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

(linked to Telegram from the Bellingcat site

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX9Cn9174Uo

1773001417393.png
 
Last edited:
Bellingcat have just published a report with apparent video footage (linked to Telegram from the Bellingcat site) of a Tomahawk cruise missile strike in Minab.
External Quote:
The US is the only participant in the war that is known to have Tomahawk missiles.
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/202...-missile-strike-next-to-girls-school-in-iran/
From the link above:
External Quote:
Planet Labs satellite imagery shows that only two structures within this red cone were damaged, including a clinic. The other structure appears to be an earth-covered magazine or bunker.
Interesting because the building labeled "clinic" in the NPR report appears only to have a large entry hole in the roof but remains otherwise intact. It is visually similar to the building at upper right just below the school suggesting that both were heavily constructed to withstand blast damage, i.e. bunkers.
 
Interesting because the building labeled "clinic" in the NPR report appears only to have a large entry hole in the roof but remains otherwise intact. It is visually similar to the building at upper right just below the school suggesting that both were heavily constructed to withstand blast damage, i.e. bunkers.
My first reaction to the video was "where's the explosion? is this some kind of bunker bomb?". But I don't know enough about all that to give an educated opinion.
 
So what would be the most likely explanation for Trump sounding like someone who had not spent 1 minute
(a week [!] after the tragedy) being briefed by our excellent military leaders, or
reviewing the in-depth investigations by PBS, CBS, New York Times, Al Jezeera, Washington Post, Bellingcat, etc., etc., etc.?
 
My first reaction to the video was "where's the explosion? is this some kind of bunker bomb?". But I don't know enough about all that to give an educated opinion.
We don't know what distance the video was taken from so the sound might not have reached the user's location before the video cuts off.
but didnt "they" say the school used to be a bunker too? not that having "just a hole" would have helped save any lives, i assume tomahawks blow up on impact, yes?

I did a quick scan through the NPR article but I don't see that particular claim. It might have been another source but I don't recall it.
Comparing the pre and post strike photos again, the school appears to me to have a wider and flatter roof than either of the two buildings I would characterize as possible bunkers. Younger eyes might have a different opinion.
 
My first reaction to the video was "where's the explosion? is this some kind of bunker bomb?". But I don't know enough about all that to give an educated opinion.
huh i didnt even notice that. yea usually tomahawk missiles there's a big fireball. i kinda thought that about the buildigns with the smallish round holes too.. i mean that would have to be a seriously strong building to keep the explosion all inside the building. i guess its possible.

or maybe we used older model tomahawks without so much power, or some quds we confiscated from iraq?
the school appears to me to have a wider and flatter roof than either of the two buildings
the school does look flat from what remains.. the others arent particularly pointy either (compared to roofs that get snow) but i do see an indication of a slight rain grade slope.
1773007079065.png


add: the al jezeera article photo when it was still part of the military base has better graphics and it was a much different roof then the other buildigns back then
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026...s-school-strike-as-israel-us-deny-involvement
1773008254173.png
 
Last edited:
the in-depth investigations by PBS, CBS, New York Times, Al Jezeera, Washington Post, Bellingcat, etc., etc., etc.?
dude we have had other threads analyzing disaster stuff... what you are listing are not "in-depth" investigations. Even Bellingcats article is short as hell when he usually writes pages of analysis.
 
So what would be the most likely explanation for Trump sounding like someone who had not spent 1 minute
(a week [!] after the tragedy) being briefed by our excellent military leaders, or
reviewing the in-depth investigations by PBS, CBS, New York Times, Al Jezeera, Washington Post, Bellingcat, etc., etc., etc.?
The most likely explanation is that either he doesn't want to hear about it or he doesn't want to be asked about it. The next reason is that none of them want to be the bearer of bad tidings to a man whose response may well be to "shoot the messenger", but although that may be true of some sources (*ahem* Hegseth) it's improbable that it's true of all you name.
 
Last edited:
The next thing I would get if I were conducting this investigation is the CENTCOM No-Strike List.

Joint Publication 3-60 -- Joint Targeting (same as previously linked above)
pg II-13

External Quote:
The no-strike list (NSL) is not a target list, though it is a critical part of the joint targeting process. The NSL is a list of objects or entities characterized as protected from the effects of military operations under international law and/or rules of engagement.
External Quote:
L No-strike entities are protected from the effects of military operations under international law and/or the ROE. Attacking these may violate the laws of war (e.g., cultural and religious sites, embassies belonging to noncombatant countries, hospitals, schools) or interfere with friendly relations with other nations, indigenous populations, or governments. NSLs are not target lists, since the entities on the NSLs are not targets. NSLs are continuously updated with the latest information from the operational environment. For more information on no-strike entities and NSLs, see CJCSI 3160.01, No Strike and the Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology.
 
