When your job is to investigate and report things as they actually are and you report on a thing that is telling you what it is and you say it is something it isn’t it calls into question the quality and depth of your work product. In this case a missile might be iron don’t related which is technically defensive if you ignore the eod that falls short of it’s intended target, artillery can be in defensive emplacements but it is in use only an offensive weapon which removes some plausible deniability for what’s his face.
Ask yourself why are people saying missiles or bombs and you’ll end up of you look finding a sole outlet that misrepresented what they were and people ran with it because let’s be honest paying attention isn’t so super common these days.
There’s always time for accuracy in journalism.
When your job is to investigate and report things as they actually are and you report on a thing that is telling you what it is and you say it is something it isn’t it calls into question the quality and depth of your work product. In this case a missile might be iron don’t related which is technically defensive if you ignore the eod that falls short of it’s intended target, artillery can be in defensive emplacements but it is in use only an offensive weapon which removes some plausible deniability for what’s his face.
Ask yourself why are people saying missiles or bombs and you’ll end up of you look finding a sole outlet that misrepresented what they were and people ran with it because let’s be honest paying attention isn’t so super common these days.
Then just call it munitions and move on.
That would be more accurate so yeah.