2 US troops were killed during an Iranian missile and drone attack, the Pentagon says 61%

By Jake Epstein59%

7/18/2026, 11:04:43 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 36.1% saturation with 129 hits. Analysis detected 843 faulty-reasoning hits from 357 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57% and a BS Rank of 61% (8,526 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 61.00% of the article peer group.

The Pentagon said two US service members were killed in Jordan on Friday during an Iranian attack. 
A third US service member is missing, and others were injured in a missile and drone attack. 
The US war on Iran has intensified after a fragile ceasefire agreement fell apart. 
Two US service members were killed in Jordan on Friday after American and partner forces came under Iranian missile and drone fire, the Pentagon said on Saturday. 
Another US service member is missing, and several others were injured in the Iranian attacks. 
It marks the first publicly acknowledged American military combat fatalities in the Middle East conflict since March. 
Sixteen US service members have now been killed, in accidents or as a result of enemy action, during the conflict with Iran. 
More than 425 others have been injured over the course of the fighting, which began when the US and Israel launched surprise attacks on Iran on February 28. 
US Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, said in a statement that the two service members were killed as American and partner forces "defended against Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks." 
Centcom said four US service members were medically evacuated to local hospitals but have since been discharged, and several others received minor injuries. 
They returned to duty. 
"Out of respect for the families," the military said, it will "withhold additional information, including the identities of the fallen warriors, until 24 hours after the next of kin have been notified." 
The US resumed combat operations against Iran earlier this month after a fragile ceasefire collapsed following unsuccessful attempts by the two sides to reach a peace deal. 
Iran has carried out attacks on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz and launched missiles and drones at countries across the Middle East, including those that host US bases. 
The US has carried out near-daily strikes against Iran in response, targeting surveillance sites, weaponry, maritime capabilities, and other military facilities. 
The US casualties are likely to trigger a strong response from the Trump administration. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.6%Jake Epstein: 3.3%Business Insider: 2.5%Confirmation Bias7.6%This article: 7.8%Jake Epstein: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.7%Anchoring Bias7.8%This article: 13.4%Jake Epstein: 4.0%Business Insider: 3.4%Availability Heuristic13.4%This article: 6.2%Jake Epstein: 0.6%Business Insider: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic6.2%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.8%Business Insider: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 3.7%Business Insider: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 19.9%Jake Epstein: 9.1%Business Insider: 5.0%Framing Effect19.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.9%Business Insider: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.6%Jake Epstein: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.8%Status Quo Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Jake Epstein: 6.6%Business Insider: 3.1%Optimism Bias7.6%This article: 3.9%Jake Epstein: 2.4%Business Insider: 1.6%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 36.1%Jake Epstein: 6.8%Business Insider: 4.6%Negativity Bias36.1%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.9%Business Insider: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.4%Business Insider: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 1.2%Business Insider: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 8.8%Business Insider: 3.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 2.1%Business Insider: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Jake Epstein: 0.5%Business Insider: 0.4%Primacy Effect4.8%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 32.8%Jake Epstein: 5.1%Business Insider: 3.3%Appeal to Authority32.8%This article: 5.9%Jake Epstein: 1.1%Business Insider: 1.2%False Dilemma5.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 1.1%Business Insider: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.1%Jake Epstein: 4.7%Business Insider: 4.0%Hasty Generalization8.1%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 2.8%Business Insider: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.0%Jake Epstein: 5.2%Business Insider: 3.1%Appeal to Emotion9.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.4%Business Insider: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 26.9%Jake Epstein: 4.0%Business Insider: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)26.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.2%Jake Epstein: 0.4%Business Insider: 0.2%Composition/Division6.2%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 8.1%Business Insider: 3.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.6%Jake Epstein: 1.3%Business Insider: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.6%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.1%Business Insider: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.0%Jake Epstein: 1.8%Business Insider: 1.2%Unattributed Quote9.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.3%Business Insider: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.0%Jake Epstein: 7.6%Business Insider: 3.3%Biased Writer Voice9.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.5%Business Insider: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.2%Business Insider: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Epstein: 1.3%Business Insider: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

357 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers33%attributed speech240writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Pentagon • 15 words • 0.0% coveragePentagon • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coveragePentagon • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageUS Central Command • 35 words • 0.0% coverageUS Central Command • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

US Central Command

100%flagged-word coverage
58 attributed words50% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Unattributed Quote-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%US Central Command: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%US Central Command: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.