Comment by Zironic

Comment by Zironic 2 days ago

99 replies

Yeah, I can't say I'm a big fan of this massive scale booby trapping devices all over civilian society and I suspect most nation stats are not very happy about this either. The EU is probably not going to be happy at all about Israel using an EU flagged company to do it either.

This is going to create a lot of distrust in the international supply chain.

mrtksn 2 days ago

Exactly it’s one thing to target operatives it’s another thing to target large number of people when they’re among the civilians.

Phone exploding in a market, doesn’t make it OK if the owner of the phone is a militant.

With that logic the Hamas terrorist attack last year isn’t a terrorist attack because many of the victims served in the IDF, which illegally occupies their territory.

This is getting ridiculous. Israel will loose the last drops of good will, which is a shame considering how much they achieved to do on that barely habitable piece of land. It breaks my heart.

  • tptacek 2 days ago

    Under International Humanitarian Law it absolutely does make it OK if the owner of the phone is a militant. This is black letter Law of Armed Combat.

    • wut42 2 days ago

      No!

      >Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today. The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction. A prompt and impartial investigation into the attacks should be urgently conducted.

      Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa Director at Human Rights Watch

      https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers...

      • loeg 2 days ago

        These are not booby traps.

    • tsimionescu 2 days ago

      Attacking millitatns while they are in the middle of civilians, especially when they are not doing that as part of some hostage/human shield operation, is not OK.

      • PeterisP 2 days ago

        The existing conventions do not prohibit attacking militants while they are in the middle of civilians, even if they are not doing that as part of some hostage/human shield operation. It may be considered morally not ok, but doing so does not violate any obligation.

        • tptacek a day ago

          That's not exactly true; it would depend on how you attacked the combatants, and how much collateral damage you caused. Civilian casualties must be proportionate to the military value of the target.

          Reporting is still coming in on these attacks so virtually every comment on these huge long threads could end up falsified one way or the other, but from what I can tell, it looks like these attacks will not only clear that bar, but that they'll do so in a way unprecedented in the history of modern warfare. But we'll see!

    • dredmorbius 2 days ago

      For those unfamiliar with terms:

      "Black Letter Law":

      In common law legal systems, black-letter law refers to well-established legal rules that are no longer subject to reasonable dispute.[1] Black-letter law can be contrasted with legal theory or unsettled legal issues.

      <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-letter_law>

      Searching for black letter and combat turns up:

      International Institute of Humanitarian Law: The Manual on the Law of Non-International Armed Conflict With Commentary (2006)

      Among definitions:

      For the purposes of this Manual, fighters are members of armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups, or taking an active (direct) part in hostilities.

      (p. 4)

      Civilians are all those who are not fighters.

      (p. 5)

      Military objectives are objects which by their nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture, or neutralisation, in the circumstances at the time, offers a definite military advantage.

      (p. 5)

      <https://www.humanrightsvoices.org/assets/attachments/documen...>

      (I'll note that one of the co-authors is affiliated with Tel Aviv University in Israel, though others do not appear to be Israeli.)

      The US DoD publishes a law of war manual, last updated in 2023:

      <https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/DOD...>

    • mrtksn 2 days ago

      Most people are not judges in the international court of justice. The legal technicalities are irrelevant.

      • tptacek 2 days ago

        I don't know what that is supposed to mean. There are norms of warfare and these attacks fall within them.

      • Bost a day ago

        The international court of justice is irrelevant if you don't have nukes or guns to support your cause.

    • dtornabene 2 days ago

      Were the children militants? What about hospital staff? And, how do you know who these people are? You don't, but you're all over this thread running cover for a terrorist attack. I've already seen plenty of reporting that many of these targeted people were not, in fact, militants, but simply political members of Hezbollah. Would you be running the same cover if Hezbollah, or Iran had targeted Knesset staff? Disgusting stuff man, truly odious.

showerst 2 days ago

> This is going to create a lot of distrust in the international supply chain.

Is it? If your threat model includes Mossad (or really any nation state) then you shouldn't have trusted those devices in the first place. Even if you didn't have "tiny explosives" on your bingo card, certainly bugs (hardware or software) should've been on there.

Given that those pagers are commonly used by doctors and none of them have been reported to explode, I think we can guess that it was targeted to the batches delivered directly to Hezbollah.

  • Zironic 2 days ago

    For instance, when Apollo Gold lisenced their pagers to a little known hungarian company, having their brand used as a bomb delivery device in the middle-east was not something they would have had on their list of potential brand risks.

