Hezbollah’s Exploding Electronics

[Derec]

Do you think that Palestinians in Gaza don't have an affinity and a relationship with Palestinians in the West Bank?

Of course they do. But had they taken the disengagement as an opportunity to live in peace with Israel, instead of using it to redouble attacks on Israel, that would have shown that a fair solution was possible in the West Bank.

 

[laughing dog]

That is the issue- the harming of non-combatants.

That can't totally be avoided in war.

No one is saying it can be totally avoided.

Your position would mean that Israel can't defend itself at all.

Your claim has no logical merit. My position is that Israel would defend itself differently.

And also note that your absolutist position on this is limited to Israel.

Hamas and Hezbollah actually target non-combatants, but you barely bat an eye at that. Instead, you condemn Israel for defending itself from these islamofascists.

You repeat these blatant slanderous accusations time and time again. Unlike you, I think killing noncombatants is wrong no matter who does it and no matter who the noncombatants are.

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

Thank you for showing yet another reason how the two are alike.

What do you mean "yet another"? There is one point of similarity, and even that one is of the "sort of, I guess" variety.

Post #17

 

[Elixir]

Israel has to stop increases in the settlements.

And summarily killing people to get them out of the way.
What meager restrictions there were on stealing settlement land from Palestinians, were lifted by Bibi's goons after 10/7.
Now there's no permitting required or anything - just grab your gun and some construction gear and get to work. Build infrastructure, homes, whatever, invite your friends. IDF will sent some sand niggers to meet Allah if they get in your way. There's no such thing as an illegal settlement any more.

 

[Axulus]

They're shit allies, who are committing genocide

They are not committing genocide. See, you exaggerate Israel's sins while only mentioning Hamas and Hezbollah when prompted, and even then as an aside.

and trying to draw us into a regional war of horrific scope.

It is Hamas and Hezbollah, both Iranian vassals, who started this war. Place blame where it belongs.

I have. There are no heroes here. I do not approve of Hezbollah or Hamas' actions. I do not have a "side", nor do I want my country to have a "side". But if we're going to have a "side", I don't want that side to gloating about their clever plan to use terrorism to further enflame tensions with Lebanon.

So is your position that Israel must just sit there and take any and all rocket fire and terrorist attack by Hezballah and Hamas, abandoning tens of thousands of homes in the process and hundreds of people killed, and not fight back to stop it?

If not, how does Israel protect their people if they don't stop those who are attacking?

 

[Axulus]

You repeat these blatant slanderous accusations time and time again. Unlike you, I think killing noncombatants is wrong no matter who does it and no matter who the noncombatants are.

It is a ridiculous position to take. The logical conclusion to it would mean that no country can ever do anything to another country to stop an enemy from repeated attacks leading to property damage, injury and death, since it is basically impossible to neutralize those doing the attacking in a country which one doesn't control without the risk of harming noncombatants.

Would you apply the same standard to a hostage situation? The police shouldn't go in and raid someone killing hostages because they might accidentally harm one of the hostages, or noncombatants, themselves? They should just sit back and let all the hostages die unless they happen to get lucky with an opportunity for the perfect kill shot that has zero chance of harming anyone else?

 

[Derec]

No one is saying it can be totally avoided.

You were when you were categorically condemning Israel for harming any non-combatants whatsoever.
Especially re this operation that had a pretty low amount of collateral damage - 10/12 of fatalities from the first wave and all 25 fatalities from the 2nd wave have been claimed by Hezbollah as their operatives.

Your claim has no logical merit. My position is that Israel would defend itself differently.

What would you propose? Any modality of defense risks collateral damage. Especially when the enemy likes to hide behind civilians.

You repeat these blatant slanderous accusations time and time again. Unlike you, I think killing noncombatants is wrong no matter who does it and no matter who the noncombatants are.

Targeting noncombatants is wrong. Inadvertently killing noncombatants is unavoidable. And yet you reserve most of your condemnation for Israel, even though they do not target non-combatants. So no, it was not a "slanderous accusation". Your bias is blatant.

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

I have seen people defend Hamas and Hezbollah as "resistance". On here and also IRL especially on college campuses. Like that Cornell professor who was reinstated.
Cornell professor who cheered Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack sparks more outrage after marching in anti-Israel protest

What is more common in this forum is to pay lip service to say "of course we condemn what Hamas did" when challenged, but spend the rest of the time attacking Israel for everything they do to defend themselves. Like make a bunch of pagers and radios in the hands of Hezbollah operatives explode.

