crashfrog @ crashfrog @sopuli.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

83

Joined

10 mo. ago

A collateral civilian death during a military action has never been considered “murder.” It can’t be, since it’s unintentional.

Well, if you subtract the Hezbollah casualties from the total casualties, there’s hardly any casualties left.

Are you asking for a source for arithmetic, or something?

I can’t have sympathy for murderous antisemites

I did back it up. I can’t make people read it, though

Defense of Israel is effectively banned on Lemmy

The source is Hezbollah. As I’ve told you.

That particular pager was in a bag, against a person, pointed away from anyone or anything else.

Where else would you carry a pager? You have to feel it when it vibrates.

Not to mention anything of the second attack, which used much larger charges and started fires and blew out windows across Lebanon.

Well, I’m sorry to hear that Lebanon’s glazers just got several months of guaranteed work, I guess, but I’m otherwise not sure why this is relevant.

And anyway, a single example isn't going to assuage anyone who has been reading reports of women and children dying from the attack.

What reports?

Didn't you say they were the ones who reported your non-Hezbollah casualty figure though?

I don’t have any “non-Hezbollah casualty figures.” I’m assuming that any casualties Hezbollah doesn’t claim are the civilians.

You could just link to what you're talking about

I’m still not understand what you’re finding unclear.

Ok, and what does this refute? I haven’t claimed there to be zero civilian casualties, but it’s currently fewer than one in one thousand.

Again, I’ve posted video. Why would I believe that could harm anyone but the bearer?

I’m assuming that, out of the total reported casualties, the ones Hezbollah doesn’t claim are the civilians. Can you explain your issue with that reasoning?

I’ll grant that there may be Hezbollah casualties that Hezbollah won’t publicly claim, but that would strengthen my case, not yours.

I’m clearly in good faith

So the children have to pay for their father's crimes?

No, they don’t have to. But they will when their fathers deliberately put them in danger.

Again, he’ll just have to live with the tragic consequences (just kidding, we know he doesn’t care.)

The same Hezbollah that claim this was an "act of war" and in nothing I can find give any indication of non Hezbollah casualties?

Why would Hezbollah report non-Hezbollah casualties? They’re not the government of Lebanon.

https://x.com/osint613/status/1837614316335648888?s=46

Here’s an example of how targeted the strike was, despite literally going off in a crowd - nobody hurt but the intended target, no harm whatsoever beyond two feet. Doesn’t even bruise an apple

I’m not saying we need to respect it, but the mail shouldn’t censor materials based on viewpoint.

Not censoring isn’t “respect”, it’s the minimum a free people should expect from their government.

Mossad, the IDF, and Israeli gov't in general doesn't give two shits about collateral damage

But that’s false. You’re just imagining that.

There wouldn’t still be a war in Gaza if that were the case.

If they kill a thousand innocents for every genuine terrorist, that's a good day in their book.

Why one? Why not zero?

Several of the victims were children.

The fathers of these dead children will simply have to live with the terrible consequences of their involvement with antisemitic terror (who are we kidding, they don’t care.)

They went off in crowds.

In every such case only the agent was harmed. You’re proving how targeted the attack was.

They are asking for the source of your statement that less then 0.1% of the victims where valid targets

Hezbollah is the source. That’s three times I’ve said so. What about that is still unclear?