8 ms·

Doesn't every army conduct "mass surveillance"? What do you think all those satellites with cameras are doing orbiting the planet? Wouldn't the opposite be inc

Doesn't every army conduct "mass surveillance"? What do you think all those satellites with cameras are doing orbiting the planet? Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage.

Sporktacular 1y ago
Arguing that mass surveillance is not unethical but actually a way to save lives is pretty disingenuous, absurdly so considering how little the country wielding it cares about collateral damage.
dark_mode 1y ago
> Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage. The concern is who gets to decide what is or isn't a legitimate target? Today's heroes might be tomorrow's victims. I'd rather no one have that much power over others.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
lordofgibbons 1y ago
Are you seriously equating observing an area using satellites with indiscriminately monitoring everyone's calls, messages, and possibly hacking their devices?
- 3form 1y ago
  Given lackluster response to the recent attempts of the "democratic" governments to do very much the same to their own citizens, I daresay not many are particularly impressed.
- holmesworcester 1y ago
  And not in a war zone, even. (West Bank is governed by Israel.)
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    The West Bank is occupied by Israel and Israel has overall control, but it is broken up into a whole bunch of tiny administrative regions, some of which are administered by the PA and some of which are administered directly by Israel.
    - babu657 1y ago
      Gee i wonder what happens if Israel just let the west bank be. Wait…i know what will happen
      - tguvot 1y ago
        Rocket factories, like the one that was discovered week ago https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjbqu9qolx https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjbqu9qolx
        ashoeafoot 1y ago
        [dead]
- pcthrowaway 1y ago
  Additionally, there is observation AI face tracking of all movements of Palestinians in the West Bank, who live under occupation. While other governments may also conduct monitoring of their citizens to varying degrees, the distinction is that they are monitoring citizens, not using monitoring to enforce military apartheid.
  - davidf18 1y ago
    [dead]
- Manuel_D 1y ago
  Militaries do that too. Signals Intelligence has been thing since radios were used by the military. I bet you that in Ukraine the moment you fire up any RF emitter it's showing up on someone's spectrum analyzer. And if it's unencrypted or a broken encryption they'll probably be decoding and logging the transmission.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    > bet you that in Ukraine the moment you fire up any RF emitter The assertion was that "every army" is doing it, not that it's happening in active warzones.
- raxxorraxor 1y ago
  I case of Hezbollah it was very much worth it.
samirillian 1y ago
Holy crap you’re totally right
ycombigators 1y ago
It would be pretty difficult for the IDF to increase their level of collateral damage.
- sir0010010 1y ago
  In 1945, about ~90k people died over 2 days from the Tokyo Firebombing. Do you think it would be difficult for any modern millitary - that intentionally wanted to cause as much collateral damage as possible - to greatly exceed that number?
  - fjdjshsh 1y ago
    Not sure what is your point. The Israeli military could throw a few atomic bombs and wipe out the entire population in Gaza. That they don't is a sign of restraint for you?
    - jlawson 1y ago
      The point is that they could do similar attacks to the Tokyo firebombing (or much worse), but choose not to. Yes, that is a sign of restraint, obviously.
      - tfourb 1y ago
        80% of buildings in Gaza are destroyed. There are well documented cases of arbitrary killings of civilians and attacks on hospitals. IDF is routinely demanding entire cities to be evacuated, knowing that not all people can comply with such an order. Multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity investigations have been opened by national and international prosecutors. It is very obvious that the only restraint that the IDF is showing is that they do not kill every single civilian on sight.
        jlawson 1y ago
        Demanding cities be evacuated is what you do when you have restraint. Otherwise you would just kill everyone inside. If they had not done this, you would also claim that it's evidence of lack of restraint. Beyond that, everything you wrote is perfectly compatible with the IDF showing tremendous restraint. It is all more or less inevitable with any war in such an environment. All of it happened in Iraq with the Americans, for example. - Buildings destroyed aren't people - Documented cases are just that - cases. You need to demonstrate a pattern at scale. Bad cases are inevitable among millions of interactions. - Investigations opened is a signal of political incentives as much as actions taken.
kennywinker 1y ago
Perhaps the actual moral choice isn’t attacking blindly or mass surveillance of an occupied nation - it’s peace? Regardless, the death toll in gaza (somewhere between 45,000 and 600,000) suggests that this mass surveillance isn’t being used effectively to reduce the death toll. It also doesn’t take mass surveillance to know that bombing hospitals and schools is going to kill innocent people.
- amscanne 1y ago
  Even the Gaza Health Ministry claims only 68,000, so I presume that your 600,000 is a typo.
  - tkel 1y ago
    Gaza Health Ministry only counts those that show up at hospitals. The first big Lancet study a year ago estimated 200k. I've seen more recent studies estimate higher, with an additional year of killings. Also, Israel has attacked or destroyed most hospitals in Gaza. So the Health Ministry's counting is obviously hindered.
    - amscanne 1y ago
      I don't believe that what you're saying is correct at all. Only 34,344 of the GHM estimate are confirmed identities. The rest of either missing but presumed dead or gross adjustments. They are open about using "media reports to assess deaths in the north of Gaza". The Lancet study published in January 2025 estimated 70,000 as of October, 2024. This is higher than the GHM estimate, but I can't find anything close to your 200k estimate. So you may believe in your estimates, but they are many multiples larger than any other credible source that I can find... so it's odd to wave these figures around without any sources, links, etc.
      - anramon 1y ago
        https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/12/israeli-ex-commander-confirms-palestinian-casualties-are-more-than-200000 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/12/israeli-ex-com... Or maybe that man is a hamas spy, right?
StanislavPetrov 1y ago
>Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage. That would only be true if your goal was not to completely obliterate the population you are attacking and bombing, as Israel has demonstrated.
- jlawson 1y ago
  Since the Oct 7 attacks the Palestinian population has not shrunk. War deaths have roughly equalled births. Are you claiming that the IDF is trying their hardest to kill all the Palestinians they can, and that this is the best they can do? Really?
  - swores 1y ago
    You're spreading misinformation (quite likely unintentionally). No data has been released supporting the claim that the population has stayed the same, what was wrongly spread was a US intelligence assessment of expected population which was made before the October 7th attack predicting future population growth, and used by many people as if it had remained accurate despite all the killing,
  - swores 1y ago
    I'm too late to edit my previous reply, but wanted to add a few sources so here we go - Fact checking services debunking the claim of population not shrinking since October 2023: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/dec/06/instagram-posts/has-gazas-population-grown-2-since-oct-7-2023-no-t/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/dec/06/instagram-... https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/gaza-population-growth-projections-predate-recent-israel-palestine-war/ https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/gaza-population-growth-proj... Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics' population estimates, as of July 2025 - down 6% in one year since 2024, which is 10% below original forecasts for 2025: https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/Press_En_WPD2025E.pdf https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/Press_En_... (3rd section of page 2; though the whole document is worth reading)
    - jlawson 1y ago
nashadelic 1y ago
Two things: 1. The death toll has shown that this is the most indiscriminate bombings (Biden's own words) and deaths of civilians in recent memory. So, you could argue the tech is aiding in killing key civil infra staff 2. Sure, they can surveil, let them do it on their own data centers. It's actually strange that they would put such data/tech on a 3rd party data center to begin with.

