Very little to nothing about why Iran might be 'feeling bitter'. Amazing how our media can simply glide right over hundreds of war crimes and atrocities.
One thing you can at least respect about this administration is that they call a spade a spade. All the "war crimes," "human rights," "equal justice" talk from the previous administrations was nauseating.
There is an Iranian claim of a US attack on a desalination plant on the island of Qeshm that has been reported in Chinese media. There is also a statement from Hegseth saying that no quarter shall be given, which is forbidden even as a statement.
The second Hague convention article 23 (d) states that "In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden [...] (d) To declare that no quarter will be given".
Not a part of ICC, therefore no war crimes, right?
And now we also have a parallel UN just because the UN has become an object of mockery due to largely the same permanent members that can veto any decision.
Pretending that there's international law, even a court to enforce it, is just closing one's eyes. It's all talk when the court is alone, without any police power to enforce its judgements. The Rome Statute and the ICC exist to make people feel better, to have people believe that the world is just thanks to a few brave bureaucrats. These bureaucrats issue statements, judgements, even arrest warrants! That sounds serious. The judges even look serious.
"Might makes right" is not a smart or sensible way for a sentient species to make decisions. We depend on trust and cooperation to achieve our potential.
All the work being done to tear that to shreds (as imperfect as it always was) seems to hinge on the unaccountable Epstein class being allowed free reign to commit the most heinous atrocities imaginable... But we do outnumber those people, by a lot.
> The Rome Statute and the ICC exist to make people feel better, to have people believe that the world is just thanks to a few brave bureaucrats.
If that were entirely true, the US wouldn't work so hard on things like the Hague Invasion act, or on sanctioning ICC judges... Or on propaganda to make people believe that 'international law' is just a sanctimonious lie.
I agree with you that I wish for trust and cooperation. But that's just not the way the world is. There is no international law. There really isn't, however much we wish it to be. And therefore bringing up statutes and the ICC is just talk. It does nothing to improve the situation or to influence it in any way.
> It was obviously an error because the building used to be a military facility
It is obvious to you because you want to believe it. It is not obvious to me at all. Here are my reasons.
I find it very hard to believe that they have not updated their map in the last 10-15 year of a country that (i) both the US and Israel have been itching to bomb for multiple decades and (ii) is riddled with HUMINT.
Israel's history of knowingly bombing schools in the past (in Egypt) certainly does not help the case.
The pilot later went on to claim that this was deliberate.
April 1970, Israeli Phantom
fighter jets bombed the Bahr
al-Baqar elementary school in
Egypt’s Sharqia governorate,
killing 46 children out of 130
who were in their classrooms
that morning.
Israel claimed the school was
an Egyptian military facility,
and Defense Minister Moshe
Dayan said at the time that
“the Egyptians may have put
elementary school pupils in
a military base".
But an Israeli pilot who took
part in the raid and was
captured during the
October 1973 war later
revealed it had been a
deliberate attack and that
they knew it was merely a
school.
The attacks, and follow through double taps, on alleged drug boats in South / Central Americas is a US war crime on multiple counts - perfidy, willful killing, lack of declaration of war, .. etc.
The US led "war of aggression" during peace negotiations as an undeclared attack is as much a war crime as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour.
The US school attacks in Iran might not have been delibrate targeting of civilians, but it was certainly negligent killing of civilians as an unforced error, planned in advance prior to an undeclared attack made during a period of negotiation.
Pointless arguing that here, and it'll never properly land in an international court ... so it's moot.
Those are war crimes, and the US specifically teaches that specific scenario to their naval officers as something that can land them in serious legal trouble.
The school attack was a double tap. A triple tap, even: first one strike, then a second strike timed when first responders would be assumed to be at the scene, then a hit on the closest medical clinic.
Where's the legal trouble?
Hegseth specifically said they wouldn't bother with rules of war, they are confirmed to have committed one thing even you agree is a war crime, so why do you want to give them the benefit of the doubt on the choice of target?
I don't think you would have given declared US enemies the benefit of that doubt, in a similar situation.
I don't think you need to be very biased to consider this a war of aggression.
Which, incidentally, is itself considered an international crime.
So, these children would be alive and as well as one can be inside the theocracy that is Iran unless the US and Israel committed the international crime of a war of aggression?
> Calling it a “school attack” implies deliberate targeting of a civilian facility.
