Comment by olalonde
Comment by olalonde 2 days ago
What incentive would they have for doing so?
Comment by olalonde 2 days ago
What incentive would they have for doing so?
It's not random: Hezbollah and Israel have been fighting for a while[0] and Hezbollah's mission is to eliminate the state of Israel[1]. I'm sure no member of Hezbollah is surprised that Israel would attack them.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hezbollah_confl...
I would dispute that but also don't see the relevance to the conflict with Hezbollah.
This is all one conflict, it does not make sense to treat this as an isolated conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. And it is dishonest [1] to portray the conflict as Israel resisting various groups that want Israel removed from the map and not mention that the Israel similarly wants Palestine removed from the map. And I am not sure how one can dispute this as the Israelis themselves say it. When the State of Israel was established, Ben-Gurion was hoping that Israel will eventually encompass all of Mandatory Palestine and today Netanyahu says in no uncertain terms that there is no room for an independent Palestinian state. And the actions in between do not paint a different picture either, whether it is the construction of settlements to further fracture the land or to support of Hamas in order to weaken the PLO.
[1] This is not necessarily an accusation of the commenter I replied to, maybe they just deemed it unnecessary to mention. I think it is worth mentioning to not create a skewed image for people unfamiliar with the conflict, that is why I wrote my comment. However reading it again I have to admit that the wording is far from perfect.
You're throwing "criminal" around without, I suspect, understanding the laws of warfare. Blowing enemy operatives isn't criminal (even if some civilians get hurt - within reason; here's the ratio of militants to civilians hurt is virtually unheard of, in a positive way). Bombing militants from above, whether by airplane or drone isn't criminal, and nothing in the laws of warfare claims you need to let the enemy an opportunity to strike back.
There is no comprehensive information yet on the ratio of civilians to militants maimed by this attack, and any claims otherwise are propaganda. If an enemy had exploded small remote controlled bombs in American supermarkets and homes there is no question we would characterize it as a terrorist attack.
Because that provides international legitimacy for retaliation by Hezbollah, even though everyone knows who did what. Same as the assassination of Ismail Hanyeh in Tehran.
countries i think don't comit acts of war randomly without annoucement or claim. This in itself would be borderline criminal, though i'm not sure if it's an actual thing noted in the geneva conventions. Those do state that any act of war should give an opportunity for retaliation. So in essence this is just as criminal as bombing people using armed drones, because these fighters did not have any opportunity to strike back.