Comment by kasey_junk

Comment by kasey_junk 3 days ago

8 replies

These pagers almost certainly went off on n the hands of doctors and clerics.

But again, this isn’t about some sort of ethical counting and categorizing of the injured. What can the intent of this attack be other than to spread terror? To say to the broad populace we will harm you when you least suspect it, independent of the military status between our countries and we will do it in surprising and asymmetric ways.

tptacek 3 days ago

It eliminated their entire command and control network, hospitalized hundreds of their officers and command staff, put the IRGC on notice that it has been comprehensively infiltrated, and will force months of internal investigations and purges.

Further, it comes during a time where Iran has been publicly messaging about retaliation for the killing of Ismael Haniyeh, so there's a geopolitical angle to it as well: "we can do this, think about what we'll do next if you try launching another 300 drones at us".

I don't think it's very hard to make a military validity argument here (of course, it's easy for me to do that, since I'm shoplifting an argument from Noga Tarnopolsky and Oz Katerji here).

  • bjourne 3 days ago

    Spreading fear is generally considered terrorism - not a proper military objective. You have to realize that the argument you're making goes both ways here.

    • tptacek 3 days ago

      In every military conflict in the history of warfare, combatants have taken steps to inspire fear in their adversaries. You may be providing a definition of terrorism, but I don't think it's a useful one; I think you need to refine it more if you want to make it operable here.

      In any case, where you use the word "fear" I would probably use "deterrence".