this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
182 points (97.9% liked)

World News

54421 readers
3296 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The attackers’ ability to spare newly established adjacent facilities (such as the Martyr Absalan clinic) and their glaring failure to avoid an elementary school operating at full capacity and packed with 170 girls leaves us with two scenarios, both unequivocally condemnatory: Either US and Israeli forces relied, in striking the vicinity of the Asif Brigade, on a very old, outdated intelligence target bank (dating to before 2013), which would constitute grave negligence and reckless disregard for civilian lives; or the strike was carried out deliberately and with prior knowledge to inflict maximum societal shock and undermine popular support for Iran’s military establishment.

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 hours ago

Israel, having done this multiple times in Gaza, knew with absolute certainty that they'll get away with it once again.

[–] kittykillinit@lemy.lol 4 points 13 hours ago

Schrodinger's US intel

[–] thekerker@lemmy.world 9 points 16 hours ago

Of course it was deliberate: Israel wouldn’t have been involved unless it was able to bomb children.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 12 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Given what I have read, I agree with Al Jazeera's evaluation. Either highly outdated info and no effort to update it (colorful murals on exterior walls, regular traffic by parents --> chances of updating the designation of the object)...

...or just people who give zero damns, or even worse, some form of AI generating target lists which people blindly rubberstamp, Israeli style.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Or whatever random Israeli asset gave a suggestion, and then they rubberstamped it.

Making shit up is a popular tactic to not get your blackmail file released or get paid or whatever.

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 15 hours ago

It makes sense that it was deliberate. Israel doesn't want regime change, they want a failed state in Iran. And the rally-round-the-flag effect the bombing and martyrdom of 165 school girls, and the subsequent longer war it will cause, gives them just that

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 23 points 22 hours ago (5 children)

How would this attack "undermine popular support for Iran's military establishment"?

I think one of the reasons for this was to stir up protests here in the U.S., so they have an excuse to take over the mid-term elections, and perhaps start marshal law.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 22 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

A common belief amongst some people, right or wrong, is that if you hurt someone badly enough they'll do what you want because that path becomes less painful.
Those people believe that sending the message "war with the US means all your children die" will result in people furiously demanding that their military stop fighting to prevent the killing.

It's quite literally the abuser mindset but applied to nations. "I wouldn't have to hurt you if you had just done what I said".
This fits with who's in power.

[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

And to finish the point, it failed in ww2 strategic civilian bombing and itll fail here.

It just doesnt work. At least the uk in ww2 didnt have dresden in history books to know better.

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

It did work in Japan though. But better don't tell them how far they'll have to go for it to have effect.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 12 points 19 hours ago

It actually didn't. The carpet bombing and flattening of cities didn't make the population want to give up or turn on the military.
The first nuclear weapon didn't either.
The second made the emperor inclined to surrender, when paired with a declaration of war by the Soviet Union.

The civilian population never posed a significant threat to the stability of the military or imperial rule.

People aren't generally idiots, and will lean towards supporting the people fighting the people who are hurting them. You may not like them, and you may want them to do something else, but you're unlikely to trust the party that is currently trying to kill you.

"Take off your armor and we'll stop shooting" just isn't a compelling argument.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah, but the US and Israeli militaries in specific are well aware of how bad optics make a military campaign harder. They're not those people.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You say that, but also... They specifically said this wasn't going to be a "politically correct war" with "rules of engagement".

https://www.war.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/4418959/secretary-of-war-pete-hegseth-and-chairman-of-the-joint-chiefs-of-staff-gen-dan/

This is the generational turning point America has waited for since 1979 and since the rudderless wars of hubris

No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win

Remember that while sensible people know optics matter, there are people who think the problem with Vietnam was that we were too soft on them, and too soft on domestic political dissident.
Those are the people currently in power. They are not competent military thinkers. They view strength the same way the people who were blindsided by our loss in Vietnam viewed it. We can't lose because we have more weapons. If the enemy is still fighting it's because we haven't bombed hard enough. Anyone who wants to hold back is weak.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, he also said there that they didn't start that war. Hagseth is a politician saying things he knows are untrue for domestic political consumption.

