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

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 35 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Bro, American bases have schools all over them, houses with families, etc.
	▲	jmye 12 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 39 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 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		So don’t sneak attack. Easy solution.