Hamas Leader Killed

[Shusha]

But when does it become a crime?

See, this is where I think it is important to use precise terminology. "Collateral damage" / incidental harm is NEVER a crime. It is simply an objective reality. (And yes, I agree with you that the terminology can be dehumanizing).

To use an exaggerated example to make a point: there is a low level military target in a location, we nuke it.

Millions dead, injured, etc.

Collateral damage?

Disproportionate collateral damage. The concern of a criminal act is in the proportionality.

At some point that term ceases to have a meaning.

No, the terms still have meaning. I understand your discomfort with the dehumanizing language of "collateral damage" or "incidental harm" (I've been using the latter term more recently.) But the legality of war isn't measured in the discomfort of witnesses. (I mean, maybe it should be, but ...)

 

[Shusha]

Hezbollah is thoroughly within the general population. They aren’t just a militant entity. If diplomats are now fair targets just say so. Israel has targeted diplomatic posts and entities before (though I don’t think that was the case here). Collateral damage.

Why do you ask? Google it.

Wasn't the diplomat one of the ones with an eye injury? Which means he was looking at the pager when it detonated. To read an encrypted message. From a military (terrorist) communications circle at the top 5000 level of about 40,000 operatives.

One does have to ask oneself why a diplomat would have to be in a Hezbollah communications circle at that level.


Edited to add: yes, just confirmed the diplomat in question (Iran's Ambassador to Lebanon) lost an eye and seriously injured the other eye in the explosion.

 

[Coyote]

See, this is where I think it is important to use precise terminology. "Collateral damage" / incidental harm is NEVER a crime. It is simply an objective reality. (And yes, I agree with you that the terminology can be dehumanizing).

Disproportionate collateral damage. The concern of a criminal act is in the proportionality.

I think on this we are in agreement. Some collateral damage is the reality of war. And yes, it is proportionality that can make it criminal.

No, the terms still have meaning. I understand your discomfort with the dehumanizing language of "collateral damage" or "incidental harm" (I've been using the latter term more recently.) But the legality of war isn't measured in the discomfort of witnesses. (I mean, maybe it should be, but ...)

If terms are to have meaning then they should be more carefully used. Right now it seems to be a catch-all covering a wide range of things.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They are within the general population. I seriously doubt they are wearing armbands saying “Hezbollah Militant”.

It was an Iranian diplomat. Now his injuries make sense.

 

[Coyote]

Wasn't the diplomat one of the ones with an eye injury? Which means he was looking at the pager when it detonated. To read an encrypted message. From a military (terrorist) communications circle at the top 5000 level of about 40,000 operatives.

I would call that conjecture.

One does have to ask oneself why a diplomat would have to be in a Hezbollah communications circle at that level.

What is Hezbollah’s roll in Lebanese society and politics? What are the reasons a diplomat might be within range? I’m sure there are more than one. Given that the devices caused injuries to people nearby and Hezbollah is well embedded within Lebanon (which I think we can agree has such a weak central government it may qualify as a failed state.)

Edited to add: yes, just confirmed the diplomat in question (Iran's Ambassador to Lebanon) lost an eye and seriously injured the other eye in the explosion.

Thanks for the confirmation, I kind of thought it might Iranian.

 

[Shusha]

I have read differing accounts.

According to this claim that I posted elsewhere:
The attacks reportedly killed at least 32 people and maimed or injured 3,250, including 200 critically. Among the dead are a boy and a girl, as well as medical personnel. Around 500 people suffered severe eye injuries, including a diplomat. Others suffered grave injuries to their faces, hands and bodies.

Yes. So I would say our accounts are more-or-less the same. (The deaths discrepancy is the pagers vs walkie-talkie: 12 deaths in the pagers, 30 in the walkie-talkies, 42 total).

I have seen nothing verifying that the overwhelming majority of those injured were high level Hezbollah militants. I can accept that majority of those killed would have been.

Probably not something that Lebanon or Hezbollah is going to want to release. But, it does seem highly likely.

Ok, now that is interesting and no, some of those points I was not aware of. However I still disagree that the military advantage outweighed the collateral damage.

I have seen no evidence that there was any collateral damage (and by that I mean unintended targets) except the two children who, as far as I can determine, were both (tragically) carrying the beeping pager to their fathers when they detonated. The military advantage was significant compared to the incidental harm.

I might change my mind on further reflection though. I also admit it was brilliant.

 

[JohnDB]

 

[toomuchtime_]

Disproportionate collateral damage. The concern of a criminal act is in the proportionality.