It's possible he believes some of this stuff in private, and Trump earnestly believes all kinds of crazy stuff. The generals and officers that pick targets and run strikes are still the same ones from Afghanistan, though.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. Unless they were fired for being "woke" and replaced by people who think bombing Iran will help usher in Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.

What has he done to make you think he deserves the benefit of the doubt? What in this administration makes you remain confident that somewhere deep down there's a responsible adult who'll calm things down? They bragged about letting Elon musk fire all those people.

Why do you think the people who ran Afghanistan wouldn't bomb a school? They bombed weddings. Hospitals. Shot children.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 49 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago) (1 children)

Sure. Unless they were fired for being “woke” and replaced by people who think bombing Iran will help usher in Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.

Yes, no guarantee it will stay that way going into the future.

What has he done to make you think he deserves the benefit of the doubt?

Who's "he"? Hagseth is assumed to be an average red-flavour grifter, Trump is Trump and gets no benefit of anything.

Why do you think the people who ran Afghanistan wouldn’t bomb a school? They bombed weddings. Hospitals. Shot children.

What makes you think I want to try and prove a negative against someone who's about to whip out a bunch of isolated anecdotes?

I don't, I'm just going to ignore any further inquiries on this.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

I mean, they're already replaced people with people like I was describing. That's not a hypothetical.

"he" referred to hegseth, who you seemed to be assuming probably didn't believe the rhetoric he was using.

No one asked you to prove a negative. You expressed that the war being waged by the people who were in Afghanistan was a reassurance that they cared about the optics of brutality. I asked why you think that, given the things that happened in Afghanistan. "Things they've done" aren't somehow irrelevant anecdotes.

We're talking about the distinction between people who think civilian casualties are justifiable as opposed to those who think it's a tool.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 14 minutes ago* (last edited 6 minutes ago)

Well, what are you asking me to prove about Afghanistan, then? 95% chance that was going to segue into "clean war exists and happened there" vs. a specific conspiratorial worldview. I'm not going to play that.

who you seemed to be assuming probably didn’t believe the rhetoric he was using.

He has no actual relevant background besides Fox News shill. Some of those guys are progressive in private, they just like the money.

Hell, even if that wasn't true, politician is a sales job, left or right. Source: Do politics in real life, too.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

marshal law.

Lol this used to be so common in Pakistan, that the natural dialect and dictation caused people to pronounce it as one word: Marshalah

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 18 hours ago

It wouldn't, and the powers attacking here know that. It's something else.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, killing civilians only makes people fight harder, and the US knows this. If it was them responsible, it was a screw up.

[–] UnityDevice@lemmy.zip 2 points 18 hours ago

What you're missing is that they want the people to fight them so they have an excuse to attack them more. And these excuses work retroactively too. They bomb, wait for a retaliation, then they say "see, we were right to bomb them," followed by an even bigger attack. Repeat till there's nothing left to bomb.

[–] SarahValentine@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 21 hours ago

They hate education, they hate children, they hate women. If it weren't deliberate on their part, it would be serendipity.

[–] TwitchingCheese@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

Is this where we learn some Iranian official that insulted Trump had their daughter at that school?

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Yep but given the elites lining up behind this from the news cheering it to Britain, Germany, NATO,Canada and France are aligning with the US blatantly and supporting this with base sharing rhetorical support.

Our governments, at least Canada and UK are very zionist. They are supporting zionism, don't get that mixed up with the perfect excuse that was handed to them.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 2 points 17 hours ago

Well we all know that the terrorist state of Israel hates middle eastern kids and US is kind of in a moronic state right now. So 2+2=4

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 17 hours ago

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.