>It was obviously an error because the building used to be a military facility and is on the campus of a military base!
... No actually, being on the campus of a military base doesn't make bombing an elementary school full of children not a war crime. If it helps, try imagining Iran bombing a school on a US military base.
And I can't help but notice that you're not mentioning the 497 other targeted schools which I made you aware of.
> try imagining Iran bombing a school on a US military base.
The US doesn't generally intermingle their children with their military bases... I hope.
Even if they did, and the base got bombed during a war, and it was obviously a targeting/aiming/intelligence error... then... well... it is war. Shit happens! Compare this to WWII, where all sides carpet bombed entire cities on purpose, with the deliberate aim of flattening them to rubble, civilians included.
PS: Something like over half of all high-rise apartment buildings that get hit by cruise missiles is because their targeting software and/or maps are shit and not "3D enough" to account for tall buildings in the way of the actual target. Yes, that's hubris with lethal consequences, but not technically a war crime. It's merely war.
In the UK and I assume elsewhere they do at least at the major sites.
There is the onsite housing, leisure facilities and in some cases schools.
Lakenheath has a couple onsite serving the various bases in the area for those wanting to stick with US curriculum vs local schools.
> The US doesn't generally intermingle their children with their military bases... I hope.
There's no need to 'hope' against reality. This information is easily available to us both - there are tens of thousands of K-12 students on US military bases, in America and in other countries [0].
> it was obviously a targeting/aiming/intelligence error
... You're still somehow ignoring the 497 other schools targeted within these last few weeks. It's like your brain simply refuses to process that information - perhaps because it would force a perspective shift?
(Spoiler alert: We are the baddies. 498 schools in 4 weeks is pretty unambiguous, especially following the US involvement in bombing basically every school in Gaza.)
> it is war. Shit happens!
War crimes are not excused by 'being at war'. That's not how it works.
Many people here have already pointed out to you the many reasons and the many officials calling the first Iranian school bombing out as a war crime; and I highly encourage you to being to wrap your head around the fact. Defending war crimes is a deeply uncool way to spend your time. It's not good for you, or for the people reading it.
Not just "we" as in Americans. Jiggawatts specifically, because I doubt they would be defending this if they weren't employed in one of the organisations now directly helping commit the worst crimes humanity has named.
This is about government acting in bad faith, not the person writing here.
I think that if you see someone defending crimes against humanity, I think saying basically "you haven't come to terms with with how evil the thing you're part of and identifying with has become" is the most charitable you can be.
> tens of thousands of K-12 students on US military bases
Well... that's just stupid, and I hope that someone in the DoD has learned from the incident in Iran and will relocate the schools outside of the base perimeters. I doubt that'll happen somehow.
> 497 other schools targeted
a) You'll have to back that number with a reference.
b) Then demonstrate that they were targeted, not just hit. Good luck with that, unless you work for the DoD and overheard incriminating conversations!
> War crimes are not excused by 'being at war'. That's not how it works.
But war is excused!
It's just incredible to me that people are totally unable to grasp that concept that war isn't some friendly board game, or guns at ten paces, all civilised, orderly, and confined entirely to willing participants. It's the deliberate infliction of death and destruction!
> Many people here have already pointed out to you the many reasons and the many officials calling the first Iranian school bombing out as a war crime
They pointed at a error, not a crime.
A terrible, terrible error, but not a crime under international law, to which the US mostly hasn't even signed up to!
> Then demonstrate that they were targeted, not just hit.
If you want to believe that 498 schools were hit by accident and not by targeting then you are free to do so. Personally, I think that's a profoundly silly and genuinely harmful choice to make, and would urge you not just to reconsider, but to reflect on how you ever thought such a thing.
> But war is excused!
Well, no. There are long and lasting consequences for wars of the type America has been spending trillions of dollars on for decades. Millions of lives lost. Tens of millions displaced. Massive political and reputational costs. Incalculable opportunity cost.
> It's just incredible to me that people are totally unable to grasp that concept that war isn't some friendly board game, or guns at ten paces, all civilised, orderly, and confined entirely to willing participants. It's the deliberate infliction of death and destruction!
Do you actually think the people who drew up international war crimes legislation were unaware of this? ... Really? Like, they lived through WWII and then just forgot about all the horror while writing up the legislation to try and prevent it ever happening again?
> They pointed at a error, not a crime.