Post #17

Both landmines and exploding pagers/radios can be used discriminately or indiscriminately. But then again, so can any weapons.
Intercepting pagers that are being sent to Hezbollah operatives and allies (like the Iranian "diplomat"/IRGC officer) is very discriminate. And the small charge ensures that the damage radius is small. Again - see the grocery store video. The two guys standing close to the target were not harmed. It discriminately wounded the target only.
Is it perfect? Like when somebody else grabs a Hezbollah pager? Of course not! But neither is any other operation or weapons system.

 

[laughing dog]

No one is saying it can be totally avoided.

You were when you were categorically condemning Israel for harming any non-combatants whatsoever.

Yet another illogical straw man from your large vault of straw men.

Especially re this operation that had a pretty low amount of collateral damage - 10/12 of fatalities from the first wave and all 25 fatalities from the 2nd wave have been claimed by Hezbollah as their operatives.

Your claim has no logical merit. My position is that Israel would defend itself differently.

What would you propose? Any modality of defense risks collateral damage. Especially when the enemy likes to hide behind civilians.

You repeat these blatant slanderous accusations time and time again. Unlike you, I think killing noncombatants is wrong no matter who does it and no matter who the noncombatants are.

Targeting noncombatants is wrong. Inadvertently killing noncombatants is unavoidable. And yet you reserve most of your condemnation for Israel, even though they do not target non-combatants. So no, it was not a "slanderous accusation". Your bias is blatant.

The IDF "inadvertently" injures and kills many more noncombatants that the terrorist they are "targeting". That is a fact. It is not bias to point that out.

 

[Rhea]

This gets at why I find this action to be so wrong. I remember that 1980 protocol because of the horrific issues at the time. This 1996 amendment added the “harmless portable objects” phrases.

AND ISRAEL SIGNED IT.

NPR Story

In addition, Israel is party to certain treaties that regulate or prohibit specific weapons.

And the most relevant treaty here is an international agreement called the Amended Protocol II, the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which contains a specific prohibition on the use of booby traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed or constructed to contain explosive material. And all the information that we've been obtaining since these attacks implicate Israel in these attacks, and also suggests that these attacks violate this prohibition on the use of booby traps or other devices in this fashion.

You can read more here.
Protocol background

It shouldn’t need to be said every time, but the accusations are there so*
* Of course I consider Hammas’ attacks to be horrendous, and also the attacks by Hezbollah. In no case, however, do I want to ally with a government who is breaking international law. I abhor retribution and revenge. They propagate, they do not de-escalate.

 

[Derec]

This gets at why I find this action to be so wrong. I remember that 1980 protocol because of the horrific issues at the time. This 1996 amendment added the “harmless portable objects” phrases.

AND ISRAEL SIGNED IT.

I think this applies more to say terrorists leaving objects in public places to explode. Not an intelligence service precisely targeting terrorist operatives as in this case.

If what Israel did here violates the letter of the law (I am neither a lawyer nor do I play one on the Internet) that would just show how stupid the law as written is. The attacks were highly discriminate and had low collateral damage. Certainly lower than the alternative, which would be air strikes or similar.

Take the air strike that happened the very next day (Friday) in a Beirut suburb. It was successful, because a number of senior Hezbollah commanders were eliminated in addition to Ibrahim Aqil.

From here:
IDF confirms eliminating multiple top Hezbollah commanders in Friday’s Beirut strike

However, there was unfortunately collateral damage because the terrorists were meeting in a residential building. There were more civilian casualties than with targeted deployment of explosives in communications devices used by Hezbollah terrorists.

 

[Derec]

Yet another illogical straw man from your large vault of straw men.

You must be talking about your own posts here.

What would you propose? Any modality of defense risks collateral damage. Especially when the enemy likes to hide behind civilians.

You failed to respond to this. Any criticism of what Israel does should include what you think they should do instead.

The IDF "inadvertently" injures and kills many more noncombatants that the terrorist they are "targeting".

It is good that these terrorists are not as successful in murdering Israelis as they want to be.
Some years ago there were many more suicide bombings in Israel with horrifically large number of dead innocents. Restaurants, buses, etc. It is only through the actions of IDF that these attacks have decreased.

Example: Sbarro bombing in 2001.
16 innocents dead, 140 wounded.

One of the terrorists, Ahlam Tamimi (of the Tamimi clan that also includes the infamous Ahed Tamimi), was unfortunately released in 2011 in what is still by far Bibi's worst policy decision. She is currently living it up in Jordan and has even married another terrorist who was released in the same rotten deal. Btw, even though US citizens were killed in that attack, Jordan is refusing to extradite her to face justice in the US. Some allies, eh?

