes, I think you're misunderstanding me. I haven't commented on anything said by either Al Jazeera or UNESCO, though I agree with @Gary C' s post #55.

 

[deirdre]

Yes, I think you're misunderstanding me. I haven't commented on anything said by either Al Jazeera or UNESCO, though I agree with @Gary C' s post #55.

ok then i have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, so ignore all my prior responses!

 

[Giddierone]

The language used here, and elsewhere about this event is tortured. The US knows exactly where they have and have not bombed. They take credit (glory) for their hits and shirk any accountability for their misses. Perhaps it will emerge that the Ayatollah actually bombed himself.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday acknowledged the U.S. military was investigating the incident.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, did not rule out the possibility that new evidence could emerge that absolves the U.S. of responsibility and points to another responsible party in the incident.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...ty-iran-school-strike-sources-say-2026-03-06/

 

[deirdre]

Perhaps it will emerge that the Ayatollah actually bombed himself.

we on MB really need to think about the policy on using sources that are behind paywalls. @Mick West

Article:

US military investigators believe it is likely that American forces were responsible for an apparent strike on an Iranian girls' school that killed scores of children on Saturday, but have not yet reached a conclusion or completed their investigation, two US officials told Reuters.

Reuters was unable to determine additional details about the investigation, including what evidence contributed to the tentative assessment, what type of munition was used, who was responsible, or why the US might have struck the school. An earlier report by the New York Times suggesting American responsibility for the strike said it occurred at the same time as a series of US attacks on an adjacent naval base belonging to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, indicating it was accidentally struck by the US as it targeted Iranian military assets nearby.


US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday acknowledged the US military was investigating the incident.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, did not rule out the possibility that new evidence could emerge that absolves the US of responsibility and points to another party responsible for the incident.

Reuters could not determine how much longer the investigation would last or what evidence US investigators are seeking before the assessment can be completed.

Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-probe-said-to-indicate-american-forces-likely-launched-strike-that-hit-iran-girls-school/amp/

 

[Ann K]

PBS, CBS & the NY Times were able to figure this out, while our massive state-of-the-art military was telling us nothing because it was so clueless.

I think that's not the reason why they're "telling us nothing". It seems to have been a massive blunder, perhaps because of the use of AI. But more to the point, it's the business of news sources to find and publicize information. That's not the job of the military.

 

[Mendel]

That's not the job of the military.

It's the job of government in a democracy to be transparent about its actions.
If they cannot confirm the report hours after it broke ("we did accidentally bomb that school, we're very sorry") and explain why it happened a day later, they're either too incompetent to be allowed to wage war, or undemocratic.

 

[JMartJr]

The US knows exactly where they have and have not bombed. They take credit (glory) for their hits and shirk any accountability for their misses.

Given that there have been "misses," instances where ordinance did not go where it was supposed to, I am not sure that any party is likely to know exactly where they have and have not bombed, especially in the first days when the environment was target-rich, and everything was happening at once. Given that it is a standard trope in wartime propaganda to accuse your adversary of murdering children*, in order to unify your population and demonize the enemy, I was initially very skeptical that a school had been struck at all. That seems more well established now.

There were three state military factions hurling ordinance around in that area at that time. Likely whatever struck the school belonged to one of them, unless it was intended for propaganda purposes it seems likely that the school was not targeted AS a school, with the intent to kill a lot of children, as aside from propaganda for the attacked faction there is no strategic nor tactical value to doing that.
------------------------------------------------------

* Historical examples of "our enemy murders children so we are justified in hating/killing them":

British propaganda depicting Irish rebels murdering children in 1641

Anti German propaganda from WW1

"in their barbaric frenzy they even snatched children from their mother's breasts and dashed the guiltless infants to the ground. They held others by the feet,upside down, and cut them in two."

Victor of Vita, 429 a.d., describing Vandals invasion of Africa.
Above three examples found at: https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/37532/who-was-the-first-to-accuse-enemy-troops-of-impaling-babies-cutting-fetuses-fro


I am omitting photographs purported to be actual children murdered in very similar "babes on bayonets" images taken in wars since photography was invented, but will note that they exist and that in some cases they are possibly staged using dolls (or at least this accusation is made by some later historians...)

This is not to say that such incidents never happen, especially when the fury of war is at its height, and things can get out of control both with the munitions and inside the minds of the combatants.. But their value for propaganda for the attacked is such that where they do not happen, it is tempting to claim they did, and where they do happen inadvertently, there is propaganda value in claiming that they were deliberate and illustrate why THEY are evil subhumans whose actions WE right thinking people are bound by honor to avenge.