That is a categorical lie. You're lying now. People pointed you to detailed statements explaining why this is a war crime, and rather than address any of those points you insist that these 498 schools are all errors because we can't prove intent. You can't seriously expect people to believe that, so I have to wonder why you're saying it at all.
Maybe you believe this lie, somehow, but it's extremely disrespectful to bs like this. It disrespects the victims of these war crimes, the people who will be hurt by the normalization of these war crimes, and the people spending their lovely Saturday time to educate you.
every single act by the US military in recent times is a war crime,pre meditated murder against people who pose no physical threat to the US, without a declaration of war.
The very first act by the newly formed US military was the execution of unarmed women and children of a native tribe defending there ancient homeland.
And the latest killing of one old Iatola and 200 little girls displays the wanton criminal and genocidal intent of a nation in deep denial.
To this address the fact that Hegseth has repeatedly claimed that the US will not be constrained by stupid rules of engagement, that's more or less is an encouragement for war crimes.
> Shannon Bosch, an associate professor of law at Edith Cowan University, analyzed the strike from the perspective of international humanitarian law (IHL). Without drawing firm conclusions, Bosch noted that schools and children under 18 are especially protected under IHL, concluding that "the legality of that strike turns on whether the expected harm to children and the school was excessive compared to the military advantage gained by striking the target."[36] UN human rights experts characterized the strike as a potential war crime under the Rome Statute.[87] Regarding the attack, international humanitarian law expert Janina Dill said that attackers are required to "verify the status" of targets to avoid harming civilians. Beth Van Schaack said the US "should have known that a school was in the vicinity".[30] HRW said the same, adding that beyond the laws of war requiring precise intelligence, the strike's proximity to civilian infrastructure required advanced notice.[3]
From the wikipedia. Honestly with this kind of disregard for human life exhibited by the above commenter, the aggressors deserve everything thats coming to them. Absolutely disgusting.
What about unguided bombs? When they strike an apartment building, the person firing it can't be guilty. He never aimed at an apartment building. Right?
The real rule here is that only the people with precision weapons can be seen as guilty.
Exactly. And the inverse holds too. Precision capability raises the duty to verify, which is precisely what Van Schaack and HRW argue the US failed to do here.
If having precision weapons raises the duty to verify, does it follow that having unguided weapons raises the duty to not use them at all, since the operator doesn't know what it will strike?
IHL applies to all parties and all weapon types. Using unguided weapons in populated areas carries its own legal exposure, yes. But that's a separate analysis.
The discussion here is about a specific strike by the state with the most advanced intelligence and precision strike capability on earth, where multiple legal experts have concluded the duty to verify was not met. The question of what other actors do with less precise weapons doesn't mitigate that failure.
> the US and Israel have not yet committed anything that would constitute a war crime.
Targeting and blowing up schools full of little girls [0] is in fact an atrocity and a war crime. Double and triple tapping it? War crimes upon war crimes.
You probably heard about that, and I've no idea why you're not mentioning it... However, did you hear about the other 497 schools that have been targeted [1]? Or the 281 medical centers, hospitals, and pharmacies? The 17 Red Crescent bases, and 94 ambulances and rescue vehicles that have also been damaged [1]?
498 schools. Think on that for a minute. Think about it for 498 minutes.
Blowing up unarmed ships, and then leaving their soldiers to drown without providing aid [2] - also a war crime; also an atrocity.
Ecocide, giving residents of Tehran generations of "cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment, DNA damage and cancer" - war crime [3].
The US is putting ICC judges under sanctions for daring to investigate their war crimes [4]. We've had a longstanding policy of threatening "to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court" [5].
And all of that isn't even touching what the US and Israel have been responsible for in Gaza, a bipartisan live-streamed genocide and holocaust.
> the combined force are not “carpet bombing”
Tell that to Rafah [6].
> Trump threatened one (blowing up civilian power stations), but he hasn’t followed through.
You certain about that? [7]
I don't know where you are getting your information, but you really need to get out of your bubble if you think all this is just propaganda.
Americans don't seem to realize they've opened Pandora's box. There are no easy wins in Middle East. This is not alike teasing Denmark over Greenland. It will last long years, five years will be short. This is your full time job now, this is your life now.
Plenty of Americans do. The structure of the US government means that I have no meaningful influence through my vote, and it’s unclear how to protest effectively from a the exurbs of a flyover state. So what the hell can any of us do?