The bombmaker, Abdullah Barghouti, is currently serving >60 life sentences, but Hamas wants him released as part of any ceasefire/hostage deal. Which is why I hope that Israel does not agree to any ceasefire deal until Hamas drops the demand that those serving life sentences and/or have been convicted or murder be freed.

What I am saying is, it is a very good thing that actions by the IDF and Israeli intelligence have made attacks like this one less frequent.

That is a fact. It is not bias to point that out.

It is bias to think that Palestinian and other Islamic terrorists are murdering too few Jews.
It is also bias to put "inadvertently" and "targeting" in scare quotes. You do not think that targeting Hezbollah terrorists is truly targeting them? Why? You don't think a child picking up her terrorist daddy's pager is inadvertent on Israel's part? Why?

 

[laughing dog]

Yet another illogical straw man from your large vault of straw men.

You must be talking about your own posts here.

I assume that is a "No u r" childish response rather than a tacit recognition of reading comprehension issues on your part.

What would you propose? Any modality of defense risks collateral damage. Especially when the enemy likes to hide behind civilians.

You failed to respond to this. Any criticism of what Israel does should include what you think they should do instead.

Why? Because you say so? Killing noncombatants is wrong. That is a simple declarative statement of morality. You can disagree with it or not.

The IDF "inadvertently" injures and kills many more noncombatants that the terrorist they are "targeting".

It is good that these terrorists are not as successful in murdering Israelis as they want to be.
Some years ago there were many more suicide bombings in Israel with horrifically large number of dead innocents. Restaurants, buses, etc. It is only through the actions of IDF that these attacks have decreased.

Example: Sbarro bombing in 2001.
16 innocents dead, 140 wounded.

One of the terrorists, Ahlam Tamimi (of the Tamimi clan that also includes the infamous Ahed Tamimi), was unfortunately released in 2011 in what is still by far Bibi's worst policy decision. She is currently living it up in Jordan and has even married another terrorist who was released in the same rotten deal. Btw, even though US citizens were killed in that attack, Jordan is refusing to extradite her to face justice in the US. Some allies, eh?

The bombmaker, Abdullah Barghouti, is currently serving >60 life sentences, but Hamas wants him released as part of any ceasefire/hostage deal. Which is why I hope that Israel does not agree to any ceasefire deal until Hamas drops the demand that those serving life sentences and/or have been convicted or murder be freed.

What I am saying is, it is a very good thing that actions by the IDF and Israeli intelligence have made attacks like this one less frequent.

Not only is that non-responsive to my point, it is claim without evidence.

That is a fact. It is not bias to point that out.

It is bias to think that Palestinian and other Islamic terrorists are murdering too few Jews.

It is. Why are your bringing it up in this discussion? Nothing I have written suggests that to any rational observer.

It is also bias to put "inadvertently" and "targeting" in scare quotes. You do not think that targeting Hezbollah terrorists is truly targeting them? Why? You don't think a child picking up her terrorist daddy's pager is inadvertent on Israel's part? Why?

No, it is not bias. Inadvertent implies to me that the IDF cares whether or not they also injure, maim or kill civilians. It is pretty clear that is not true given that they have target kill ratios. I think they'd prefer to not injure, maim or kill a very large number of civilians relative to their targets but, in the end, it really doesn't matter much to them.

As an aside, I suspect that if some Islamic terrorist group pulled off a similar "coup" with the IDF that also injured. maimed or killed some noncombatants, the usual suspects would be screaming about those bloody inhuman terrorists.

 

[Tigers!]

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.
During your university protests earlier this year there were many apologists there IIRC. And also in the UK.
It is disinguenous of you to say there are no Hamas/Hezbollah apologists. They exist and are getting airwaves.

 

[TV and credit cards]

If what Israel did here violates the letter of the law (I am neither a lawyer nor do I play one on the Internet) that would just show how stupid the law as written is. The attacks were highly discriminate and had low collateral damage. Certainly lower than the alternative, which would be air strikes or similar.

Other alternatives would be poisoning and window tossing. Russia is a hell of a lot better at avoiding collateral damage. Surely Israel has room for improvement.

 

[laughing dog]

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.
During your university protests earlier this year there were many apologists there IIRC. And also in the UK.
It is disinguenous of you to say there are no Hamas/Hezbollah apologists. They exist and are getting airwaves.

Not disingenuous but sloppy because I was referring to this forum. Thanks for the catch.

 

[bilby]

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.

Here in Brisbane, the largest such march had a few hundred participants, in a location with about three million people who could easily have attended had they so desired.