My first reaction to the video was "where's the explosion? is this some kind of bunker bomb?". But I don't know enough about all that to give an educated opinion.

Me neither. Perhaps the warhead failed to detonate, or to completely detonate? It might seem unlikely but it does happen.

External Quote:
Of the 16 U.S. Tomahawk missiles fired at militants in Nigeria, at least four appeared not to explode, according to officials and imagery reviewed by The Post.
Washington Post, "Unexploded missiles, witnesses undercut Trump account of Nigeria strike", 10 January 2026
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2026/01/10/nigeria-strikes-islamist-militants-isis/

Russian authorities claim to have received components from Tomahawks that failed to detonate when used against targets in Syria,
"Fact: Russia Captured an Unexploded U.S. Tomahawk Missile", The National Interest website, 21 August 2020, Michael Peck (I'm not sure that the article establishes if the claim is a fact), https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/fact-russia-captured-unexploded-us-tomahawk-missile-167346

The speed of impact doesn't guarantee the detonation of high explosives; many (supersonic) HE artillery shells fail to detonate; the Exocet missile that struck HMS Sheffield in 1982 failed to explode and Exocets are considerably faster than Tomahawks (approx. Mach 0.93 vs. 0.74).

Again, no idea if this is what happened, or if maybe as @fizzBuzz has mused, the missile penetrated a bunker before detonating. Maybe neither of these.
 
Last edited:
The most likely explanation is that either he doesn't want to hear about it or he doesn't want to be asked about it. The next reason is that none of them want to be the bearer of bad tidings to a man whose response may well be to "shoot the messenger", but although that may be true of some sources (*ahem* Hegseth) it's improbable that it's true of all you name.
Well, I sure can not disagree with that.
In my mind, though, the most likely explanation for Trump sounding like someone who had not spent 1 minute trying
to understand the tragedy, is because he simply had NOT bothered to spend 1 minute trying to understand the tragedy.
Experience has (sadly) taught him, that his opinions will be news, & broadcast far & wide, if/when they have zero factual basis...

ETA: To be fair to Trump, he's had multiple parties to host, and a stunningly pointless and ineffective "College Sports Roundtable"
for some reason...true, ethical priorities over spending a minute or two on the tragic deaths of ~175 innocents...mostly little girls.

"Trump college sports meeting turns into dog and pony show with no real answers.
Trump's suggestion: "I'd like to go exactly back to what we had, and ram it through a court." 3/6/26
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...ck-saban-ncaa-antitrust-congress/89027722007/
 
Last edited:
huh i didnt even notice that. yea usually tomahawk missiles there's a big fireball. i kinda thought that about the buildigns with the smallish round holes too.. i mean that would have to be a seriously strong building to keep the explosion all inside the building. i guess its possible.

or maybe we used older model tomahawks without so much power, or some quds we confiscated from iraq?

the school does look flat from what remains.. the others arent particularly pointy either (compared to roofs that get snow) but i do see an indication of a slight rain grade slope.
View attachment 89008

add: the al jezeera article photo when it was still part of the military base has better graphics and it was a much different roof then the other buildigns back then
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026...s-school-strike-as-israel-us-deny-involvement
View attachment 89011
The Aljazerra article linked here gives a nice time line of the changes in this facility. The school originally being part of the military facility and later being walled off and repurposed as a school.

With respect to the weapons being used I would not expect every sign of damage being the result of a Tomahawk hit. They are expensive, and overkill for some targets. The buildings with a nice hole in the roof in the dead center of the building were possibly hit with GPS-guided gravity bombs. Internal damage to the buildings caused by bomb detonating inside the building could render it effectively destroyed. Remember there are a lot of targets being hit, using the smaller and cheaper bombs available instead of a Tomahawk allows you to reserve them for more important and hardened targets. I would not expect every building/target in a facility to be attacked with the same particular weapon.
 
The Aljazerra article linked here gives a nice time line of the changes in this facility. The school originally being part of the military facility and later being walled off and repurposed as a school.

With respect to the weapons being used I would not expect every sign of damage being the result of a Tomahawk hit. They are expensive, and overkill for some targets. The buildings with a nice hole in the roof in the dead center of the building were possibly hit with GPS-guided gravity bombs. Internal damage to the buildings caused by bomb detonating inside the building could render it effectively destroyed. Remember there are a lot of targets being hit, using the smaller and cheaper bombs available instead of a Tomahawk allows you to reserve them for more important and hardened targets. I would not expect every building/target in a facility to be attacked with the same particular weapon.
That might also explain why the base was struck in two phases. Buildings thought to house some higher priority targets were possibly struck early.
 

Trending content

Back
Top