883
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
883 points (98.9% liked)
News
35724 readers
3022 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think being designed to maim is but one of multiple problems with this approach, which would overall not be served by more explosives.
It looks like a pager. Yes, supply chain attack blah blah only purchased by Hezbollah folks. But if it gets stolen or found by a civilian, there is nothing about it to suggest it could be lethal or that they should leave it alone. It isn't just not marked as lethal, it's explicitly disguised as something mundane.
Hezbollah folks could be sitting next to an innocent civilian in any number of contexts.
Related to but distinct from my first point, there is an endless list of possible ways that a pager belonging to a hezbollah operative could wind up in the hands of an innocent, or in a position to harm an innocent instead of the target, and none of them are things that could be controlled or monitored for the fleet of explosive pagers. Once sold, there was literally no way to have any idea who would actually be harmed when the triggering page was sent.
Just call it terrorism perpetrated by a state actor, and we have no argument.
All of your problems are just one and the same: statistical probability of civilian casualties. And the nice thing with discussing the ethics of the choice to do it here is that we have the exact results. Around 2750 Hezbros hit with around 10 civilian deaths.
When they destroyed ISIS in Mosul 8 years ago, they turned that dial up all the way to a 1-on-1 ratio. 10.000 innocents for 10.000 Isibro's.
When they destroyed them in Raqqa, they went even higher, to around 1.5.
And if it makes you happy to call it 'terrorism' when you see civilian casualties, go ahead.
Their "success" was entirely down to luck, and all my problems were to illustrate the uncertainty built into every second that elapsed from the time they sold the pagers until the time they were detonated.
I think you overestimate the number of Lebanese that would steal pagers from Hezbollah.
As I said, the results just prove they made a good call (no pun intended) and with the large sample size luck just can't be a factor
"All of your problems boil down to the fact it's indiscriminate. Get over it. The problems end when you do."