Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

You're justifying the slaughter of children, just FYI. This is an attempt to excuse what we did, and it's wrong. They can be wrong and we can be wrong. Kids are out of bounds.

You’re either blindly wrapped in your own arguments or are willfully and deliberately distorting what others are saying. Describing why protesters might lack sympathy for IRGC‑connected families is not at all the same thing as justifying killing children. It’s an explanation of political and emotional context, not a moral endorsement of the strike. There is a clear difference between saying "people affected by years of state brutality may not feel compassion for regime elites" and saying "it was right to kill kids." The former is analysis. The latter is something no one here said.

Pointing out that the IRGC and Basij have committed atrocities against children does not mean anyone is arguing that children are legitimate targets. It means the regime’s own actions have created a climate of rage and trauma that shapes how protesters react. That is not justification. That is cause‑and‑effect. If you want to argue the strike was wrong, that’s a valid moral position. But accusing someone of defending the killing of children when they clearly did not is grossly inaccurate and shuts down any serious discussion.

We've seen you do this repeatedly throughout this thread. You are not debating in good faith.

DP. You are full of sh#t. It would be hilarious how you talk about good faith while saying every child in the school was related to a member of IRGC. What the F? You people are just amoral. Seriously hope you are just some Zionist paid troll living in Israel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

You're justifying the slaughter of children, just FYI. This is an attempt to excuse what we did, and it's wrong. They can be wrong and we can be wrong. Kids are out of bounds.

You’re either blindly wrapped in your own arguments or are willfully and deliberately distorting what others are saying. Describing why protesters might lack sympathy for IRGC‑connected families is not at all the same thing as justifying killing children. It’s an explanation of political and emotional context, not a moral endorsement of the strike. There is a clear difference between saying "people affected by years of state brutality may not feel compassion for regime elites" and saying "it was right to kill kids." The former is analysis. The latter is something no one here said.

Pointing out that the IRGC and Basij have committed atrocities against children does not mean anyone is arguing that children are legitimate targets. It means the regime’s own actions have created a climate of rage and trauma that shapes how protesters react. That is not justification. That is cause‑and‑effect. If you want to argue the strike was wrong, that’s a valid moral position. But accusing someone of defending the killing of children when they clearly did not is grossly inaccurate and shuts down any serious discussion.

We've seen you do this repeatedly throughout this thread. You are not debating in good faith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

You're justifying the slaughter of children, just FYI. This is an attempt to excuse what we did, and it's wrong. They can be wrong and we can be wrong. Kids are out of bounds.

You’re either blindly wrapped in your own arguments or are willfully and deliberately distorting what others are saying. Describing why protesters might lack sympathy for IRGC‑connected families is not at all the same thing as justifying killing children. It’s an explanation of political and emotional context, not a moral endorsement of the strike. There is a clear difference between saying "people affected by years of state brutality may not feel compassion for regime elites" and saying "it was right to kill kids." The former is analysis. The latter is something no one here said.

Pointing out that the IRGC and Basij have committed atrocities against children does not mean anyone is arguing that children are legitimate targets. It means the regime’s own actions have created a climate of rage and trauma that shapes how protesters react. That is not justification. That is cause‑and‑effect. If you want to argue the strike was wrong, that’s a valid moral position. But accusing someone of defending the killing of children when they clearly did not is grossly inaccurate and shuts down any serious discussion.

We've seen you do this repeatedly throughout this thread. You are not debating in good faith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

You're justifying the slaughter of children, just FYI. This is an attempt to excuse what we did, and it's wrong. They can be wrong and we can be wrong. Kids are out of bounds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Israel is immoral

But not Iran. Nope, not the terrorist regime full of mullahs who execute thousands without even blinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Slaughtering kids is pretty bad but somehow I doubt the protesters will have all that much sympathy knowing the kids at Minab were the kids of IRGC officers who without a second thought ordered Basij thugs to slaughter the protesters and their kids in the streets, ordered hospitals to refuse them medical care, arrested shot kids arriving at hospitals and then beat them to death, and then held their bodies for ransom. That all happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

The US strengthens the hardliners in Iran with these bombings. They aren't helping the protestors by destroying hospitals and slaughtering children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.

stfu who are you?

Military experts have already confirmed that it looks like a Tomahawk missile. It's embarrassing how only a few news outlets have updated their report with the photo/video evidence. That's why we end up with meatheads like the pp.

AP:
Experts interviewed by The Associated Press, citing satellite image analysis, say the school was probably struck amid a quick succession of bombs dropped on the compound.

A U.S. official familiar with internal deliberations on the matter has told the AP that the strike was likely American. The official spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the sensitive matter.

Trevor Ball, a Bellingcat researcher, identified the munition as a Tomahawk cruise missile — which only the U.S. is known to possess in this war. It’s the first evidence of a munition used in the strike.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged using Tomahawk missiles in this war and even released a photo of the USS Spruance, part of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group located within range of the school, firing a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28.

