Readit Newsstark constrast to hezbollah's direct attack on civilians:
1. directly targeted civilians 2. direct action (not remote) 3. intentionally brutal (beheadings, rapes)
...what are they, animals?
pager attack is, however scary it looks, rather more "reserved and gentlemen-ly way" of doing things:
1. targeted hezbolla militants (would average civilian use walkietalkie?) 2. indirect action
for anyone saying otherwise, how more "gentlemen-ly" should israel be? do nothing? "talk" with the leaders? waste more precious lives by directly sending troops without any prior action?
I just don't get why people talk negatively about the walkietalkie boomboom campaign -- it's a masterpiece of "trying the most not to kill civilians but doing your job"
Downsides are doing infrastructure in a programming language was always problematic unless developer was skilled at Ops which most who used TFCDK were not.
Lumping together all civilians killed by Israel in the course of war is overly reductive: Some were killed in unlawful intentional acts, some were unfortunate collateral damage of lawful acts, and some were intentional victims of Hamas brutality, sacrificed at the altar of making Israel look bad.
It's an occupation that has been ongoing for almost 80 years, not a 'war' that began unprovoked, along with recorded history and the universe itself, on October 7th.
>Sometimes in perfectly legal and justified strikes, sometimes in attacks that contravene the laws of war.
More than half the time, these 'perfect justifications' don't hold water and in fact rest on the hope of total impunity from IHL.
>Hamas uses the civilians under their control as both a sword and a shield
Not according to any sane definition that is internationally agreed upon. Conversely, the IDF's use of human shields - as defined in IHL and in their own propaganda - is abundantly documented.
>Egypt simply refuses their obligation under IHL to allow refugees to flee, collateral damage is an unfortunate inevitability.
Rather odd that rendering Palestinians stateless is just a law of nature in your books, and that Israel's obligations as an occupying power and the agent that created a refugee crisis - ie, prosecuted a campaign of human cleansing - is not part of your calculus at all.
Sure, yeah, just like it was in any number of previous operations, which at the time they declared successful, even though they did quite a bit more of the latter. Per Occam's razor, either they are prodigious bunglers, or you are overly credulous.
"get asked the same about terminals all the time. “How will you turn this into a business? What’s the monetization strategy?” The monetization strategy is that my bank account has 3 commas mate."
https://x.com/mitchellh/status/1964785527741427940
Take a good guess where the three commas come from.