Skeptics of any political bent or national allegiance do the world a service when they can resist the allure of "Remember the atrocity those guys committed, so our atrocity we are about to commit is only right and proper!"

 

[deirdre]

There were three state military factions hurling ordinance around in that area at that time

i'm not 100% sure that is technically true. i dont want to rewatch briefings for quotes.. but there are 2 seperate operations (i assume 1 is israili and 1 is american... they have different names). Our generals say the israelis and americans have separate location areas AND separate targets.
Americans are doing navy stuff and are in the south. so i think that jives with the school area.
israelis are doing um.. missile sites? (<dont quote me) and are in the North.

Not ruling out israelis..but it does seem with my novice understanding of what i'm listening to that it would be either Iran or America.

 

[NoParty]

I think that's not the reason why they're "telling us nothing". It seems to have been a massive blunder, perhaps because of the use of AI. But more to the point, it's the business of news sources to find and publicize information. That's not the job of the military.

I was saying that I do NOT believe that they're stonewalling because they don't know...much more likely that they were sure
on 2/28 that it was our bombs...but they can't admit it, or reconcile that reality with stated claims of protecting innocent life.

In a free, open republic, when the whole world is trying to figure out (since 2/28) who slaughtered ~175 innocents,
pretending that you don't know (perhaps hoping the lies--that Iran did it on accident--get traction, and maybe get you off the hook)
is irresponsible, dishonest, and well beneath the greatness that America claims to embody.
It isn't enough to just say how great America is, on your memes & t-shirts...you actually have to live up to that standard.

I think the day is coming soon that Hegseth, etc., will be dragged, kicking & screaming, to admit what everyone else already accepted.

My interest at this point is in the tale that will need to be concocted to explain why--almost a week after the bombing--they've
tried to present themselves as unaware of any errors on their own part. Unable to take responsibility for their own actions,
they keep hiding behind the--increasingly obvious stall tactic--"Can't talk now!! Uh, big, big Investigation in progress!!" defense...

 

[NoParty]

Given that there have been "misses," instances where ordinance did not go where it was supposed to, I am not sure that any party is likely to know exactly where they have and have not bombed, especially in the first days when the environment was target-rich, and everything was happening at once. Given that it is a standard trope in wartime propaganda to accuse your adversary of murdering children*, in order to unify your population and demonize the enemy, I was initially very skeptical that a school had been struck at all. That seems more well established now.

There were three state military factions hurling ordinance around in that area at that time. Likely whatever struck the school belonged to one of them, unless it was intended for propaganda purposes it seems likely that the school was not targeted AS a school, with the intent to kill a lot of children, as aside from propaganda for the attacked faction there is no strategic nor tactical value to doing that.
------------------------------------------------------

* Historical examples of "our enemy murders children so we are justified in hating/killing them":
View attachment 88972
British propaganda depicting Irish rebels murdering children in 1641

View attachment 88973
Anti German propaganda from WW1

"in their barbaric frenzy they even snatched children from their mother's breasts and dashed the guiltless infants to the ground. They held others by the feet,upside down, and cut them in two."

Victor of Vita, 429 a.d., describing Vandals invasion of Africa.
Above three examples found at: https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/37532/who-was-the-first-to-accuse-enemy-troops-of-impaling-babies-cutting-fetuses-fro


I am omitting photographs purported to be actual children murdered in very similar "babes on bayonets" images taken in wars since photography was invented, but will note that they exist and that in some cases they are possibly staged using dolls (or at least this accusation is made by some later historians...)

This is not to say that such incidents never happen, especially when the fury of war is at its height, and things can get out of control both with the munitions and inside the minds of the combatants.. But their value for propaganda for the attacked is such that where they do not happen, it is tempting to claim they did, and where they do happen inadvertently, there is propaganda value in claiming that they were deliberate and illustrate why THEY are evil subhumans whose actions WE right thinking people are bound by honor to avenge.

Skeptics of any political bent or national allegiance do the world a service when they can resist the allure of "Remember the atrocity those guys committed, so our atrocity we are about to commit is only right and proper!"

When I posted (way back in Post #9) the experts' views that these were precise shots, on multiple buildings, it was because they
were saying that this did not at all look like the kind of collateral damage situations, we often see in war, because something
takes a lot of damage because it was near something else that was the actual target. I find it highly implausible that such a
sophisticated attack was made, with the party behind it, unaware of what they were doing...