Comment by megous

Comment by megous 10 months ago

16 replies

View on Hacker News

If it's basically a remotely controlled IED via a public communication network, then there's nothing technically interesting about that, really.

But the aspect of some supposedly civilized state staging a mass terror attack via a remotely controlled IEDs, putting suddenly thousands of people, many of them civilians (yes, Hezballah are also civilians, because they're a major political party in Lebanon) into hospital, killing ~10, critically infuring ~200, is way more interesting.

You can generate many questions about that aspect. Like the whole why on both strategic and tactical levels? How does this fit with the international law? Why are people kinda chill about this?

Re the response below: No proof of specific targeting of combatants, yet. No proof of any attempt to not affect bystanders, etc. Yet, there are videos of bombs exploding while people are shopping with children around, etc. Pretty much indiscriminate.

Definitely not battery burnings: https://t.me/hamza20300/293409 these are the scale/type of injuries that this caused. (Two children there just in this single scene in one hospital, so beware.)

baltimore 10 months ago

No, a mass terror attack would indiscriminately target victims. This is almost entirely opposite -- an organization widely recognized as a terrorist group (1) is narrowly targeted.

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_g...

Reply View 8 replies
  • ithkuil 10 months ago

    Also because one would have to weigh the alternative.

    Imagine Israel declared an old fashioned war against Lebanon as response to the missile strikes originated from its territory.

    I think the number of civilian casualties of a conventional "legal" war would be much much higher than the collateral damage of this operation.

    Now, does that make it "right"? To me war is horror and is to avoid at all cost. Is a smaller horror a cost one's willing to pay to avoid a bigger horror? Hard to say. But I think it's still important to at least try to see things in a broader context otherwise we may never understand why people on the ground make the choices they do.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • megous 9 months ago

      Your post is non-sense, because this operation was clearly meant as a starting salvo (to create a confusion) in a war against Lebanon. It was at risk of being discovered, so they triggered the explosions early, to at least get some effect. Reports in Israeli media confirmed this rather quickly after the explosions. Also the mass bombings killing thousand people in a few days started almost right away after the operation.

      I don't understand people who think Israel is some benevolent entity that just tries to defend itself while causing as little harm and disruption as possible. They murder innocents left and right every day, create havoc in multiple countries at once, terrorize and occupy people for decades, all while playing a victim card constantly.

      Reply View 0 replies
  • bjourne 10 months ago

    [flagged]

    Reply View 4 replies
wing-_-nuts 10 months ago

>Hezballah are also civilians, because they're a major political party in Lebanon

That's an interesting take. Are you saying hamas are also civilians because they're the major political party in gaza?

Reply View 6 replies
  • ChocolateGod 10 months ago

    I would argue that Hamas has gone from being an organised terrorist group to being an idea.

    Gaza has a very young population growing up with the current war, some (not all) will be radicalized by what they experienced growing up.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • solarpunk 10 months ago

    hamas is the governing body of gaza, so any government workers would technically be hamas.

    don't confuse post office workers for military personnel just cuz they work for the government.

    Reply View 2 replies