Maybe, but the pager thing was definitely terrorism.
No, it’s not. You can’t fucking win with the pacifists.
Hi, I’m definitely not a pacifist. I’ve been in war zones. And the laws of war exist for a reason. The choice is not war crimes or pacifism. Anyone telling you that is a shit person trying to make you a shit person. Don’t listen to them.
I would hesitate to call it terrorism, it was targeted at military persons with an intent at military disruption and any public casualties were collateral damage. It may have been a war crime though.
I was a war crime, I can’t find any way to even debate it not being.
I don’t think you can just call things you don’t like a ‘war crime’
The disguising of a military weapons in the form of common civilian used equipment to trick your opponent is a war crime.
It was a war crime in 2008 when a bomb was disguised as a spare tire in an SUV used to kill the head of Hezbollah’s international operations, whether we agree the target needed to be taken out or not. A drone strike would be “lawful” a car bomb is not.
A cell phone is common civilian equipment. This isn’t “whatever I think.”
It was a war crime in 2008 when a bomb was disguised as a spare tire in an SUV used to kill the head of Hezbollah’s international operations, whether we agree the target needed to be taken out or not. A drone strike would be “lawful” a car bomb is not.
Far from an uncontested view, at least insofar as why it was a war crime.
This essay argues that making a military object appear to be a civilian object—such as disguising a bomb as an SUV’s spare tire—is a permissible ruse of war, not a prohibited act of perfidy, as long as the civilian object in question does not receive special protection under international humanitarian law (IHL). It nevertheless concludes that Mughniyah’s killing was, in fact, perfidious, because outside of an active combat zone a remotely detonated explosive device disguised as a civilian object must be located in the close vicinity of a military objective, which the SUV was not.
I mean. It legally doesn’t fall under the definition of terrorism, so there is that argument, lol.
Sabotaging dual-use communications devices that are used, specifically, by members of an enemy paramilitary group is not a clear-cut war crime. On the other hand, there is a very strong argument that ‘blind-firing’ such devices en-masse without regard for the proximity of civilians or possibility of civilian harm is a war crime via insufficiently discerning use of force. But even that is something that could probably be argued in a legitimately-unbiased international court - not that it’ll ever fucking get to one, considering Israel’s history with international courts.
Either way, it’s a shite move that was only meant to escalate the situation so Bibi can stay in power a few more minutes. Vile shit.
“stress that booby-traps associated with objects in normal civilian daily use are prohibited, and that booby-traps must not be used in association with protected persons, protected objects (such as medical supplies, gravesites and cultural or religious property) or internationally recognized protective emblems or signs (such as the red cross and red crescent).[3] Several manuals further specify that booby-traps must not be used in connection with certain objects likely to attract civilians, such as children’s toys.”
A cell phone is a normal civil daily use item and would attract use by civilians.
This specifically would come from Rule 80, pertaining to booby traps. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule80
- “Booby-trap” means any device or material which is designed, constructed or adapted to kill or injure and which functions unexpectedly when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently harmless object or performs an apparently safe act.
As these were remotely detonated, they do not fit the definition of a booby trap. Rather, the issue becomes a war crime because of Israel’s choice to detonate, which was very likely done in a manner that was reckless and without regard for collateral damage.
So would you classify them as an improvised explosive device instead? That the department of homeland security says are used by “criminals, vandals, terrorists, suicide bombers, and insurgents”
That wouldn’t be a good look either
Didn’t say it was a good look. In fact, I quite explicitly noted that it was a shit move and likely a war crime. Just probably not because of international law on booby traps, but because of international law on discriminate use of force.
or approaches an apparently harmless object or performs an apparently safe act.
You’re forgetting a couple or statements there. These were absolutely booby traps and command detonated traps exist.
No. The distribution is as indiscriminate as leaving command detonated mines in place. (also a war crime). You cannot ensure those mines only target combatants after you leave. The indiscriminate distribution is a war crime as much as the indiscriminate activation.
We can’t leave mines out in a place all the civilians have left because they might one day get found by a civilian. Actively introducing bombs to the public market is absolutely a war crime.
So gross that the US considers the use of multiple 2000 lbs Bunker-buster Bombs on a residential district of a counties Capital, flattening at least six residential buildings, burying and killing hundreds of civilians, as a ‘measure of justice.’ because the intended target is the terrorist and now using Human Shields, so it’s their fault for all those civilian deaths, not Israel. Terrorism is only what Our and Israel’s enemies do.
Whatever violence the US and our Allies do is good and just, whatever violence our and our Allies enemies do is bad and unjustified. The double standard is so flagrantly obvious. It’s not about civilians, or peace, or justice. Israel can kill however many civilians they want, even US ones, and the US will still back them.
All that money could be going to our crippled Social Services instead and actually help people’s lives.
It’s not great optics that’s for sure.
Harris’ statement for anyone curious, before they accuse her of being pro-Israel for saying this.
Hassan Nasrallah was a terrorist with American blood on his hands. Across decades, his leadership of Hezbollah destabilized the Middle East and led to the killing of countless innocent people in Lebanon, Israel, Syria, and around the world. Today, Hezbollah’s victims have a measure of justice.
I have an unwavering commitment to the security of Israel. I will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.
President Biden and I do not want to see conflict in the Middle East escalate into a broader regional war. We have been working on a diplomatic solution along the Israel-Lebanon border so that people can safely return home on both sides of that border. Diplomacy remains the best path forward to protect civilians and achieve lasting stability in the region.
She, and probably Biden are clearly referencing the American POV. Would I love to see her release another statement telling Netanyahu he has to stop this and give Palestinians freedom? Yeah. But I’m also not going to pretend the US doesn’t want to get bad guys who’ve killed Americans.
Don’t tack on “and Harris” you wouldn’t do that for any other President. “Biden calls it…”
I do believe she said it too.
Hassan Nasrallah was a terrorist with American blood on his hands. Across decades, his leadership of Hezbollah destabilized the Middle East and led to the killing of countless innocent people in Lebanon, Israel, Syria, and around the world. Today, Hezbollah’s victims have a measure of justice.
I have an unwavering commitment to the security of Israel. I will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.
President Biden and I do not want to see conflict in the Middle East escalate into a broader regional war. We have been working on a diplomatic solution along the Israel-Lebanon border so that people can safely return home on both sides of that border. Diplomacy remains the best path forward to protect civilians and achieve lasting stability in the region.
She released a statement too. I could say her boss demanded a united show or her campaign staff was getting bothered by AIPAC with a month left in the campaign but that would be the same as people excusing Trump’s 5d chess bullshit. The best I can give people is she’s the American VP and she’s going to care that a terrorist who killed Americans died.
Yeah, that makes since. Thanks for the info