Sporktacular 1y ago

Arguing that mass surveillance is not unethical but actually a way to save lives is pretty disingenuous, absurdly so considering how little the country wielding it cares about collateral damage.

dark_mode 1y ago

> Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage. The concern is who gets to decide what is or isn't a legitimate target? Today's heroes might be tomorrow's victims. I'd rather no one have that much power over others.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

lordofgibbons 1y ago

Are you seriously equating observing an area using satellites with indiscriminately monitoring everyone's calls, messages, and possibly hacking their devices?

3form 1y ago
Given lackluster response to the recent attempts of the "democratic" governments to do very much the same to their own citizens, I daresay not many are particularly impressed.
holmesworcester 1y ago
And not in a war zone, even. (West Bank is governed by Israel.)
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  The West Bank is occupied by Israel and Israel has overall control, but it is broken up into a whole bunch of tiny administrative regions, some of which are administered by the PA and some of which are administered directly by Israel.
  - babu657 1y ago
    Gee i wonder what happens if Israel just let the west bank be. Wait…i know what will happen
    - tguvot 1y ago
      Rocket factories, like the one that was discovered week ago https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjbqu9qolx https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjbqu9qolx
      - ashoeafoot 1y ago
        [dead]
pcthrowaway 1y ago
Additionally, there is observation AI face tracking of all movements of Palestinians in the West Bank, who live under occupation. While other governments may also conduct monitoring of their citizens to varying degrees, the distinction is that they are monitoring citizens, not using monitoring to enforce military apartheid.
- davidf18 1y ago
  [dead]
Manuel_D 1y ago
Militaries do that too. Signals Intelligence has been thing since radios were used by the military. I bet you that in Ukraine the moment you fire up any RF emitter it's showing up on someone's spectrum analyzer. And if it's unencrypted or a broken encryption they'll probably be decoding and logging the transmission.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  > bet you that in Ukraine the moment you fire up any RF emitter The assertion was that "every army" is doing it, not that it's happening in active warzones.
raxxorraxor 1y ago
I case of Hezbollah it was very much worth it.

samirillian 1y ago

Holy crap you’re totally right

ycombigators 1y ago

It would be pretty difficult for the IDF to increase their level of collateral damage.

