• SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months 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
          ·
          8 months 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
            ·
            8 months 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
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months 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
                    ·
                    8 months 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.