3 ms·

> Israel and Lebanon are not at war. Maybe not, but the combatants holding those devices were at war, no?

shprd 2y ago
> but the combatants holding those devices were at war, no? The attack wasn't as targeted as you seem to think. It also hit health workers and bystanders. Approx half the casualties are civilians (including children). According to Humans rights watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers-harmed-hezbollah-civilians https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers... > Thousands of pagers simultaneously exploded across Lebanon and parts of Syria on September 17, 2024, resulting in at least 12 deaths, including at least two children and two health workers, and at least 2,800 injuries, according to Lebanon’s Ministry of Health.
- lelanthran 2y ago
  > Approx half the casualties are civilians Citation needed for that. None of the news reports, even the heavily biased ones, have reported mass civilian casualties.
  - bordercases 2y ago
    How many children do you expect to be combatants?
  - shprd 2y ago
    The citation, as requested: "two children and four health workers in a hospital in southern Beirut were among the 12 people who were killed on Tuesday." - Public Health Minister Firas Abiad in a press conference So that's 50% of those killed, right? and that's just health workers and children (who were 8 and 11 years old, btw). Also, there were multiple footage of the devices exploding among civilians in dense markets and grocery stores, so the percentage of civilians injured might be even higher. I expect more detailed reports will be shared over the next few days about the total casualty.
    - dsauerbrun 2y ago
      casualties refers to injuries as well as deaths. I think the citation they were looking for was for the ~2800 number. I don't think it's reasonable to say that 6/12 killed were civilians, so half of all casualties were civilian. We dont know until we get more reports, like you said, it could be higher... but it could also be lower.
      - zeroimpl 2y ago
        This is a dumb position though because all logic would suggest the two ratios are proportional. Civilians are not significantly more likely to die of their injuries than non-civilians. While 12 is a bit of a small sample, it's not unreasonably small to make extrapolations.
    - TwentyPosts 2y ago
      Apart from the issue where this ignores how many people got injured (a much larger number), there's a very simple "survival bias" reason (ironically) why this argument doesn't work. Children (and potentially health workers, as opposed to men of fighting age) are much more likely to die of such an explosion than men of fighting age. In other words, children will be significantly overrepresented here.
      - tga_d 2y ago
        To just back up for a moment, your argument is that an attack that turned enemy combatants into unwitting suicide bombers in civilian areas with children doesn't qualify as terrorism, because children are easy to kill? Would you hold this opinion if it was an operation by Taliban fighters on US soldiers at home on leave?
      - shprd 2y ago
        Sorry to burst you theory: 1. Hezbollah only mourned 10 out of the 26 killed so far, claiming them as members (one of them being a medic). So the 50% seems to still hold, even leaving some room for malice and mistakes. 2. Most of the explosion incidents and injuries are coming from residential areas in Beirut so statistically the percentage of civilians injured as "collateral damage" is likely high considering many of those carrying these devices were going about their life, either with family or in public places at the time.
  - IOT_Apprentice 2y ago
    [flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- tveita 2y ago
  That still looks like a more targeted approach than "precise strikes" on schools and humanitarian zones like in https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyx9znxl4eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyx9znxl4eo
- golergka 2y ago
  [flagged]

> but the combatants holding those devices were at war, no? The attack wasn't as targeted as you seem to think. It also hit health workers and bystanders. Approx half the casualties are civilians (including children). According to Humans rights watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers-harmed-hezbollah-civilians https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers... > Thousands of pagers simultaneously exploded across Lebanon and parts of Syria on September 17, 2024, resulting in at least 12 deaths, including at least two children and two health workers, and at least 2,800 injuries, according to Lebanon’s Ministry of Health.

lelanthran 2y ago
> Approx half the casualties are civilians Citation needed for that. None of the news reports, even the heavily biased ones, have reported mass civilian casualties.
- bordercases 2y ago
  How many children do you expect to be combatants?
- shprd 2y ago
  The citation, as requested: "two children and four health workers in a hospital in southern Beirut were among the 12 people who were killed on Tuesday." - Public Health Minister Firas Abiad in a press conference So that's 50% of those killed, right? and that's just health workers and children (who were 8 and 11 years old, btw). Also, there were multiple footage of the devices exploding among civilians in dense markets and grocery stores, so the percentage of civilians injured might be even higher. I expect more detailed reports will be shared over the next few days about the total casualty.
  - dsauerbrun 2y ago
    casualties refers to injuries as well as deaths. I think the citation they were looking for was for the ~2800 number. I don't think it's reasonable to say that 6/12 killed were civilians, so half of all casualties were civilian. We dont know until we get more reports, like you said, it could be higher... but it could also be lower.
    - zeroimpl 2y ago
      This is a dumb position though because all logic would suggest the two ratios are proportional. Civilians are not significantly more likely to die of their injuries than non-civilians. While 12 is a bit of a small sample, it's not unreasonably small to make extrapolations.
  - TwentyPosts 2y ago
    Apart from the issue where this ignores how many people got injured (a much larger number), there's a very simple "survival bias" reason (ironically) why this argument doesn't work. Children (and potentially health workers, as opposed to men of fighting age) are much more likely to die of such an explosion than men of fighting age. In other words, children will be significantly overrepresented here.
    - tga_d 2y ago
      To just back up for a moment, your argument is that an attack that turned enemy combatants into unwitting suicide bombers in civilian areas with children doesn't qualify as terrorism, because children are easy to kill? Would you hold this opinion if it was an operation by Taliban fighters on US soldiers at home on leave?
    - shprd 2y ago
      Sorry to burst you theory: 1. Hezbollah only mourned 10 out of the 26 killed so far, claiming them as members (one of them being a medic). So the 50% seems to still hold, even leaving some room for malice and mistakes. 2. Most of the explosion incidents and injuries are coming from residential areas in Beirut so statistically the percentage of civilians injured as "collateral damage" is likely high considering many of those carrying these devices were going about their life, either with family or in public places at the time.
- IOT_Apprentice 2y ago
  [flagged]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tveita 2y ago
That still looks like a more targeted approach than "precise strikes" on schools and humanitarian zones like in https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyx9znxl4eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyx9znxl4eo
golergka 2y ago
[flagged]