What allows liberals to claim that this could not be intentional, deliberate and voluntary?
There is no ground to be do that. It means nothing. The US have backed liberal Israel whose snipers killed children with one bullet in the head and the heart. A signature. And that is only recent history.
There is no ground to claim that the targeting was not intentional.
If a military deliberately targets a school full of children, then that is a blatant Evil war crime. It means innocent children were knowingly treated as expendable.
There is no strategy, no politics and no excuse on earth that can justify killing children on purpose. That is a complete moral collapse.
In a interview with Donald Trump and Hegseth, they tried to pin it on Iran. Saying Iran couldn't "Aim properly in the First place" and the "US Military never misses".
That Hegseth guy couldn't even look at the camera and kept his eyes down, while saying they will investigate it further. And we all know they will not investigate it further.
I do hope that the UN get there act together, and start a official investigation.
There is a snake in the grass. This is not the USA Military from the past! I agree with Rooinek.
Trump is a puppet and his main concern, is not getting exposed by the Epstein files. Him and his administration is Spineless Gangsters.
Nonsense...there is no way this was on purpose...unless it was sabotage by a sleeper...highly unlikely... deliberate bad intel... negligence...error in execution...anything but an deliberate target by the US military...why on earth would the deliberately cause the negative publicity resulting from this? It makes no sense.
It is very funny how bizarre liberals keep denying themselves.
The public negativity is very relative, the free press giving Trump on nearly everything and more than anything, the public negativity has zero influence on the outcome. Liberals behave as if polls showing that liberals do not accept their responsibility in the strike will change anything.
It will change nothing. Even better, liberals boast on how Trump is non submersible relatively to public opinion.
The non sense is not to point out that, the non sense is to keep picturing public negativity as a determining factor while also stating that public negativity has no grip on Trump.
As usual, liberals invert everything.
Nonsense...there is no way this was on purpose...unless it was sabotage by a sleeper...highly unlikely... deliberate bad intel... negligence...error in execution...anything but an deliberate target by the US military
Agreed, it makes no sense at all
At all as at all. How does it compare to telling that drugs traders could have not figured their boats disappearing without a publication of the videos...
Ja right guys, keep telling yourselves it wasn’t deliberate. Who else is using Tomahawk missiles, huh?
You can keep playing the “mistake” and “collateral damage” game if you want, but at the end of the day we are talking about human lives. Children died.
Research done by AI:
The Tomahawk Missile were developed specifically for the U.S. military by American defense companies.
The Tomahawk cruise missile was originally developed in the 1970s for the United States Navy. The main contractor that designed and built the early versions was General Dynamics.
Later, the program and production were taken over by Raytheon (now part of RTX). Raytheon still manufactures and upgrades the Tomahawk today.
So the structure works like this:
The U.S. military defines the weapon requirements and funds the program.
Defense contractors design and manufacture the missiles.
The U.S. Navy (and sometimes submarines or ships) launch and operate them.
Well, if you believe Trump is the Devil reincarnated and a child molesting pedophile, you would probably believe he will deliberately murder innocent school girls. I don't.
Okay….M you and Trad claim it was a deliberate strike to destroy a school. You stress these missiles are directed, so not collateral damage……what’s the motivation, what’s the payoff. Give us one plausible reason why the US would do this knowing full well it will lead to justifiable anger.
Where's the apology?
Repeating "we're investigating" all the time or Bozo claiming he doesn't know about it is not exactly what the world needs to hear.
Never apologise, never explain. The mob want neither.
Well Xavi, Bozo certainly lives by your creed. He undertsands it even if I don't.
Ok Moz, firstly i would like to know what the official report says about the munitions depot they were supposedly targeting.
Where exactly was this depot? How far away was it from the school? And was the depot actually destroyed or not?
Because if the school was hit by mistake while aiming at a munitions depot, those details matter.
So what possible motives could there be if the strike was deliberate:
Fear and intimidation. If you bomb a school and kill a large number of children, the message could be, if we can do this, we can do anything.
Another one could be propaganda. Where each side tries to control the narrative and blame the other side for civilian deaths.
And the last one is that Netanyahu are pursuing ethnic cleansing and therefore, even the children who will grow up to become citizens of that country and enemies to Isreal.