Not to mention, they've even put their allies on shaky grounds now. I have Emirati friends, and all of them told me that they're hearing that none of their compatriots are happy with the war, as well as with the government's current posturing about allying with Israel, even though it was a 50/50 support for it when the Abraham Accords were signed. With full support for US actions, they've only strengthened the case for radicalization and dissident actions in their homeland.
Not to mention, the image of the GCC, particularly Dubai, as a stable oasis in the midst of a reckless desert, has been shattered. All the rich folk have already left (including some in my network), and companies are unilaterally laying off workers and shutting down.
There's also the issue of divisions within the GCC itself - there are many influential rulers who were caught completely unawares by US actions, and secretly voicing criticism against the federal authority's actions.
Dubai and the Emirates in general should have concerned themselves first with securing the freedom of navigation of the Persian Gulf, and then with building a playground for adults. But they didn't and expected someone else to do it for them.
That someone else still has military bases there, the expectation was until recently on a solid ground. I'm actually not sure that someone else disengaging from that region was the plan, but maybe it will be the result after all.
> an embittered Iran
Very little to nothing about why Iran might be 'feeling bitter'. Amazing how our media can simply glide right over hundreds of war crimes and atrocities.
[flagged]
Threatening collective punishment (intimidation) is an article 33 war crime.
I don't have much time to look up the historical list but here one in the last 24h:https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/university-of-science-a...
One thing you can at least respect about this administration is that they call a spade a spade. All the "war crimes," "human rights," "equal justice" talk from the previous administrations was nauseating.
There is an Iranian claim of a US attack on a desalination plant on the island of Qeshm that has been reported in Chinese media. There is also a statement from Hegseth saying that no quarter shall be given, which is forbidden even as a statement.
He seems to have gone all in on Joshua and Deuteronomy.
I agree that the act of carrying out Hesgeth's statement would be a war crime. But can you elaborate on "forbidden even as a statement"?
The second Hague convention article 23 (d) states that "In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden [...] (d) To declare that no quarter will be given".
> As far as I can tell, the US and Israel have not yet committed anything that would constitute a war crime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_attack
> According to witness accounts verified by satellite-based analyses, the school was triple tapped by three distinct strikes.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-iranian-girls-k...
> Eyewitnesses describe second blast which killed survivors as they sheltered in prayer hall
The US didn't ratify the Rome Statute which gives them a carte blanche on war crimes.
What a great club to be in, along with Russia, Israel and Sudan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat...
Not a part of ICC, therefore no war crimes, right?
And now we also have a parallel UN just because the UN has become an object of mockery due to largely the same permanent members that can veto any decision.
Pretending that there's international law, even a court to enforce it, is just closing one's eyes. It's all talk when the court is alone, without any police power to enforce its judgements. The Rome Statute and the ICC exist to make people feel better, to have people believe that the world is just thanks to a few brave bureaucrats. These bureaucrats issue statements, judgements, even arrest warrants! That sounds serious. The judges even look serious.
"Might makes right" is not a smart or sensible way for a sentient species to make decisions. We depend on trust and cooperation to achieve our potential.
All the work being done to tear that to shreds (as imperfect as it always was) seems to hinge on the unaccountable Epstein class being allowed free reign to commit the most heinous atrocities imaginable... But we do outnumber those people, by a lot.
> The Rome Statute and the ICC exist to make people feel better, to have people believe that the world is just thanks to a few brave bureaucrats.
If that were entirely true, the US wouldn't work so hard on things like the Hague Invasion act, or on sanctioning ICC judges... Or on propaganda to make people believe that 'international law' is just a sanctimonious lie.
I agree with you that I wish for trust and cooperation. But that's just not the way the world is. There is no international law. There really isn't, however much we wish it to be. And therefore bringing up statutes and the ICC is just talk. It does nothing to improve the situation or to influence it in any way.
Calling it a “school attack” implies deliberate targeting of a civilian facility.
It was obviously an error because the building used to be a military facility and is on the campus of a military base!
Yes, the deaths of the school children is absolutely horrific, I weep for their poor parents.
But it is not a war crime.
Errors, collateral damage, and civilian deaths are not war crimes!
Words have meaning, legal terms have precise definitions.
You undermine your cause if you refuse to use valid arguments, or if you misuse terminology.