Disproportionate collateral damage is a judgement call, and therefore there is no standard by which to measure whether the resulting collateral damage is proportional or not. In practice it means not using more force than necessary to accomplish the mission and has nothing to do with how many people were killed.

 

[JohnDB]

Disproportionate collateral damage is a judgement call, and therefore there is no standard by which to measure whether the resulting collateral damage is proportional or not. In practice it means not using more force than necessary to accomplish the mission and has nothing to do with how many people were killed.

Hamas has already violated a 5 hr old cease fire agreement....Palestinians do not want peace

 

[Lisa558]

A key difference between Israel and her Arab enemies is that Israel takes steps to limit Muslim civilian casualties - the targeted pager strike was brilliant - while the Arab terrorists TARGET Jewish civilians in the hope of killing as many as possible.

Antisemites will have a hard time admitting this.

 

[Lisa558]

Hamas has already violated a 5 hr old cease fire agreement....Palestinians do not want peace

It was Hezbellah that violated it. This is why Israel needs to maintain a military presence.

 

[Shusha]

Disproportionate collateral damage is a judgement call, and therefore there is no standard by which to measure whether the resulting collateral damage is proportional or not. In practice it means not using more force than necessary to accomplish the mission and has nothing to do with how many people were killed.

Correct. There is no universal legal measurement for proportionality. Each military uses its own measure for proportionality for each strike and should record and be prepared to defend the military advantage of the strike and the reasonably expected incidental harm.

 

[Shusha]

Given that the devices caused injuries to people nearby ...

Do you have a source for this? I've not seen any reports of this.

 

[Tyrion234]

Strongly disagree.


True.

But when does it become a crime?

To use an exaggerated example to make a point: there is a low level military target in a location, we nuke it.

Millions dead, injured, etc.

Collateral damage?

At some point that term ceases to have a meaning.




I have read differing accounts.

According to this claim that I posted elsewhere:
The attacks reportedly killed at least 32 people and maimed or injured 3,250, including 200 critically. Among the dead are a boy and a girl, as well as medical personnel. Around 500 people suffered severe eye injuries, including a diplomat. Others suffered grave injuries to their faces, hands and bodies.

I have seen nothing verifying that the overwhelming majority of those injured were high level Hezbollah militants. I can accept that majority of those killed would have been.




Ok, now that is interesting and no, some of those points I was not aware of. However I still disagree that the military advantage outweighed the collateral damage. I might change my mind on further reflection though. I also admit it was brilliant.

IMHO the world would probably better off without you, again, just my opinion

 

[Coyote]

I have seen no evidence that there was any collateral damage (and by that I mean unintended targets) except the two children who, as far as I can determine, were both (tragically) carrying the beeping pager to their fathers when they detonated. The military advantage was significant compared to the incidental harm.

I haven’t seen anything that shows all the collateral other than the children were militants. I’m skeptical of that claim.

 

[Coyote]

IMHO the world would probably better off without you, again, just my opinion

The feeling is mutual. Now that we’ve cleared that up, do you have anything to add to the topic itself? Is that something within your capabilities?

 

[Coyote]

Do you have a source for this? I've not seen any reports of this.

That is a fair question and at this point I can’t find anything that specifically details it.

 

[Coyote]

Correct. There is no universal legal measurement for proportionality. Each military uses its own measure for proportionality for each strike and should record and be prepared to defend the military advantage of the strike and the reasonably expected incidental harm.

In that case…”collateral damage” and proportionality have no meaning. I could nuke a low level military target killing thousands and maiming millions and it would be acceptable.

 

[Shusha]

That is a fair question and at this point I can’t find anything that specifically details it.

Yep. I find it suspicious, don't you? That Hezbollah is not splashing every news source with all the photos and stories of the horrific injuries to innocent women and children. Oh, we've seen the two children who were carrying the beeping pagers to their fathers. We've even seen mention of two medical personnel who were in the proximity of pagers at the time of detonation. But nothing on the rest of the "collateral damage". Odd, don't you think? Not the usual way Hezbollah plays the game. I mean, its hardly conclusive. But it is odd.

 

[Coyote]

Yep. I find it suspicious, don't you? That Hezbollah is not splashing every news source with all the photos and stories of the horrific injuries to innocent women and children. Oh, we've seen the two children who were carrying the beeping pagers to their fathers. We've even seen mention of two medical personnel who were in the proximity of pagers at the time of detonation. But nothing on the rest of the "collateral damage". Odd, don't you think? Not the usual way Hezbollah plays the game. I mean, its hardly conclusive. But it is odd.

I’ll back off my position unless further information becomes available. Healthcare workers were injured but the source I found stated they had pagers which indicates…well…you know.