sir0010010 1y ago
In 1945, about ~90k people died over 2 days from the Tokyo Firebombing. Do you think it would be difficult for any modern millitary - that intentionally wanted to cause as much collateral damage as possible - to greatly exceed that number?
- fjdjshsh 1y ago
  Not sure what is your point. The Israeli military could throw a few atomic bombs and wipe out the entire population in Gaza. That they don't is a sign of restraint for you?
  - jlawson 1y ago
    The point is that they could do similar attacks to the Tokyo firebombing (or much worse), but choose not to. Yes, that is a sign of restraint, obviously.
    - tfourb 1y ago
      80% of buildings in Gaza are destroyed. There are well documented cases of arbitrary killings of civilians and attacks on hospitals. IDF is routinely demanding entire cities to be evacuated, knowing that not all people can comply with such an order. Multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity investigations have been opened by national and international prosecutors. It is very obvious that the only restraint that the IDF is showing is that they do not kill every single civilian on sight.
      - jlawson 1y ago
        Demanding cities be evacuated is what you do when you have restraint. Otherwise you would just kill everyone inside. If they had not done this, you would also claim that it's evidence of lack of restraint. Beyond that, everything you wrote is perfectly compatible with the IDF showing tremendous restraint. It is all more or less inevitable with any war in such an environment. All of it happened in Iraq with the Americans, for example. - Buildings destroyed aren't people - Documented cases are just that - cases. You need to demonstrate a pattern at scale. Bad cases are inevitable among millions of interactions. - Investigations opened is a signal of political incentives as much as actions taken.

kennywinker 1y ago

Perhaps the actual moral choice isn’t attacking blindly or mass surveillance of an occupied nation - it’s peace? Regardless, the death toll in gaza (somewhere between 45,000 and 600,000) suggests that this mass surveillance isn’t being used effectively to reduce the death toll. It also doesn’t take mass surveillance to know that bombing hospitals and schools is going to kill innocent people.

amscanne 1y ago
Even the Gaza Health Ministry claims only 68,000, so I presume that your 600,000 is a typo.
- tkel 1y ago
  Gaza Health Ministry only counts those that show up at hospitals. The first big Lancet study a year ago estimated 200k. I've seen more recent studies estimate higher, with an additional year of killings. Also, Israel has attacked or destroyed most hospitals in Gaza. So the Health Ministry's counting is obviously hindered.
  - amscanne 1y ago
    I don't believe that what you're saying is correct at all. Only 34,344 of the GHM estimate are confirmed identities. The rest of either missing but presumed dead or gross adjustments. They are open about using "media reports to assess deaths in the north of Gaza". The Lancet study published in January 2025 estimated 70,000 as of October, 2024. This is higher than the GHM estimate, but I can't find anything close to your 200k estimate. So you may believe in your estimates, but they are many multiples larger than any other credible source that I can find... so it's odd to wave these figures around without any sources, links, etc.
    - anramon 1y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/12/israeli-ex-commander-confirms-palestinian-casualties-are-more-than-200000 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/12/israeli-ex-com... Or maybe that man is a hamas spy, right?

StanislavPetrov 1y ago

>Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage. That would only be true if your goal was not to completely obliterate the population you are attacking and bombing, as Israel has demonstrated.

jlawson 1y ago
Since the Oct 7 attacks the Palestinian population has not shrunk. War deaths have roughly equalled births. Are you claiming that the IDF is trying their hardest to kill all the Palestinians they can, and that this is the best they can do? Really?
- swores 1y ago
  You're spreading misinformation (quite likely unintentionally). No data has been released supporting the claim that the population has stayed the same, what was wrongly spread was a US intelligence assessment of expected population which was made before the October 7th attack predicting future population growth, and used by many people as if it had remained accurate despite all the killing,
- swores 1y ago
  I'm too late to edit my previous reply, but wanted to add a few sources so here we go - Fact checking services debunking the claim of population not shrinking since October 2023: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/dec/06/instagram-posts/has-gazas-population-grown-2-since-oct-7-2023-no-t/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/dec/06/instagram-... https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/gaza-population-growth-projections-predate-recent-israel-palestine-war/ https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/gaza-population-growth-proj... Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics' population estimates, as of July 2025 - down 6% in one year since 2024, which is 10% below original forecasts for 2025: https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/Press_En_WPD2025E.pdf https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/Press_En_... (3rd section of page 2; though the whole document is worth reading)
  - jlawson 1y ago

nashadelic 1y ago

Two things: 1. The death toll has shown that this is the most indiscriminate bombings (Biden's own words) and deaths of civilians in recent memory. So, you could argue the tech is aiding in killing key civil infra staff 2. Sure, they can surveil, let them do it on their own data centers. It's actually strange that they would put such data/tech on a 3rd party data center to begin with.