Anyone who thinks Iranian nukes were ever a serious threat was severely misinformed. After all, the calculus of the aggressive use of nukes is the same for Iran as it is for any country: use nukes get bombed out of existence. Nobody is going to mess with that balance of power because the cost of it failing is the existence of our society itself, all society itself really: American society, Iranian society, Russian society, Chinese society, all of it and more. We would all agree to burn Iran to the ground if their leaders ever made that choice and everybody knows it. The only time it really makes sense to use nukes is when you are dead anyway.
As for other missiles, well, now we are talking about terrorism. As for Hezbollah and the Houthis, that's more terrorism. So, yes, I stand by the idea that the main threat was terrorism and that said threat is hardly reduced by this. The reality of the matter is that there is little chance this makes the region safer.
That said, at least I suppose I might be able to draw a little comfort for how this affects Russia's war, as distant and relatively minor as those effects are likely to be. (See recent discussion on the relative futility of strategic bombing for why I don't find this particularly comforting).
Yes, because I'm sure that the Iranian military authorities are the ones who decided that was a good place to put a school. After all, protection of military assets is typically a consideration for education officials.
Frankly, if you wouldn't say that of a school on a military base in America, you shouldn't say it of one near a military base in Iran without something substantial to implicate the decision. The reality is that the idea that the left hand even noticed what the right hand was doing in this situation is mostly unbelievable. So, you know, extraordinary claims extraordinary evidence.
