I agree with your overall sentiment, but how realistic is it? Israel/US says they've been hitting thousands of targets (so reality might mean ~hundreds, still a lot), how are they supposed to verify this at all?

> Humans should have been double and triple checking every target by other means.

How practically would this happen? The US/Israel don't want people on the ground, and people on the ground is exactly the only way you can actually verify stuff like this, not every place in the world is on Google Maps or have a web presence at all, so the only realistic way to verify this would be to visually inspect it in person, something neither parties who started this war want to do.

Even better, don't make attacks against other soverign nations that don't pose an immediately and critical threat to you, and this whole conflict could have been avoided in the first place.

But no, the president has to be involved in some sort of child-trafficking scheme, so pulling the country into a war seemed preferable to being held responsible, and now we're here, arguing about fucking details that don't matter.

▲

free_bip 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The school literally had its own website. If the AI involved was as smart as the media hype machine makes them out to be, it would have found the website and marked it as a non-target. It never even would have made it to human review.

▲

ok_dad 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In this case, they would have discovered it was a school with a Google search, basically. There’s no excuse.

▲

jdross 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm pretty sure this is the school that was on the corner of a military base, and the school building hit was previously part of the military base.

▲

dghlsakjg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's a non excuse.

I live near a military base, and there is a daycare, school, rec center, pub, ice rink, church, and grocery store, open to the public, and not managed by the military. All of it is on land owned by the military, but outside the wire.

The fact that these facilities exist on military land near a base (which a hostile government would surely argue IS the base) does not mean that the people in those buildings have it coming.

▲

jmye 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Does that make it not a school, somehow? Or are we cool with killing kids just because their parents might be in the military? I'm not clear what the excuse being made actually is.

▲

hackerstuff 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It's definitely not cool to have a school adjacent to a military base. Not saying this specific attack was justified, but whoever allowed this, let alone if it was done intentionally as a strategy, also has blood on their hands.

	▲	mikeyouse 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Where do you think the children of our armed forces go to school? There are hundreds of schools on or adjacent to military installations in the US. The only people with blood on their hands for bombing a school are the people who bombed the school. It’s really not more complicated than that.
	▲	ok_dad 31 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Bro, American bases have schools all over them, houses with families, etc.
	▲	jmye 8 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> It's definitely not cool to have a school adjacent to a military base. Not saying this specific attack was justified I mean, you kind of are saying it was justified, given the entirety of your focus is on justifying it. The blood is solely on the hands of the useless, dumbshit military that couldn't identify a school and avoid bombing it. And that's the charitable interpretation of their actions.

▲

Tostino 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Or the vast satellite network we run. Pretty easy to see it's school children going in and out of the area.

▲

bilbo0s 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

To be fair, we don't really have the capacity to run satellite surveillance on each and every target we select to engage in a sneak attack.

I think sometimes people watch hollywood movies and get the impression that it represents a kind of cataloging of our military capabilities. A demonstration of what we can do to our enemies. With the underlying subtext being "don't mess with us."

I just want to gently suggest that not everything we see in movies is factual with respect to military or intelligence capabilities.

I'm an old timer. I got off the bus at Quantico in 1991. But even though I'm not in right now, I'd feel confident in betting that we don't have the capacity to surveil that many targets via satellite for, say, 1 week, prior to our attack.

(Of course, when I got off the bus at Quantico in '91 I also would have been just as confident in betting that the US would never engage in a first strike. So what do I know?)

	▲	ok_dad 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		So don’t sneak attack. Easy solution.