When asked about the strike at a press conference Monday, Trump claimed that Iran has access to the Tomahawk cruise missile, which is made by American defense contractor Raytheon.


ABC News:
A newly surfaced video appears to show a U.S.-made missile hitting a building in Iran adjacent to a girls' school where local officials say 168 people were killed, experts told ABC News.

The eyewitness video was first posted Sunday morning by the Iranian outlet Mehr News, and then shared online by Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician, who now works as a researcher with the investigative group Bellingcat.

Experts told ABC News the missile has the characteristics of a Tomahawk, which is used by the United States and is not known to be fielded by Iran or Israel.

Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told ABC News that the size and shape of the missile resemble the Tomahawk.

N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of Armament Research Services, also said the munition seen in the video appeared to be a Tomahawk.

Where the F is the jet nacelle? Those are VERY prominent on Tomahawks. And what fking Tomahawk does a 90 degree nosedive? That IS NOT HOW THEY WORK.

If you and the "experts" can't answer those very basic questions, then you've all completely failed.

Again, who tf are you??

Trump softens suggestion that Iran was behind deadly strike on girls' school

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iran doesn’t even need to kill 180 American schoolchildren as revenge, Americans will do it themselves.

Iran callously slaughtered hundreds of its own kids in the protests a few weeks ago. That deeply undermines their credibility and moral authority.

Exactly. It just boggles the mind that these posters seem to have no recollection of that. More likely, they have selective memory. Utter hypocrites.

The ones attacking the US with nothing to say about Iran's many evil acts are willfully dishonest, unserious posters. We should just flag them as trolls and move on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.

stfu who are you?

Military experts have already confirmed that it looks like a Tomahawk missile. It's embarrassing how only a few news outlets have updated their report with the photo/video evidence. That's why we end up with meatheads like the pp.

AP:
Experts interviewed by The Associated Press, citing satellite image analysis, say the school was probably struck amid a quick succession of bombs dropped on the compound.

A U.S. official familiar with internal deliberations on the matter has told the AP that the strike was likely American. The official spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the sensitive matter.

Trevor Ball, a Bellingcat researcher, identified the munition as a Tomahawk cruise missile — which only the U.S. is known to possess in this war. It’s the first evidence of a munition used in the strike.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged using Tomahawk missiles in this war and even released a photo of the USS Spruance, part of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group located within range of the school, firing a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28.

When asked about the strike at a press conference Monday, Trump claimed that Iran has access to the Tomahawk cruise missile, which is made by American defense contractor Raytheon.


ABC News:
A newly surfaced video appears to show a U.S.-made missile hitting a building in Iran adjacent to a girls' school where local officials say 168 people were killed, experts told ABC News.

The eyewitness video was first posted Sunday morning by the Iranian outlet Mehr News, and then shared online by Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician, who now works as a researcher with the investigative group Bellingcat.

Experts told ABC News the missile has the characteristics of a Tomahawk, which is used by the United States and is not known to be fielded by Iran or Israel.

Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told ABC News that the size and shape of the missile resemble the Tomahawk.

N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of Armament Research Services, also said the munition seen in the video appeared to be a Tomahawk.

Where the F is the jet nacelle? Those are VERY prominent on Tomahawks. And what fking Tomahawk does a 90 degree nosedive? That IS NOT HOW THEY WORK.

If you and the "experts" can't answer those very basic questions, then you've all completely failed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.

stfu who are you?

Military experts have already confirmed that it looks like a Tomahawk missile. It's embarrassing how only a few news outlets have updated their report with the photo/video evidence. That's why we end up with meatheads like the pp.

AP:
Experts interviewed by The Associated Press, citing satellite image analysis, say the school was probably struck amid a quick succession of bombs dropped on the compound.

A U.S. official familiar with internal deliberations on the matter has told the AP that the strike was likely American. The official spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the sensitive matter.

Trevor Ball, a Bellingcat researcher, identified the munition as a Tomahawk cruise missile — which only the U.S. is known to possess in this war. It’s the first evidence of a munition used in the strike.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged using Tomahawk missiles in this war and even released a photo of the USS Spruance, part of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group located within range of the school, firing a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28.

When asked about the strike at a press conference Monday, Trump claimed that Iran has access to the Tomahawk cruise missile, which is made by American defense contractor Raytheon.


ABC News:
A newly surfaced video appears to show a U.S.-made missile hitting a building in Iran adjacent to a girls' school where local officials say 168 people were killed, experts told ABC News.

The eyewitness video was first posted Sunday morning by the Iranian outlet Mehr News, and then shared online by Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician, who now works as a researcher with the investigative group Bellingcat.

Experts told ABC News the missile has the characteristics of a Tomahawk, which is used by the United States and is not known to be fielded by Iran or Israel.

Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told ABC News that the size and shape of the missile resemble the Tomahawk.