There are "substantial numbers" of people who support pretty much anything; But if marching for something is less popular on a sunny weekend afternoon than is watching the Brisbane Broncos playing a dead rubber on a rainy Thursday night, it can't really be popular enough that the rest of us need worry about it.

 

[TomC]

If what Israel did here violates the letter of the law (I am neither a lawyer nor do I play one on the Internet) that would just show how stupid the law as written is. The attacks were highly discriminate and had low collateral damage. Certainly lower than the alternative, which would be air strikes or similar.

Other alternatives would be poisoning and window tossing. Russia is a hell of a lot better at avoiding collateral damage. Surely Israel has room for improvement.

Heh
Russia is better at avoiding collateral damage.


Must be because all those Ukrainians are Nazis.
Tom

 

[Arctish]

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.

When you say there are marches "with banners within" defending Hamas and Hezbollah, do you mean there are a few random banners defending Hamas and Hezbollah among a larger number bearing other messages, or that the majority of banners express explicit pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah sentiments?

 

[steve_bank]

There is never going to be peace and a two state solution. Note how Netanyahu fits into it. Netanyahu is ding what conservative Israelis gave wanted, destruction of the Palestinian people and room for Israeli expansion.

There is no oter way to frame, Netanyahu is a butcher. I can say that because I am not a political figur running for officer. If it were anyone iother than Jews we would be calling them out and placng sanctions.

Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin came immediately after an anti-violence rally in support of the Oslo peace process.[1]

Before the rally, Rabin was disparaged personally by right-wing conservatives and Likud leaders who perceived the peace process as an attempt to forfeit the occupied territories and a capitulation to Israel's enemies.[2][3]

National religious conservatives and Likud party leaders believed that withdrawing from any "Jewish" land was heresy.[4] The Likud leader and future prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, accused Rabin's government of being "removed from Jewish tradition [...] and Jewish values".[2][3] Right-wing rabbis associated with the settlers' movement prohibited territorial concessions to the Palestinians and forbade soldiers in the Israel Defense Forces from evacuating Jewish settlers under the accords.[5][6] Some rabbis proclaimed din rodef, based on a traditional Jewish law of self-defense, against Rabin personally, arguing that the Oslo Accords would endanger Jewish lives.[5][7]

Rallies organized by Likud and other right-wing groups featured depictions of Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform, or in the crosshairs of a gun.[2][3] Protesters compared the Labor party to the Nazis and Rabin to Adolf Hitler[5] and chanted, "Rabin is a murderer" and "Rabin is a traitor".[8][9] In July 1995, Netanyahu led a mock funeral procession featuring a coffin and hangman's noose at an anti-Rabin rally where protesters chanted, "Death to Rabin".[10][11] The chief of internal security, Carmi Gillon, then alerted Netanyahu of a plot on Rabin's life and asked him to moderate the protests' rhetoric, which Netanyahu declined to do.[8][12] Netanyahu denied any intention to incite violence.[2][3][13]

Rabin dismissed such protests or labeled them chutzpah.[2] According to Gillon, Rabin refused his requests to wear a bulletproof vest and preferred not to use the armored car purchased for him.[14] Left-wing supporters organized pro-peace rallies in support of the Oslo Accords. It was after one such gathering in Tel Aviv that the assassination took place.[3]

 

[Tigers!]

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.

Here in Brisbane, the largest such march had a few hundred participants, in a location with about three million people who could easily have attended had they so desired.

There are "substantial numbers" of people who support pretty much anything; But if marching for something is less popular on a sunny weekend afternoon than is watching the Brisbane Broncos playing a dead rubber on a rainy Thursday night, it can't really be popular enough that the rest of us need worry about it.

How many phone booths were needed to hold a Bris. Broncos dead rubber match crowd on a rainy Thu. night? Being generous they would just fill one of the buses you drive Bibly.

 

[Tigers!]

Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have apologists defending their killings while Israel has numerous apologists defending the magnitudes more deaths and harm to noncombatants.

Every Sunday since late Oct. 2023 there have been street marches in major Aust. capital cities with banners within defending Hamas in particular but also Hezbollah. The apologoists exist in substantial numbers.

When you say there are marches "with banners within" defending Hamas and Hezbollah, do you mean there are a few random banners defending Hamas and Hezbollah among a larger number bearing other messages, or that the majority of banners express explicit pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah sentiments?

Unfortanuturaely the vast majority are the generic pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbelloah, anti-Jew/Israel ones. There are a few anti-war stalwarts amongst them but drowned in the torrent.