So I am not saying that this is true at all, but it can be tactics and history shows it has been used in many wars before this one.
Okay….M you and Trad claim it was a deliberate strike to destroy a school. You stress these missiles are directed, so not collateral damage……what’s the motivation, what’s the payoff. Give us one plausible reason why the US would do this knowing full well it will lead to justifiable anger.
It is very funny as liberals have this urge to distort.
The OP does read nothing like that: here again what it reads. Liberals jumped to the conclusion that the US did not take the strike deliberately. On what ground? How did liberal reach the conclusion that the US could not have taken the strike deliberately? There will no answer to this and that is how liberals are urged to distort. As a reminder, the US backed as much as possible liberal Israel that killed many civilians on purpose, and among other targets, sniped kids. On what ground is it possible to affirm that oh no, the US could not have done it.
As to justifiable anger... What is that? Okay, people get angry on a justified ground as the US took the strike. And what? What is supposed to happen? What would be the consequences of that justifiable anger?
See how it works; liberals claimed the US could not have done without providing any ground, any context to explain their conclusion. And second, they throw in absolute garbage like public negativity, justifiable anger as if it could matter a bit for the US.
There is nothing.
Now for potential motivations, there could be a number of them. And the good news, peeps, is that this was scheduled to be addressed in one incoming big admission thread. It was planned and time is missing at the moment.
That is not the topic of the thread. The thread is that liberals claim the US could not have done it without providing anything cogent to support their claim.
"Ok Moz, firstly i would like to know what the official report says about the munitions depot they were supposedly targeting.
Where exactly was this depot? How far away was it from the school? And was the depot actually destroyed or not?
Because if the school was hit by mistake while aiming at a munitions depot, those details matter.
So what possible motives could there be if the strike was deliberate:
Fear and intimidation. If you bomb a school and kill a large number of children, the message could be, if we can do this, we can do anything.
Another one could be propaganda. Where each side tries to control the narrative and blame the other side for civilian deaths.
And the last one is that Netanyahu are pursuing ethnic cleansing and therefore, even the children who will grow up to become citizens of that country and enemies to Isreal.
So I am not saying that this is true at all, but it can be tactics and history shows it has been used in many wars before this one."
A lot of conjecture, speculation, assumptions and opinions without any substantive argument to justify a very serious allegation...
“A lot of conjecture, speculation, assumptions and opinions without any substantive argument to justify a very serious allegation…”
OK DB, where is your substantive argument or proof that this was not deliberately done?
Moz asked: “Give us one plausible reason why the US would do this knowing full well it will lead to justifiable anger.”
So I gave him possible reasons, but I stated very clearly that I am not saying they are factual or true.
"Moz asked: “Give us one plausible reason why the US would do this knowing full well it will lead to justifiable anger.”
So I gave him possible reasons, but I stated very clearly that I am not saying they are factual or true."
None of your possible reasons were remotely plausible.
Why not? Just because you say so?
Go do a bit of research, DB… read some articles on past and present wars.
Then you will see that all three are plausible reasons and have been used as tactics in almost all wars.
Just because you don’t like the answers doesn’t mean they can’t be considered.
You do not give any concrete evidence to prove otherwise. That’s lazy and just avoiding the debate.
There's no reasoning with a Trumpanzee. They're so quick to leap to the defence of their hero they don't bother reading or understanding the criticism or the question.
It's all just TDS to them.
So what possible motives could there be if the strike was deliberate:
Fear and intimidation. If you bomb a school and kill a large number of children, the message could be, if we can do this, we can do anything.
Another one could be propaganda. Where each side tries to control the narrative and blame the other side for civilian deaths.
And the last one is that Netanyahu are pursuing ethnic cleansing and therefore, even the children who will grow up to become citizens of that country and enemies to Isreal.
So I am not saying that this is true at all, but it can be tactics and history shows it has been used in many wars before this one.
Nope, nobody is going to be intimidated by hitting a school. And nope you don’t win the propaganda narrative by hitting a school. And nope Netanyahu wouldn’t do this, besides which the evidence points to a US strike,
This was a tragic mistake. I have no doubt, given how generous the American people are, there will eventually be a fund established for families of these children. And I’ll certainly contribute to it,