4 ms·

* * *

Cyph0n 10mo ago
So the indiscriminate mass detonation of explosive devices is not terrorism? Are you aware of how many civilian casualties there were as a result of this attack? Would this be acceptable if Hezbollah did this to Israeli military officers?
- richardfeynman 10mo ago
  The attack was by definition discriminate. I don't think there's an attack in modern history that was more targeted and had less collateral damage. The attack targeted hundreds Hezbollah leaders, who bought and used those pagers. There was minimal collateral damage among civilians amounting to unverified allegations that a child of a Hezbollah member was maimed, and some minor other damage. The explosives in the pagers were measured in grams, and the explosions were relatively small, specifically to minimize collateral damage.
  - Cyph0n 10mo ago
    It was indiscriminate in timing, location, and device possession. Unless you’re saying that the country behind a self-evaluated >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio in Gaza went through rigorous protocols to minimize harm in this attack?
    - richardfeynman 10mo ago
      The timing was during a war, the location was in a belligerent country, and the pagers were only and exclusively given to hezbollah leadership. The very definition of discriminate. Also, Israel has not "self-evaluated" a >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio. There was a Haaretz report that said the IDF was able to ID about 20% of those killed as militants against known databases, which is remarkably high compared to any other war. That doesn't mean the remaining 80% are civilians, it just means they weren't ID'd against a databse. So this includes anyone with a gun at a distance. Do you think Ukraine has a database of Russian soldiers and are able to ID 20% of the russian soldiers they kill against that database? Of course not. Israel's self evaluation of the ratio varies between 1.4:1 and 2:1 depending on the government official you quote.
      - Cyph0n 10mo ago
        Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Re: location - They exploded everywhere you can think of, while these targets were doing civilian activities near other civilians, and not in a combat setting. Re: possession - Given the above, and Israel’s horrendous kill ratio, there was definitely no consideration for possession of these pagers at the time of the attack. For example, who is to say that some pagers weren’t in use by members of the political bureau, or unofficially resold to a hospital for use by oncall doctors?
        richardfeynman 10mo ago
        timing - The fact that they were triggered to explode en masse does not imply there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. However, the fact that only Hezbollah leaders had these pagers, and the fact that the explosives were small, does imply there was deep consideration to minimizing civilian harm. location - they all exploded on the person of hezbolllah leaders or in their possession in a belligerent country during wartime possession - Israel has a laudable and low civilian: militant kill ratio, possibly the best in the history of modern combat. The pagers were encrypted military devices with military messages, there was no known use by doctors or non Hezbollah operatives.
        Cyph0n 10mo ago
        > Israel has a laudable and low civilian: militant kill ratio, possibly the best in the history of modern combat. Right, that’s my cue to stop engaging :)
        palmotea 10mo ago
        > Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Zero? The whole nature of the attack shows consideration towards "minimizing civilian harm." Tricking an enemy agent into carrying a small explosive device on his person, then detonating it, will have far less civilian harm than the standard procedure of dropping a bomb on whatever building they happen to be in. Your thinking appears unreasonably binary here, as shown by your use of phrases like "zero consideration" and "definitely no consideration," in reaction to Israel not meeting an unrealistically high standard for "minimizing civilian harm." Could Israel have done more to minimize civilian harm with that attack? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean they did nothing.
flyinglizard 10mo ago
… and it’s not just that Israel woke up one morning and decided to take Hezbollah to the cleaners, either. Hezbollah started a military campaign against Israel on October 8th, 2023, one day after the most horrific attack Jews have experienced since the holocaust. I don’t think this attack could have been more moral or justified than it was. It didn’t even kill on large numbers, instead it was just enough to neutralize Hezbollahs command and control structures.
viccis 10mo ago
Would you call it terrorism when Israel sent mailbombs to US top brass, including our president?
- richardfeynman 10mo ago
  This has not happened anywhere other than your imagination. You mean "if" not "when."
  - viccis 10mo ago
    Fortunately, it was well documented. Per the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mailed-to-truman-in-1947-truman-was-sent-bombs-book.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mail...
    - richardfeynman 10mo ago
      This is what you call "well-documented"? Did you even read the article? This 1972 article cites unsubstantiated claims from memoirs written decades after the fact — not verified evidence. There is no solid historical documentation that Israel, the Israeli government, or even Lehi sent functional bombs to U.S. leadership in 1947. The only sources are anecdotal, inconsistent, and disputed. Crucially, there are no Secret Service or National Archives records of any assassination attempt on Truman by Zionist militants. A Freedom of Information Act request for such records produced nothing. Historians who have looked into the claim find no contemporaneous evidence and no confirmation in government archives. In other words, this is not a "documented Israeli attack on the U.S." Instead, it’s a story that survives (in spite of evidence that it's false) in the minds and narratives of people like you want it to be true. That’s how conspiracy theories work: weak evidence, strong emotion.
      - viccis 10mo ago
        Ok, so I see you're taking a denialist approach. At best you will have to settle on "well they sure did send them to a bunch of British politicians, and ya know, they did carry out the King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people via terrorism, and they did plan on terrorist bombing a bunch of Westerners and Arabs to blame it on communists and Muslim Brotherhood (the Lavon Affair) before getting caught, but they definitely didn't send them to Truman we pinky promise". This isn't even the most outrageous thing Lehi and Irgun did (trying to partner with Hitler against the British might take that) before the Israeli government disbanded them and merged most of them into the IDF when they no longer needed to terrorize the West.