    So now companies engaged in international business not only have to consider exposure to the usual fraud, but also if their counterpart is actively malicious.

    It's also likely going to make nation states start thinking about supply chains they maybe didn't before. How do you know someone didn't put explosives in your mice, keyboards, monitors, headsets and various other things that were probably manufactured in china?

  • ozfive 2 days ago

    There were four ambulance workers and two children in the 12 dead.

steventhedev 2 days ago

I can imagine the EU is far more interested in an EU flagged company doing business with Hezbollah who are a designated terrorist organization and subject to sanctions.

If there's one thing you learn quick in fintech - it's you absolutely do not fuck with sanctions.

  • Zironic 2 days ago

    If it was a real company that would be the case. However from what I've read the journalists looking into BAC Consulting has found it to be a company in name only with no actual offices or hungarian employees.

    It makes me slightly curious which company Israel convinced to actually produce these pagers and radios.

    • qubitcoder 2 days ago

      From the BBC [1].

      BBC Verify has accessed BAC’s company records, which reveal it was first incorporated in 2022 and has a single shareholder. It is registered to a building in Budapest's 14th district.

      As well as BAC, a further 13 companies and one person are registered at the same building.

      However, our search of a financial information database does not reveal that BAC has any connections to other companies or people.

      The same database shows no trading information about BAC. For example, there are no records of any shipments between it and any other firms.

      However, BAC's website, which is now inaccessible, previously said it was scaling up its business in Asia, and had a goal to "develop international technology co-operation among countries for the sale of telecommunication products".

      The website listed one person as BAC’s chief executive and founder - Cristiana Bársony-Arcidiacono - and does not appear to mention other employees.

      [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cew12r5qe1ro

tptacek 2 days ago

These aren't civilian devices.

  • gruez 2 days ago

    The claim isn't that they're "civilian devices", it's that they're "devices all over civilian society". That's relevant because bobby trapping them is liable to cause casualties.

    • Zironic 2 days ago

      It's like cluster bombs and landmines. You have no idea where all these things are. You have no idea how many of them exploded and which didn't and it's extremely hard to clean up the duds.

      • mrguyorama 2 days ago

        And neither are against the laws of war. The US has decided to reduce their usage, but Russia uses air deployed landmines with high dud rates and it is not a war crime.

    • loeg 2 days ago

      Notably, these are not booby traps. (The defining feature of booby traps is that they are triggered by the victim.)

    • exe34 2 days ago

      this was a special shipment created for the terrorists. this isn't just putting a bomb into every pager.

      • gruez 2 days ago

        >this isn't just putting a bomb into every pager.

        I never claimed otherwise. Again, the claim isn't that innocent people are carrying the pagers, is that the pagers are around innocent civilians. It's not any different than drone striking terrorists at weddings[1], which also drew criticism from human rights groups. Even if we assume the targets are definitely terrorists, that doesn't solve the issue of civilians who happen to be nearby.

        [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wech_Baghtu_wedding_party_airs...

        • exe34 2 days ago

          the blast radius is much smaller. from the market video, the people around him were fine, and only the heznobollah guy was considering the impact of terrorism on future generations.

      • freehorse 2 days ago

        Were the kids killed also terrorists?

      • dtornabene 2 days ago

        How do you know this? you can't know it. You have no idea how many people had these devices.

  • tamimio 2 days ago

    Says who? Pagers are used by doctors and icom are used by pretty much anyone who needs that communication, like construction workers in a site or first responders.

    • loeg 2 days ago

      Not the ones distributed to Hezbollah.

    • petre 2 days ago

      Being linked to Hezbollah carries certain occupational risks.

      • freehorse 2 days ago

        So if somebody turned the phones of all members of X army (say IDF) into bombs, and exploded them at mass when a lot of them would be off duty with their families, would that be ok? This is what happened here.

caeril 2 days ago

> The EU is probably not going to be happy

Happiness is irrelevant, especially when it comes to geopolitics.

In the US, criticism of Israel is antagonistic to our Judeo-Christian values.

In the EU, criticism of Israel is tantamount to the rise of a Fourth Reich.

Germany, in particular, is scared shitless of this accusation, and will accept any and all actions by Israel. This is a country who can do no wrong, and will get away with whatever they feel like.

> This is going to create a lot of distrust in the international supply chain.

This reminds me of people who were legitimately shocked to learn about the Snowden disclosures. If you don't already know the supply chain is thoroughly poisoned, and has been for decades, there is no helping you.