Thread

Iran school bombing: grounds to believe US was behind atrocity, UN finds

354 points · 307 comments · hebelehubele

boesboes · 1789645981 · focus · HN ↗
That was never a question right?
1. jvanderbot · 1789654384 · focus · HN ↗
  Colloquially, I think it is well accepted that US launched the missiles. The question is whether they indiscriminately targeted civilians.
  NYT did an excellent analysis showing that the US probably did intentionally target the building, believing it to be part of the nearby compound that received several direct strikes. This analysis is really good [1]
  The definition of war crime is not "Killed civilians" it is "targeted civilians" or "reckless indiscriminate attacks". My understanding of the NYT analysis is that this was very plausibly misunderstood to still be part of the iran national guard compound.
  Everyone gets their own opinion on this. There were 900 or so strikes in the first 12h, and only one school hit, and that school was actually part of the compound before. A horrific accident that was brought on by unnecessary hostilities, i think.
  1: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-missile-strike.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-m...
  1. jvanderbot · 1789655428 · focus · HN ↗
    I'll add the definition from the Rome statute that, by my read, establishes a war crime when there is intent to commit the civilian strikes:
    Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime.
    Still this is a legal defense that might plausibly be used during a trial, not necessarily a reason to skip a trial.
    toast0 · 1789659649 · focus · HN ↗
    From that text, it sure sounds to me that these attacks are going to be legal. The article describes them as 'indescriminate', but they were specifically targetted based on a mistake of fact.
    There's certainly evidence that the US was neglegent in relying on old information without verifying. That's serious and reprehensible, but I don't know that that rises to the level of a war crime.
    I'll add that it's not what I want my country's military to be doing and that if I had any power, there would be consequences for the people involved in decision making that led to this, as well as changes in procedure to reduce this type of mistake in the future, and a settlement paid to the people affected by this strike.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.