Bulky pager is a fun way to spin terrorism. Let me try.
How Al Qaeda's surprise itinerary shocked New Yorkers
I don't know if this can considered terrorism, the same way I don't consider car bombs driven into coalition FOBs in Iraq or Afghanistan, or roadside IEDs and VBIDs that killed soldier on patrol, as terrorism.
If you're targeting military personnel, it's not terrorism. But, if you're doing it in a way that unnecessarily causes collateral damage, too much collateral damage, etc., that's a war crime. Which I believe this was.
I can understand the argument that considers this terrorism, and I'm not putting down this flag saying that my understanding of it is right and yours is wrong. Just explaining my current view of the situation.
But at this point, I'm not sure it makes any difference. Israeli troops, and settlers, are regularly committing unquestionable acts of terrorism and war crimes on a daily basis, so what difference does it make classifying this one incident as terrorism, or just another war crime.
It is textbook terrorism. Imagine being in the supermarket shopping for produce when suddenly the person standing next to you has their legs blown off... Would "terror" be a good description of how that would likely make someone feel?
It's just state-sponsored, which is why it was more sophisticated than what we're used to seeing from non-state actors. Which makes it even worse.
Terrorism is more about the intent rather than the result. Did Israel intend to instill terror in the civilian population or did they genuinely try to target Hezbollah militants (and perhaps didn't care much about any civilian casualties)?
If the goal was military casualties, they'd have been better served by having Hezbollah mobilize its insurgents, by maybe massing on the borders in a very obvious show of force, then firing off the pagers once the militants were grouped and away from civilian populations.
But then they'd be on the back foot because the survivors would be already massed and coordinating in person, which would hamper their actual invasion.
Duh, yes they did. They admitted that much, try harder.
Did Israel intend to instill terror in the civilian population
Yes. Absolutely yes. And the terror attack with pagers was just one part of the larger, ongoing terrorism.
Totally with you. Edit (until the end, then I have a different conclusion about semantics) They attempted a military strike, on militants. There was a ton of collateral damage, and the method inherently put non combatants at risk. That's war crime, and that's already bad enough. The semantics matter and I personally believe "war crime and wonton disregard for collateral damage" is the most effective description.
The 9/11 hijackers did something different, they explicitly tried to hunt civilians.
To be clear, I'm not condoning or defending Israel's actions one bit.
You might have missed my point at the end, but I'm not sure at this point if semantics do matter.
If this was a singular event, or one of several events, they obviously would.
But after a year of daily war crimes and terrorism by the IDF, I genuinely don't know if it actually matters whether or not this one event should be categorized as terrorism, or just a war crime.
Agree with everything else you said, but I wanted to lead with that part first since I crammed in at the bottom of my last comment.
I diverged from you, I'll edit to be clear.
I think semantics matter because we hope to compel nation states to act. Phrases like war crimes or terrorism have very different meanings on the global stage, and it's important that "casual" discussion reflect the proper terminology used.
Israel is certainly inspiring quite a bit of "terror" with what they are doing, but they aren't being "terrorists" in the legelese sense. They believe they are conducting security and wartime operations, and much of the global community sees it that way too. What they are increasingly accused of (and obviously guilty of) is massive collateral damage both quantitatively (the number of people hurt) and qualitatively (the way in which they are hurt). If Israel claims to be hunting militants in an ongoing military engagement, then what they are doing is a war crime.
Edit I'd also highlight that "just a warcrime" is not some slap on the wrist accusation.
And I can pull out a dozen other US military and CIA officials, current and present, who would say differently.
Would their status as current, or former, as cogs in the wheels of the US military and intelligence branches, make them credible as well?
They would not be ctedible in their reading of a calendar.
More like sophisticated terrorist attack tools used
I wonder if the coverage of these pager attacks would be quite so complimentary on their ingenuity if it struck targets in Europe, with >25% civilian collateral, including aid-workers, children and members of neighbouring countries.
They're advertising war crimes. Doesn't matter who was bombed, really.
Lock em up.
Probably not. No one credits Al-Qaeda's ingenuity with using planes as ad-hoc cruise missiles.
I do. It was very clever and they achieved every long-term strategic goal of the attacks, short of the destruction of the US (which may well be pending).
But yes, I get your point, Westerner lives are special and sacred, because history is only still happening in other places. When we die all logic must shut off.
>25% civilian collateral
Is there a source on this? The initial coverage made it sound like it was maybe 10%.
Are you counting injuries or just deaths?
As of 22 September 2024, the death toll from the attacks was 42, including at least 12 civilian deaths. More than 3,500 people were injured.
At least 12 people were killed in the first wave of attacks, including civilians such as two health workers, a 9-year-old girl and an 11-year-old boy. The adult son of Ali Ammar, a Hezbollah member of Parliament was killed; Prime Minister Najib Mikati visited southern Beirut to pay his respects. More than 2,750 people were wounded. In the second wave on 18 September, at least 30 people were killed and 750 others were injured. One eye doctor at Mount Lebanon University Hospital reported that a number of those injured showed signs of something being blown up directly in their face, with some losing one or both eyes, while others had shrapnel in their brains. The Lebanese health ministry reported that 300 people had lost both eyes and 500 people had lost one eye as a result of the pager attacks. Other doctors saw severe hand, waist and facial injuries, reporting patients with fingers torn, hands amputated, eyes popped out of the socket and facial lacerations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Lebanon_pager_explosions
Thanks! I was thinking of injured, clearly.
Interesting that by deaths, civilians are a much larger share. It makes sense in that it would take less to blow up a kid, so in the rare cases they were handling the top-secret Hezbollah pager it was more likely to be fatal. (Welcome to war, where kids are reduced to a physics problem)
I'm still not sure why this is the one people are hung up on, when there's a plethora of clear-cut IDF warcrimes to choose from.
I think it's only because the US State Department praised the operation as legitimate and completely downplayed the reality of the casualties, instead of acknowledging it for the mass terrorism that it was. Not at all surprising for those who know how routinely the State Dept lies about the realities of US and US-backed warfare, but many people in the West still ran with it thanks to the coverage by US Media that shares that sentiment with the State Dept.
It's really nothing new for anyone aware of how many war crimes the IDF commits daily, just another form and against a different resistance group
This was an excellent read and actually good journalism
There's no kill like overkill, I guess. I have a feeling it would have taken years for Hezbollah logistics to figure it out even with none of that stuff.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/