> It was obviously an error because the building used to be a military facility
It is obvious to you because you want to believe it. It is not obvious to me at all. Here are my reasons.
I find it very hard to believe that they have not updated their map in the last 10-15 year of a country that (i) both the US and Israel have been itching to bomb for multiple decades and (ii) is riddled with HUMINT.
Israel's history of knowingly bombing schools in the past (in Egypt) certainly does not help the case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahr_El-Baqar_primary_school_b...
The pilot later went on to claim that this was deliberate.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/3/questions-over-minab...Given the repetition, it smells target selection policy to me rather than an accident.
These kids would have been kids of IRGC personnel. Likely that was the reason.
The attacks, and follow through double taps, on alleged drug boats in South / Central Americas is a US war crime on multiple counts - perfidy, willful killing, lack of declaration of war, .. etc.
The US led "war of aggression" during peace negotiations as an undeclared attack is as much a war crime as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour.
The US school attacks in Iran might not have been delibrate targeting of civilians, but it was certainly negligent killing of civilians as an unforced error, planned in advance prior to an undeclared attack made during a period of negotiation.
Pointless arguing that here, and it'll never properly land in an international court ... so it's moot.
> double taps, on alleged drug boats
Those are war crimes, and the US specifically teaches that specific scenario to their naval officers as something that can land them in serious legal trouble.
The school attack was a double tap. A triple tap, even: first one strike, then a second strike timed when first responders would be assumed to be at the scene, then a hit on the closest medical clinic.
Where's the legal trouble?
Hegseth specifically said they wouldn't bother with rules of war, they are confirmed to have committed one thing even you agree is a war crime, so why do you want to give them the benefit of the doubt on the choice of target?
I don't think you would have given declared US enemies the benefit of that doubt, in a similar situation.
I don't think you need to be very biased to consider this a war of aggression.
Which, incidentally, is itself considered an international crime.
So, these children would be alive and as well as one can be inside the theocracy that is Iran unless the US and Israel committed the international crime of a war of aggression?
> Calling it a “school attack” implies deliberate targeting of a civilian facility.
>It was obviously an error because the building used to be a military facility and is on the campus of a military base!
... No actually, being on the campus of a military base doesn't make bombing an elementary school full of children not a war crime. If it helps, try imagining Iran bombing a school on a US military base.
And I can't help but notice that you're not mentioning the 497 other targeted schools which I made you aware of.
> try imagining Iran bombing a school on a US military base.
The US doesn't generally intermingle their children with their military bases... I hope.
Even if they did, and the base got bombed during a war, and it was obviously a targeting/aiming/intelligence error... then... well... it is war. Shit happens! Compare this to WWII, where all sides carpet bombed entire cities on purpose, with the deliberate aim of flattening them to rubble, civilians included.
PS: Something like over half of all high-rise apartment buildings that get hit by cruise missiles is because their targeting software and/or maps are shit and not "3D enough" to account for tall buildings in the way of the actual target. Yes, that's hubris with lethal consequences, but not technically a war crime. It's merely war.
In the UK and I assume elsewhere they do at least at the major sites. There is the onsite housing, leisure facilities and in some cases schools. Lakenheath has a couple onsite serving the various bases in the area for those wanting to stick with US curriculum vs local schools.
> The US doesn't generally intermingle their children with their military bases... I hope.
There's no need to 'hope' against reality. This information is easily available to us both - there are tens of thousands of K-12 students on US military bases, in America and in other countries [0].
> it was obviously a targeting/aiming/intelligence error
... You're still somehow ignoring the 497 other schools targeted within these last few weeks. It's like your brain simply refuses to process that information - perhaps because it would force a perspective shift?
(Spoiler alert: We are the baddies. 498 schools in 4 weeks is pretty unambiguous, especially following the US involvement in bombing basically every school in Gaza.)
> it is war. Shit happens!
War crimes are not excused by 'being at war'. That's not how it works.
Many people here have already pointed out to you the many reasons and the many officials calling the first Iranian school bombing out as a war crime; and I highly encourage you to being to wrap your head around the fact. Defending war crimes is a deeply uncool way to spend your time. It's not good for you, or for the people reading it.
0 - https://www.militaryonesource.mil/education-employment/for-c...
