Honestly, the real question to me is how many innocent people were maimed, injured, or killed in this attack. This is incredibly indiscriminate, even though the idea is that only the bad guys are holding the pages or walkie-talkies, but if they’re in a cafe they’re not the only ones getting hurt. Think of it as attaching an explosive to a thousand Hezbollah people, and then exploding them as they wander through a city. That’s the true crime, the potentially disproportionate massacre of innocent civilians.
Honestly, the real question to me is how many innocent people were maimed, injured, or killed in this attack.
Quite a bit fewer than 0.1% of the individual detonations appear to have harmed anyone except the Hezbollah operative assigned to the pager, so this doesn’t actually appear to be a question. The attack was extremely discriminate and targeted.
but if they’re in a cafe they’re not the only ones getting hurt.
In every case in which one of these went off in a cafe, the intended target was the only one hurt.
That’s the true crime, the potentially disproportionate massacre of innocent civilians.
But that isn’t what happened. The opposite happened.
Several of the victims were children. They went off in crowds. There was no way they could control that many devices with precision when they set them off all at once like that.
The fathers of these dead children will simply have to live with the terrible consequences of their involvement with antisemitic terror (who are we kidding, they don’t care.)
They went off in crowds.
In every such case only the agent was harmed. You’re proving how targeted the attack was.
They are asking for the source of your statement that less then 0.1% of the victims where valid targets. Since most have seen evidence to the exact opposite of that statement.
Oh and although I can put links to back that statement up, I will not. (Since that is the presiding fashion here apparently)
Honestly, the real question to me is how many innocent people were maimed, injured, or killed in this attack. This is incredibly indiscriminate, even though the idea is that only the bad guys are holding the pages or walkie-talkies, but if they’re in a cafe they’re not the only ones getting hurt. Think of it as attaching an explosive to a thousand Hezbollah people, and then exploding them as they wander through a city. That’s the true crime, the potentially disproportionate massacre of innocent civilians.
Quite a bit fewer than 0.1% of the individual detonations appear to have harmed anyone except the Hezbollah operative assigned to the pager, so this doesn’t actually appear to be a question. The attack was extremely discriminate and targeted.
In every case in which one of these went off in a cafe, the intended target was the only one hurt.
But that isn’t what happened. The opposite happened.
Several of the victims were children. They went off in crowds. There was no way they could control that many devices with precision when they set them off all at once like that.
The fathers of these dead children will simply have to live with the terrible consequences of their involvement with antisemitic terror (who are we kidding, they don’t care.)
In every such case only the agent was harmed. You’re proving how targeted the attack was.
Says who?
Says Hezbollah, and all reporting from Lebanon.
Source? Not being shitty but serious
Hezbollah publicly announces their war casualties so they’re the source
I don’t know how to explain that any more clearly. If you’re still puzzled, I recommend asking a question instead of posting a single word
They are asking for the source of your statement that less then 0.1% of the victims where valid targets. Since most have seen evidence to the exact opposite of that statement.
Oh and although I can put links to back that statement up, I will not. (Since that is the presiding fashion here apparently)
Hezbollah is the source. That’s three times I’ve said so. What about that is still unclear?