Nothing in the UN report claims that this was an intentional strike on civilians. They make NO claim to that effect.

The claim is that "the U.S. failed in its obligation to do everything feasible to verify that it was a military objective. Updating targeting information and acting upon such information falls within the category of feasible precautions an attacking party is required to take under IHL . . . the strikes are a violation of the obligation to distinguish between civilian objects.

And:

" the Mission concluded that when targeting the school building, the U.S acted wilfully, that is with the requisite mental element of recklessness ( dolus eventualis)."

And (finally):

". . . the Mission found that these strikes constituted an indiscriminate attack in violation of the principle of distinction."

The UN report's claim is that the US negligently used outdated information which led them to think this compound hit was still a military target.

It's evident you didn't read the report and submitted a shitpost.

The comment you're replying to doesn't say anything about the UN report, it's just about the double-tap strike.

> It's evident you didn't read the report and submitted a shitpost.

Chill.