10-year-old Fatima Jaafar Abdullah was killed in pager explosions in Lebanon.

Israel murders another kid again.

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    If iPhones had explosives planted in them straight out of the factory and would’ve went off in New York all at the same time, injuring thousands and endangering people around them, the 24/7 news cycle would’ve already called for total annihilation and what not.

    • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Indeed. I’m paging Nasrallah right now that he should update his manifesto

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        70
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        10 year old girl clearly was in a right wing terrorist group.

        Wide range bombings like this are not a military tactic aimed at neutralizing a threat. This is literally what terrorists do to cause terror.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          10 year old girl clearly was in a right wing terrorist group.

          This is what Israelis actually believe

          In an episode of Two Nice Jewish Boys, which aired three weeks ago, host Weinstein said: “If you gave me a button to just erase Gaza, every single living being in Gaza would no longer be living tomorrow. I would press it in a second.”

          He claimed that “most Israelis” would do the same.

          Meningher added that they would also want to wipe out Palestinians in “the territories.”

          “Because that’s the reality we live in, it’s us or them, and it has to be them,” Weinstein said.

          He added that Israelis want “full-scale war.”

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          51
          ·
          2 months ago

          Distributing bombs to terrorists is about as exact as you can get. It’s not on Israel if a terrorist lets their kids play with their tools.

          Israel could have leveled a block in Lebanon like they do in Gaza, but they didn’t.

          • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            36
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s not on Israel if a terrorist lets their kids play with their tools.

            Man has pager in his pocket. Man is sitting down having a meal with his family. Pager blows up in his pocket, killing the child sitting next to him, and probably killing or injuring other family members.

            Targeted or not, that child’s death is squarely on Israel. They decided that collateral damage was acceptable when they chose this method of mass assassination.

            • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              36
              ·
              2 months ago

              When Hezbollah chose to reopen hostilities with Israel the outcome would always be more death. Her father could have chosen peace instead

              • SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                This attack didn’t just target militants, it also hit politicians who would be working diplomatically towards peace. Israel has an extremely broad definition of “terrorist”

          • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Dropping smaller bombs that kill innocents is still terrorism. It’s not like it’s okay if I blow up a bus just because I blew up a building last week.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              21
              ·
              2 months ago

              Blowing up the bus that transports soldiers to camp is a hell of a lot better than blowing up a building where a single officer lives.

              • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                In this analogy it’s just a city bus. They killed civilians with this attack, I’m not sure if you realize. Unless you think the 10 year old girl was a hardened Hezbollah soldier.

                And yes, it’s better, but not good. Especially since they’re not even at war with Lebanon right now. They’re just trying to expand the conflict to keep the US in a forever war to justify their genocide and so Netanyahu never has to account for his crimes.

                • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  13
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  A City bus doesn’t actually fit the analogy. Israel didn’t randomly distribute explosive pagers to anyone. They went to a terrorist organization.

                • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  14
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  In this case it’s Hezbollah that chose to ‘expand the conflict’ back in October

          • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Israel could have leveled a block in Lebanon like they do in Gaza, but they didn’t.

            They absolutely cannot, not without expecting a similar, if not bigger, retaliation from Lebanon, Iran, Insarhallah, and probably Turkey.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              2 months ago

              Lebanon could retaliate, but it’s still going to bring whether Hezbollah is really state sponsored to the forefront of the conflict. The other two countries aren’t going to openly invite US/EU intervention by taking action.

              • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Not really. The attack indiscriminately killed and injured many innocent Lebonese. Lebanon is fully justified in responding solely on that basis alone.

                • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  That really doesn’t seem to be true though. There’s no reports of anyone injured that wasn’t a militant or directly related to one. This doesn’t seem to be a case of 100s of innocent’s to a single target, it appears to very much be the opposite. That is expressly not indiscriminate.

              • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Turkey literally said they were willing to intervene if the conflict further escalates.

                And if Israel bombed Lebanon, it wouldn’t matter whether Hezbollah is state sponsored or not. They would be attacking Lebanon’s sovereignty.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Distributing bombs to terrorists

            What if you distribute bombs to Lebanese civilians, detonate them, and then label the corpses “Terrorist” after the fact?

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              2 months ago

              Then there would be news articles about mass civilian casualties, and not the focus on a single girl who was the daughter of a Hezbollah militant.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                2 months ago

                Then there would be news articles about mass civilian casualties

                You’re literally posting under one of them.

                • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Focused on a single person who was in a car with a Hezbollah member when the pager exploded. Yes it’s unfortunate she died instead of her father, but it’s hardly proof of indiscriminate attacks.

  • ravhall@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    I get going after your ‘enemy,’ but this is even worse than firing randomly into a crowd of Palestinians. They pushed a button not knowing who would die. This is low, even for them.

    I can’t even think of a devil’s advocate argument for this.

    • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      98
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I believe the devil’s advocate argument would be that, based on Hezbollah’s internal communications, the Mossad intercepted a shipment of pagers which were being purchased to replace their (potentially compromised) mobile phones, knowing that these were - in theory - being distributed exclusively to Hezbollah operatives. That would make it the most precise military strike of all time.

      Everyone who launches a rocket is accepting the possibility of “collateral damage”, but this is surely the most surgical of surgical strikes in history. And yet, yes, they must have accepted the risk of bystander casualties, which just serves to highlight how awful that logic is. It’s definitely not worse than randomly firing into a crowd, though.

      • JWBananas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        49
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        That would make it the most precise military strike of all time.

