• SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think few to no children were shot, but many were injured via indirect means, as I think I pretty clearly lay out.

      At the very minimum, it would be a rare occurrence for so many children to only be wounded if shot by a sniper rifle. It is unlikely, in general, that the wounds were from sniper rounds.

      • constate368@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The majority of the injured were children and two are in critical condition as a result of sniper fire targeting the hospital, a Red Crescent statement said.

        So they got injured running from sniper fire? Did the sniper pull off some James Bond shit and shoot a dangling object to fall on them?

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Idk if you know this but sniper rifles are pretty powerful and fuck things up.

              • constate368@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                They fuck up what you’re aiming at. In this case, mostly children.

                Sorry if that was unclear.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Except that’s literally not how the damage profile of such a round functions. Limbs disappear - soldiers die. Children would be slaughtered. This clearly did not happen.