N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of Armament Research Services, also said the munition seen in the video appeared to be a Tomahawk.

Where the F is the jet nacelle? Those are VERY prominent on Tomahawks. And what fking Tomahawk does a 90 degree nosedive? That IS NOT HOW THEY WORK.

If you and the "experts" can't answer those very basic questions, then you've all completely failed.

Again, who tf are you??

Trump softens suggestion that Iran was behind deadly strike on girls' school

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.

stfu who are you?

Military experts have already confirmed that it looks like a Tomahawk missile. It's embarrassing how only a few news outlets have updated their report with the photo/video evidence. That's why we end up with meatheads like the pp.

AP:
Experts interviewed by The Associated Press, citing satellite image analysis, say the school was probably struck amid a quick succession of bombs dropped on the compound.

A U.S. official familiar with internal deliberations on the matter has told the AP that the strike was likely American. The official spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the sensitive matter.

Trevor Ball, a Bellingcat researcher, identified the munition as a Tomahawk cruise missile — which only the U.S. is known to possess in this war. It’s the first evidence of a munition used in the strike.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged using Tomahawk missiles in this war and even released a photo of the USS Spruance, part of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group located within range of the school, firing a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28.

When asked about the strike at a press conference Monday, Trump claimed that Iran has access to the Tomahawk cruise missile, which is made by American defense contractor Raytheon.


ABC News:
A newly surfaced video appears to show a U.S.-made missile hitting a building in Iran adjacent to a girls' school where local officials say 168 people were killed, experts told ABC News.

The eyewitness video was first posted Sunday morning by the Iranian outlet Mehr News, and then shared online by Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician, who now works as a researcher with the investigative group Bellingcat.

Experts told ABC News the missile has the characteristics of a Tomahawk, which is used by the United States and is not known to be fielded by Iran or Israel.

Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told ABC News that the size and shape of the missile resemble the Tomahawk.

N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of Armament Research Services, also said the munition seen in the video appeared to be a Tomahawk.

Where the F is the jet nacelle? Those are VERY prominent on Tomahawks. And what fking Tomahawk does a 90 degree nosedive? That IS NOT HOW THEY WORK.

If you and the "experts" can't answer those very basic questions, then you've all completely failed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.

stfu who are you?

Military experts have already confirmed that it looks like a Tomahawk missile. It's embarrassing how only a few news outlets have updated their report with the photo/video evidence. That's why we end up with meatheads like the pp.

AP:
Experts interviewed by The Associated Press, citing satellite image analysis, say the school was probably struck amid a quick succession of bombs dropped on the compound.

A U.S. official familiar with internal deliberations on the matter has told the AP that the strike was likely American. The official spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the sensitive matter.

Trevor Ball, a Bellingcat researcher, identified the munition as a Tomahawk cruise missile — which only the U.S. is known to possess in this war. It’s the first evidence of a munition used in the strike.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged using Tomahawk missiles in this war and even released a photo of the USS Spruance, part of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group located within range of the school, firing a Tomahawk missile on Feb. 28.

When asked about the strike at a press conference Monday, Trump claimed that Iran has access to the Tomahawk cruise missile, which is made by American defense contractor Raytheon.


ABC News:
A newly surfaced video appears to show a U.S.-made missile hitting a building in Iran adjacent to a girls' school where local officials say 168 people were killed, experts told ABC News.

The eyewitness video was first posted Sunday morning by the Iranian outlet Mehr News, and then shared online by Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician, who now works as a researcher with the investigative group Bellingcat.

Experts told ABC News the missile has the characteristics of a Tomahawk, which is used by the United States and is not known to be fielded by Iran or Israel.

Sam Lair, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, told ABC News that the size and shape of the missile resemble the Tomahawk.

N.R. Jenzen-Jones, director of Armament Research Services, also said the munition seen in the video appeared to be a Tomahawk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will we verify that the US military did not deliberately double tap the elementary school?

I'm unconvinced. The projectile in the video does not match known Tomahawk characteristics. Tomahawks usually hug the terrain at between 30 and 150m and approach at low altitude with a shallow terminal pop‑up, but the object captured in video is descending at a steep, almost ballistic angle. The airframe also lacks the Tomahawk’s distinctive dorsal intake nacelle, which is normally visible even in poor‑quality footage. The exhaust plume appears narrower and more concentrated than the turbofan signature associated with a Tomahawk. These technical mismatches point toward a different class of weapon such as a guided rocket, ballistic missile, or loitering munition.

The evidence for an intentional double‑tap is also doubtful. The two explosions show different blast signatures, which suggests different munitions or secondary detonations rather than a coordinated sequence. The earlier smoke plume could come from fuel fires or structural collapse inside the adjacent IRGC compound, not a prior missile strike. Without verified fragments, radar tracks, or continuous video establishing timing, the case for intentionality or a deliberate double‑strike remains unproven.

There are too many technical issues to reconcile.