> We are the baddies
Not just "we" as in Americans. Jiggawatts specifically, because I doubt they would be defending this if they weren't employed in one of the organisations now directly helping commit the worst crimes humanity has named.
Please review the site guidelines, especially the parts about personal attacks and assuming good faith.
This is about government acting in bad faith, not the person writing here.
I think that if you see someone defending crimes against humanity, I think saying basically "you haven't come to terms with with how evil the thing you're part of and identifying with has become" is the most charitable you can be.
> tens of thousands of K-12 students on US military bases
Well... that's just stupid, and I hope that someone in the DoD has learned from the incident in Iran and will relocate the schools outside of the base perimeters. I doubt that'll happen somehow.
> 497 other schools targeted
a) You'll have to back that number with a reference.
b) Then demonstrate that they were targeted, not just hit. Good luck with that, unless you work for the DoD and overheard incriminating conversations!
> War crimes are not excused by 'being at war'. That's not how it works.
But war is excused!
It's just incredible to me that people are totally unable to grasp that concept that war isn't some friendly board game, or guns at ten paces, all civilised, orderly, and confined entirely to willing participants. It's the deliberate infliction of death and destruction!
> Many people here have already pointed out to you the many reasons and the many officials calling the first Iranian school bombing out as a war crime
They pointed at a error, not a crime.
A terrible, terrible error, but not a crime under international law, to which the US mostly hasn't even signed up to!
> a) You'll have to back that number with a reference.
I did, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47552783
> Then demonstrate that they were targeted, not just hit.
If you want to believe that 498 schools were hit by accident and not by targeting then you are free to do so. Personally, I think that's a profoundly silly and genuinely harmful choice to make, and would urge you not just to reconsider, but to reflect on how you ever thought such a thing.
> But war is excused!
Well, no. There are long and lasting consequences for wars of the type America has been spending trillions of dollars on for decades. Millions of lives lost. Tens of millions displaced. Massive political and reputational costs. Incalculable opportunity cost.
> It's just incredible to me that people are totally unable to grasp that concept that war isn't some friendly board game, or guns at ten paces, all civilised, orderly, and confined entirely to willing participants. It's the deliberate infliction of death and destruction!
Do you actually think the people who drew up international war crimes legislation were unaware of this? ... Really? Like, they lived through WWII and then just forgot about all the horror while writing up the legislation to try and prevent it ever happening again?
> They pointed at a error, not a crime.
That is a categorical lie. You're lying now. People pointed you to detailed statements explaining why this is a war crime, and rather than address any of those points you insist that these 498 schools are all errors because we can't prove intent. You can't seriously expect people to believe that, so I have to wonder why you're saying it at all.
Maybe you believe this lie, somehow, but it's extremely disrespectful to bs like this. It disrespects the victims of these war crimes, the people who will be hurt by the normalization of these war crimes, and the people spending their lovely Saturday time to educate you.
every single act by the US military in recent times is a war crime,pre meditated murder against people who pose no physical threat to the US, without a declaration of war. The very first act by the newly formed US military was the execution of unarmed women and children of a native tribe defending there ancient homeland. And the latest killing of one old Iatola and 200 little girls displays the wanton criminal and genocidal intent of a nation in deep denial.
They bombed a school full of children. Are you serious?
[flagged]
> The US didn't know about the change because of imperfect intelligence.
One needs to execute many mental contortions to believe that. Many things needed to have gone wrong simultaneously to get to that outcome.
When it is a repeat, it's probably policy. Occam's razor would agree.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/3/questions-over-minab...
To this address the fact that Hegseth has repeatedly claimed that the US will not be constrained by stupid rules of engagement, that's more or less is an encouragement for war crimes.
More of my thoughts here
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47553343
> Shannon Bosch, an associate professor of law at Edith Cowan University, analyzed the strike from the perspective of international humanitarian law (IHL). Without drawing firm conclusions, Bosch noted that schools and children under 18 are especially protected under IHL, concluding that "the legality of that strike turns on whether the expected harm to children and the school was excessive compared to the military advantage gained by striking the target."[36] UN human rights experts characterized the strike as a potential war crime under the Rome Statute.[87] Regarding the attack, international humanitarian law expert Janina Dill said that attackers are required to "verify the status" of targets to avoid harming civilians. Beth Van Schaack said the US "should have known that a school was in the vicinity".[30] HRW said the same, adding that beyond the laws of war requiring precise intelligence, the strike's proximity to civilian infrastructure required advanced notice.[3]
From the wikipedia. Honestly with this kind of disregard for human life exhibited by the above commenter, the aggressors deserve everything thats coming to them. Absolutely disgusting.
