You're responding to something that isn't in my comments. Neither I said it's a scripting language, nor you are being honest in pretending that the industry does not associate whether a language is perceptibly low-level with its applicability in systems programming tasks.
You said systems, which implies a converse of scripts. There is nothing else in the category. If something is not a systems language, it is necessarily a scripting language.
The vast majority of low level tasks are systems in nature (obviously; hence why a low level scripting language would be mostly pointless), so you're not wrong, but you're not telling the whole story.
Defining systems languages and scripting languages as mutually exclusive duals is a pretty bizarre way to look at the space. I mean, you do you, but I doubt you'll find many people who will agree with this framing.