* * *

Cyph0n 10mo ago

So the indiscriminate mass detonation of explosive devices is not terrorism? Are you aware of how many civilian casualties there were as a result of this attack? Would this be acceptable if Hezbollah did this to Israeli military officers?

richardfeynman 10mo ago
The attack was by definition discriminate. I don't think there's an attack in modern history that was more targeted and had less collateral damage. The attack targeted hundreds Hezbollah leaders, who bought and used those pagers. There was minimal collateral damage among civilians amounting to unverified allegations that a child of a Hezbollah member was maimed, and some minor other damage. The explosives in the pagers were measured in grams, and the explosions were relatively small, specifically to minimize collateral damage.
- Cyph0n 10mo ago
  It was indiscriminate in timing, location, and device possession. Unless you’re saying that the country behind a self-evaluated >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio in Gaza went through rigorous protocols to minimize harm in this attack?
  - richardfeynman 10mo ago
    The timing was during a war, the location was in a belligerent country, and the pagers were only and exclusively given to hezbollah leadership. The very definition of discriminate. Also, Israel has not "self-evaluated" a >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio. There was a Haaretz report that said the IDF was able to ID about 20% of those killed as militants against known databases, which is remarkably high compared to any other war. That doesn't mean the remaining 80% are civilians, it just means they weren't ID'd against a databse. So this includes anyone with a gun at a distance. Do you think Ukraine has a database of Russian soldiers and are able to ID 20% of the russian soldiers they kill against that database? Of course not. Israel's self evaluation of the ratio varies between 1.4:1 and 2:1 depending on the government official you quote.
    - Cyph0n 10mo ago
      Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Re: location - They exploded everywhere you can think of, while these targets were doing civilian activities near other civilians, and not in a combat setting. Re: possession - Given the above, and Israel’s horrendous kill ratio, there was definitely no consideration for possession of these pagers at the time of the attack. For example, who is to say that some pagers weren’t in use by members of the political bureau, or unofficially resold to a hospital for use by oncall doctors?
      - richardfeynman 10mo ago
        timing - The fact that they were triggered to explode en masse does not imply there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. However, the fact that only Hezbollah leaders had these pagers, and the fact that the explosives were small, does imply there was deep consideration to minimizing civilian harm. location - they all exploded on the person of hezbolllah leaders or in their possession in a belligerent country during wartime possession - Israel has a laudable and low civilian: militant kill ratio, possibly the best in the history of modern combat. The pagers were encrypted military devices with military messages, there was no known use by doctors or non Hezbollah operatives.
        Cyph0n 10mo ago
        > Israel has a laudable and low civilian: militant kill ratio, possibly the best in the history of modern combat. Right, that’s my cue to stop engaging :)
      - palmotea 10mo ago
        > Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Zero? The whole nature of the attack shows consideration towards "minimizing civilian harm." Tricking an enemy agent into carrying a small explosive device on his person, then detonating it, will have far less civilian harm than the standard procedure of dropping a bomb on whatever building they happen to be in. Your thinking appears unreasonably binary here, as shown by your use of phrases like "zero consideration" and "definitely no consideration," in reaction to Israel not meeting an unrealistically high standard for "minimizing civilian harm." Could Israel have done more to minimize civilian harm with that attack? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean they did nothing.

flyinglizard 10mo ago

… and it’s not just that Israel woke up one morning and decided to take Hezbollah to the cleaners, either. Hezbollah started a military campaign against Israel on October 8th, 2023, one day after the most horrific attack Jews have experienced since the holocaust. I don’t think this attack could have been more moral or justified than it was. It didn’t even kill on large numbers, instead it was just enough to neutralize Hezbollahs command and control structures.

viccis 10mo ago

Would you call it terrorism when Israel sent mailbombs to US top brass, including our president?

richardfeynman 10mo ago
This has not happened anywhere other than your imagination. You mean "if" not "when."
- viccis 10mo ago
  Fortunately, it was well documented. Per the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mailed-to-truman-in-1947-truman-was-sent-bombs-book.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mail...
  - richardfeynman 10mo ago
    This is what you call "well-documented"? Did you even read the article? This 1972 article cites unsubstantiated claims from memoirs written decades after the fact — not verified evidence. There is no solid historical documentation that Israel, the Israeli government, or even Lehi sent functional bombs to U.S. leadership in 1947. The only sources are anecdotal, inconsistent, and disputed. Crucially, there are no Secret Service or National Archives records of any assassination attempt on Truman by Zionist militants. A Freedom of Information Act request for such records produced nothing. Historians who have looked into the claim find no contemporaneous evidence and no confirmation in government archives. In other words, this is not a "documented Israeli attack on the U.S." Instead, it’s a story that survives (in spite of evidence that it's false) in the minds and narratives of people like you want it to be true. That’s how conspiracy theories work: weak evidence, strong emotion.
    - viccis 10mo ago
      Ok, so I see you're taking a denialist approach. At best you will have to settle on "well they sure did send them to a bunch of British politicians, and ya know, they did carry out the King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people via terrorism, and they did plan on terrorist bombing a bunch of Westerners and Arabs to blame it on communists and Muslim Brotherhood (the Lavon Affair) before getting caught, but they definitely didn't send them to Truman we pinky promise". This isn't even the most outrageous thing Lehi and Irgun did (trying to partner with Hitler against the British might take that) before the Israeli government disbanded them and merged most of them into the IDF when they no longer needed to terrorize the West.