3 ms·

Yeah, it's the definition of a terror attack. The really bad part is how lauded the Mossad was for it's 'precision' by the western media. Geneva convention vio

by orwin 2y ago

Yeah, it's the definition of a terror attack. The really bad part is how lauded the Mossad was for it's 'precision' by the western media. Geneva convention violations, random children killed because Hezbollah militant were shopping/walking nearby, really 'precise'... On the other hand killing only 5 children for two hundred opposants, and not at least twice as much is proof that Mossad is a hundred of time more precise than tsahal. But maybe that's a low bar.

myth_drannon 2y ago
[flagged]
tptacek 2y ago
A terror attack definitionally targets civilian noncombatants, deliberately.
- aspenmayer 2y ago
  Not necessarily. The attack on USS Cole is considered a terror attack despite its explicitly military target. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing
- orwin 2y ago
  No, a terror attack is an attack that create a fear amongst noncombatants in order to push political objectives. Easy example: Attacking a hospital that healed an enemy combatant is a terror attack, even if you missile is very precise and only kill the combatant and people sharing his room. You didn't aim for civilians, but your goal with this attack is to coerce civilians (doctors and nurses here) into refusing to heal combatant again, using fear. That's the definition. In both the French dictionary, and britannica (https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism).
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> it's the definition of a terror attack No, it's not. We don't have to twist the definitions of prohibited acts of war for a war to be deplorable. Legal warfare is still horrendous. > random children killed because Hezbollah militant were shopping/walking nearby, really 'precise' To be clear, if those same targets were hit conventionally--by air-launched missile, for instance--that would somehow be better?
- orwin 2y ago
  Yes it is, see https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism > terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. They want to push the non-Chia in Lebanon against the Chia, probably hoping for an organisation like "Phalanges Libanaises" to come back and restart the civil war. If a new civil war start, it will be the second Israel deliberatly started in lebanon (yeah, the "Phalangistes" did the massacre, but the Mossad actually planned it and gave the target (mostly palestinians btw). This time it will be harder though.

by orwin 2y ago

myth_drannon 2y ago

[flagged]

tptacek 2y ago

A terror attack definitionally targets civilian noncombatants, deliberately.

aspenmayer 2y ago
Not necessarily. The attack on USS Cole is considered a terror attack despite its explicitly military target. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing
orwin 2y ago
No, a terror attack is an attack that create a fear amongst noncombatants in order to push political objectives. Easy example: Attacking a hospital that healed an enemy combatant is a terror attack, even if you missile is very precise and only kill the combatant and people sharing his room. You didn't aim for civilians, but your goal with this attack is to coerce civilians (doctors and nurses here) into refusing to heal combatant again, using fear. That's the definition. In both the French dictionary, and britannica (https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism).

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> it's the definition of a terror attack No, it's not. We don't have to twist the definitions of prohibited acts of war for a war to be deplorable. Legal warfare is still horrendous. > random children killed because Hezbollah militant were shopping/walking nearby, really 'precise' To be clear, if those same targets were hit conventionally--by air-launched missile, for instance--that would somehow be better?

orwin 2y ago
Yes it is, see https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism > terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. They want to push the non-Chia in Lebanon against the Chia, probably hoping for an organisation like "Phalanges Libanaises" to come back and restart the civil war. If a new civil war start, it will be the second Israel deliberatly started in lebanon (yeah, the "Phalangistes" did the massacre, but the Mossad actually planned it and gave the target (mostly palestinians btw). This time it will be harder though.