What about unguided bombs? When they strike an apartment building, the person firing it can't be guilty. He never aimed at an apartment building. Right? The real rule here is that only the people with precision weapons can be seen as guilty.
Exactly. And the inverse holds too. Precision capability raises the duty to verify, which is precisely what Van Schaack and HRW argue the US failed to do here.
If having precision weapons raises the duty to verify, does it follow that having unguided weapons raises the duty to not use them at all, since the operator doesn't know what it will strike?
IHL applies to all parties and all weapon types. Using unguided weapons in populated areas carries its own legal exposure, yes. But that's a separate analysis.
The discussion here is about a specific strike by the state with the most advanced intelligence and precision strike capability on earth, where multiple legal experts have concluded the duty to verify was not met. The question of what other actors do with less precise weapons doesn't mitigate that failure.
> the US and Israel have not yet committed anything that would constitute a war crime.
Targeting and blowing up schools full of little girls [0] is in fact an atrocity and a war crime. Double and triple tapping it? War crimes upon war crimes.
You probably heard about that, and I've no idea why you're not mentioning it... However, did you hear about the other 497 schools that have been targeted [1]? Or the 281 medical centers, hospitals, and pharmacies? The 17 Red Crescent bases, and 94 ambulances and rescue vehicles that have also been damaged [1]?
498 schools. Think on that for a minute. Think about it for 498 minutes.
Blowing up unarmed ships, and then leaving their soldiers to drown without providing aid [2] - also a war crime; also an atrocity.
Ecocide, giving residents of Tehran generations of "cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment, DNA damage and cancer" - war crime [3].
The US is putting ICC judges under sanctions for daring to investigate their war crimes [4]. We've had a longstanding policy of threatening "to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court" [5].
And all of that isn't even touching what the US and Israel have been responsible for in Gaza, a bipartisan live-streamed genocide and holocaust.
> the combined force are not “carpet bombing”
Tell that to Rafah [6].
> Trump threatened one (blowing up civilian power stations), but he hasn’t followed through.
You certain about that? [7]
I don't know where you are getting your information, but you really need to get out of your bubble if you think all this is just propaganda.
0 - https://www.amnestyusa.org/blog/u-s-responsible-for-killing-...
1 - https://truthout.org/articles/us-israeli-attacks-have-damage...
2 - https://x.com/KanwalSibal/status/2029438199546954240
3 - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/23/tehran-toxic-c...
4 - https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/international-criminal-court-de...
5 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...
6 - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/C2Xt05-i19E
7 - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/bushehr-nuclear-plant-h...
War crimes only counts as such from the looser side.
Plus whatever gets discussed at United Nations is proven to be only rhetoric.
Americans don't seem to realize they've opened Pandora's box. There are no easy wins in Middle East. This is not alike teasing Denmark over Greenland. It will last long years, five years will be short. This is your full time job now, this is your life now.
Plenty of Americans do. The structure of the US government means that I have no meaningful influence through my vote, and it’s unclear how to protest effectively from a the exurbs of a flyover state. So what the hell can any of us do?
Not to mention, they've even put their allies on shaky grounds now. I have Emirati friends, and all of them told me that they're hearing that none of their compatriots are happy with the war, as well as with the government's current posturing about allying with Israel, even though it was a 50/50 support for it when the Abraham Accords were signed. With full support for US actions, they've only strengthened the case for radicalization and dissident actions in their homeland.
Not to mention, the image of the GCC, particularly Dubai, as a stable oasis in the midst of a reckless desert, has been shattered. All the rich folk have already left (including some in my network), and companies are unilaterally laying off workers and shutting down.
There's also the issue of divisions within the GCC itself - there are many influential rulers who were caught completely unawares by US actions, and secretly voicing criticism against the federal authority's actions.
Dubai and the Emirates in general should have concerned themselves first with securing the freedom of navigation of the Persian Gulf, and then with building a playground for adults. But they didn't and expected someone else to do it for them.
That someone else still has military bases there, the expectation was until recently on a solid ground. I'm actually not sure that someone else disengaging from that region was the plan, but maybe it will be the result after all.