5 ms·
I added more context above to clarify the point I was making (which I thought would be self-evident, but I guess it was a bit more obscure than I thought)
by pbiggar 11mo ago
I added more context above to clarify the point I was making (which I thought would be self-evident, but I guess it was a bit more obscure than I thought)
- jameshilliard 11mo ago[flagged]
- ebbi 11mo ago[flagged]
- sudohalt 11mo ago[flagged]
- dralley 11mo agoIf you define "casualty" as suffering some ear pain or a minor scratch, then sure.
- richwater 11mo ago[flagged]
- jameshilliard 11mo ago> 2. The vast majority of casualties were not mythical "terrorists", they were ordinary pedestrians. This is simply false, virtually every single spicy pager casualty was part of a terrorist organization. > 3. Regardless this is still considered a war crime, and is by definition a terrorist act because it was not targeted. When they launched the attack they had no knowledge of where each pager was. It was highly targeted in reality, spicy pagers were sold exclusively to the terrorist organizations for use on the terrorists communication network. It's arguably one of the most highly targeted attacks in history in terms of enemy to civilian casualty ratios.
- GuinansEyebrows 11mo ago> spicy pagers what a disturbing infantilization
- jameshilliard 11mo ago> what a disturbing infantilization Would you prefer it be called Operation Grim Beeper?
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]