• octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    They planted bombs in hardware that is used exclusively by Hezbollah operatives and their accomplices to evade gathering sigint. Yes, civilians got hurt. That’s the nature of war, and what makes it so horrible - people who might hold no malice nor pose any threat to the other side get hurt and die.

    How is this argument different than defending the use of landmines?

    So the pagers were ordered by Hezbollah. You send that text you don’t know if they are at a daycare picking up their kids, if they lost the pager and it’s sitting on some restaurant owner’s countertop next to some other family, etc etc etc.

    There are so many things that can happen between when those pagers get rigged and sent out and the time they are detonated.

    If Israel seemed at all like they tried to avoid bombing and shooting civilians in Gaza we could at least defend their actions there by saying “clearly they are trying to avoid civilian casualties” (we can’t, but we could) - but there is nothing but hopes and prayers to avoid civilian casualties in an attack like this.

    Literally if any non-governmental entity did the same thing, no one would hesitate to call it a terrorist attack. And that’s what it is here, a terrorist attack.

    Edit: Acknowledging that I typed Hamas out of habit instead of Hezbollah. Corrected.

    • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The pagers were used by Hezbollah, not Hamas. They are two different entities, and while it doesn’t make any difference in the narrow context I’m replying to, it’s really a basic detail that anyone voicing an opinion on the matter should know.

      How is this argument different than defending the use of landmines?

      From the Wikipedia entry about landmines: “The use of land mines is controversial because they are indiscriminate weapons, harming soldier and civilian alike. They remain dangerous after the conflict in which they were deployed has ended, killing and injuring civilians and rendering land impassable and unusable for decades. To make matters worse, many factions have not kept accurate records (or any at all) of the exact locations of their minefields, making removal efforts painstakingly slow.”

      Planting bombs inside pagers specifically used by Hezbollah isn’t indiscriminate (unless by “indiscriminate” you mean “when they go off, they harm anyone in the proximity”, but going by that definition everything with an exploding charge is “indiscriminate”, yet only mines are banned). And obviously exploded bombs don’t remain dangerous and aren’t difficult to remove.

      • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        The pagers were used by Hezbollah, not Hamas.

        I realize that, I was drawing a parallel between the two circumstances.

        And again - when you drop a bomb, you can credibly have made an attempt to ensure no one is in the vicinity who you don’t intend to bomb. (Not that israel seems to do this) - this is especially true with modern technology.

        You cannot reasonably predict the path that a pager takes once it is shipped, no matter who it is intended for, not least because no one expects a pager to be the source of a deadly threat. You control who owns that “bomb” you have just sent into the world only until the moment it is unpacked and given to the first person who takes possession of it.

        • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I realize that, I was drawing a parallel between the two circumstances.

          Err… what circumstances? What was the purpose of drawing a parallel between Hamas and Hezbollah? What insight was I to gain by it? Asking seriously.

          And again - when you drop a bomb, you can credibly have made an attempt to ensure no one is in the vicinity who you don’t intend to bomb. (Not that israel seems to do this) - this is especially true with modern technology.

          Sorry, were you making two arguments or one? You asked about the difference between landmines and what Israel did. I thought the rest of what you said was to show how planting bombs in pagers is like landmines, not a new argument. If there were two arguments, you didn’t respond to my answer regarding landmines.

          I can talk about the difference, and you’ll respond with a counter argument etc. Ultimately, it’ll come down to me saying Israel is able to reasonably predict who’ll carry the explosive and you saying they can’t. The bottom line for me is this:

          Some weapons have been banned from warfare while others haven’t. The banned weapons follow certain criteria for being banned. exploda-pagers don’t follow the criteria under which landmines have been banned. If you know of other weapons or tactics that are banned and are akin to exploda-pagers, we can discuss that. Otherwise, I’m left with the conclusion what Israel did falls within the bounds of a legitimate military operation. You can, of course, think differently.

          • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            You can, of course, think differently.

            And I do. It’s been one argument the entire time, and I don’t see how it’s worth reframing the parallel when you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand it the first two times.

            Good day.

            Edite: I see I typed Hamas when I meant to type Hezbollah in one place. Will correct now. I admit that was potentially confusing.

            • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              You: So the pagers were ordered by Hezbollah…

              Me: “The pagers were used by Hezbollah, not Hamas.”

              You: “I realize that, I was drawing a parallel between the two circumstances.”

              Me: asking for clarification.

              You: “you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand [the parallel?] the first two times […] Edite: I see I typed Hamas when I meant to type Hezbollah in one place”

              It seems you’ve mistyped, then misunderstood me when I fixed it (though I attributed it to a lack of knowledge) and now you’re insinuating I might be misunderstanding you willfully? If that’s the case, you’re making it so easy for me other people might think we’re in cahoots[1].

              Anyway, Just because I don’t agree with you doesn’t mean I didn’t understand the argument. And I’m pretty sure I did understand at least one of your points. I’ve explained why the pagers aren’t like landmines and why the rational behind the treaty to ban landmines seems to agree with me. If that’s the only argument you made (“It’s been one argument the entire time”), you can simply reply to what I said instead of reframing anything.


              [1] Speaking of other people, are people downvoting me as a dislike button, or is there a specific reason? I don’t mind the downvotes, just wondering if they’re because people don’t agree with me or because they think there’s something wrong/harmful with my messages.

              • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                “you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand [the parallel?] the first two times

                When I typed that I hadn’t spotted my own typo yet. Sorry.

                If that’s the case, you’re making it so easy for me other people might think we’re in cahoots

                I don’t care in the least if anyone thinks I’m in cahoots with anyone; it won’t change that I’m in cahoots with no one.

                You can, of course, think differently.

                Typo notwithstanding, it remains true that I do think differently, and if your argument boils down to what has actually been banned vs an understanding of how absolutely heartless and tragic it is to deploy a bunch of explosive pagers that will randomly move around a populated area because you want to kill a limited set of bad guys in that area, there is nothing left for us to discuss.

                • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I don’t care in the least if anyone thinks I’m in cahoots with anyone; it won’t change that I’m in cahoots with no one.

                  Sorry, I was trying to say - Please don’t imply I might be willingly misunderstanding you when you’re not communicating clearly. Even your edit is somewhat unclear, as it isn’t evident if the part before the edit is still relevant.

                  how absolutely heartless and tragic […]

                  Wait, what? The prevalent criticism against the exploding pagers (both on Lemmy and other places) is that they’re akin to mines and are essentially terrorist attacks. Both of these thing are (at least somewhat) specific and objective, and that’s where we started the conversation. Going from that to “It’s heartless”, which is a very subjective description, seems to me like moving the goalpost.

                  Yes, of course it’s heartless and tragic. War is heartless and tragic. How else would you describe taking a kid who was in high school a few months ago, putting a rifle in his hand and telling him “See that other kid who’s just like you? go shoot him because he happen to be living on the other side of an imaginary line”?

                  Saying “Well, this heartless and tragic thing is acceptable but I don’t like that heartless and tragic thing” is arbitrary unless there’s an actual criteria. Either way you’re entitled to your own opinion, it’s just that earlier I thought you have some criteria or test.

                  • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    I did, it’s been in every comment of mine and in the rest of the sentence after the bit you cherrypicked.

                    I’m left with the conclusion what Israel did falls within the bounds of a legitimate military operation.

                    Once we hit this point, further discussion was likely pointless anyhow. Please let’s end this discussion here. Thank you!