While I somewhat agree, you should also look at the results of those precision strikes. Usually, when they kill a senior Iranian officer sleeping in his appartment, they level the building or at lest blow up several adjacent units, probably killing at last 10 innocent people.

▲

jandrewrogers 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's an inherent limitation of precision strikes. The objective is minimizing the collateral damage required to achieve the objective, not avoiding it entirely. Even the various explosive-free precision-guided munitions the US uses have a non-zero damage radius.

One can argue whether or not it is a good idea for the bombs to be flying around in the first place, but there is no version of physics that allows anyone to avoid collateral damage as a practical matter.

	▲	breppp 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		This one from the 12 day war did https://www.twz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Iran-scientis...
	▲	TheAlchemist an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I know. I'm just saying that the way we talk about 'precision strikes' in the west, make one feel like only the target is eliminated, while in reality we usually blow half of the building the target was in, along with all the people. I would actually be interested by a poll on what people in the US think about how many innocent people are killed in a precision or elimination strike on average - I bet it would be something like less than 1.

▲

jiggawatts 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Which is not “carpet bombing”.

Use words and phrases correctly, or expect an argument.