The U.S. military's deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in the Iran conflict marks a significant shift in warfare, utilizing vast data from various sources to aid in targeting decisions. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reassured that humans retain ultimate authority over lethal decisions, stating, “We follow the law and humans make decisions.” However, the legal framework surrounding AI use in military operations lacks explicit boundaries, raising concerns about accountability, especially after a U.S. airstrike in February that reportedly killed at least 168 children at an Iranian elementary school. This incident has prompted congressional Democrats to question the Pentagon about AI's potential role in the tragedy. Legal experts highlight the rapid pace at which AI operates, suggesting that it could outstrip human judgment in critical situations. The Pentagon is currently embroiled in a legal dispute with AI firm Anthropic over the limitations of its technology's use in warfare, reflecting broader ethical debates about autonomous systems. The law of armed conflict mandates that military commanders minimize civilian casualties, but the interpretation of “appropriate levels of human judgment” in AI applications remains vague. As AI continues to evolve, experts warn that the military must ensure rigorous human oversight to maintain compliance with legal and ethical standards.