        Pretty sure that honor still goes to the R9X Slap Chop. The pager explosions, on the other hand, injured thousands.

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 months ago

          Fat electrician had a great video on this.

          Soo accurate that if the target is in a car you need to know what seat.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I really don’t get it. Other than the “WAOW” factor, this certainly can’t have been a good use of resources for Israel.

          • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            2 months ago

            They already believed their communications were being intercepted so switched to another method.

            That method then literally blew up in their pockets.

            The amount of fear and distrust of the supply chain can’t be overstated.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              I dunno man. I just feel like if you’re at the point where you can clandestinely intercept huge amounts of your enemy’s personal communication devices, ‘turn them into bombs’ feels like a bit of a low-yield outcome.

              • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Alternately this proves that they still are intercepting their communication AND can intervene in their supply chain.

                I assure you that basically every nation state in FVEY (and then Israel by proxy) has the ability to intercept your communication.

                This is something that ought to be considered as a basic entry level accepted threat.

                NOW they know they have to worry about shit blowing up randomly, brand new stuff.

              • Aqarius@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                Consider it backwards: Israel sees this attack happening so valuable, that they were willing to forego using the pagers for spying.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Considering Israel’s history, I don’t know how much agreement there would be between my estimation of military value and the current administration’s.

              • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                They thought the pagers were secure communication devices. Now they know they are not. Hezbollah was maybe planning to escalate its attacks on Israel, without good, secure communications, they probably can’t. On the flip side, if Israel decides to invade Southern Lebanon to escalate things with Hezbollah, Hezbollah is going to have a much tougher time coordinating its defense since its supposed ‘secure’ communication system has just been blown up, the previous system (cell phones) what already suspected of being compromised, and now today, walkie-talkies used by the senior Hezbollah leadership have also exploded.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              This is not normal for cyber ops. The only thing really that makes sense is if they needed to buy time so set off the pagers. Otherwise they just set their compromised communications devices on fire and told them they did it.

          • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            In which world getting thousands of Hezbolla operatives unwittingly keeping a bomb in their pocket would not be a good use of resources for Israel?

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Because it changes nothing in the long run. So what exactly was so imminent that this had to happen?

              • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Hezbollah has been saying for a while it ‘might’ escalate its actions against Israel. Now… that does not seem as likely.

              • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                what exactly was so imminent that this had to happen?

                What was so imminent that Hezbollah had to fire that rocket barrage some days ago?

                You don’t seem to understand the nature of this conflict

                • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I meant it more like, why blow up the pagers you spent all this effort to compromise. I would have thought that having access to those devices would be worth more covertly.

                  I suppose its possible the only thing they could manage to sneak into the devices was explosives though, since you have to take the board apart to find it. Its likely it looked like a board component too.

        • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I guess I should have qualified that to exclude individual assassinations, otherwise you’d have to include snipers and whatever. I almost don’t believe that “knife missile” is real (quotation marks because the only real knife missiles are Culture technology).

      • Asifall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I feel like people are missing one of the more heinous aspects of this, which is that it injured thousands of people and only managed to kill ~10 of their targets. The outcome of this attack is going to be general terror and potentially hundreds of life altering injuries but very little military advantage.

        • Cornpop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The advantage is huge. 1000s of militants are now seriously injured and are no longer battle ready. Many will never be again. Massive success for Israel, and one of the most precision strikes ever used. Now there will be fear from any communication devise exploding, there will be 1000s of man hours wasted taking other stuff apart to check it, and morale will be down as well.

          • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Now westerners will worry when lining up for concerts or flights and the increased security expenditure will impact their economy

            I guess you support ISIS terror attacks as a brilliant play too?

          • USNWoodwork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            How did the compromised pagers not trigger warnings at airport X-rays? I guess lithium batteries and C4 look similar?

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          How did something that only killed 10 targets injure thousands, especially when you are considering explosives.

          I don’t think I could injure 1000s of civilians with only 10 targets killed with an explosive hidden on their person if I tried.

        • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          2 months ago

          They injured thousands of their targets, killed a few, and only got very little collateral damage

          Nasrallah would shit down his prophet’s throat to get this kind of outcome

      • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        2 months ago

        Correct.

        Killing civilians isn’t a war crime. Deliberately killing civilians, or not taking reasonable steps to minimize civilian casualties is a war crime.

        “Small” explosive that is embedded in something passed to and likely worn by the target is unlikely to be a war crime. If they somehow snuck a 1000lb bomb into one it absolutely would be however.

          • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Close - you’re looking at letter, not action and intentions.

            Booby traps are banned for use in ways that are likely to be used by civilians and remove protections on the civilian population. Things like placing explosives on public transport, the side of the road, in marketplaces or protected places. Targeted strikes, like on a piece of civilian equipment that is likely to only be used by the target (cellphone, personal vehicle, laptop) are permitted as they are unlikely to be set off by a random civilian.

            What is a question, however, is if the targets were actually combatants.

      • xenomor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s literally a war crime to attack people who are not actively participating in combat. That includes people who are members of your enemy’s military.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          49
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          That includes people who are members of your enemy’s military.

          No, members of an enemy’s military are combatants regardless of whether they’re holding a gun or in a firefight at the time. The only exception is personnel such as chaplains and medics.

          • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hmmm I guess with Israel having a conscript army then rocket barrages aren’t acts of terrorism. If a large portion of the country is considered “combatants” then any non-coms can be written off as “acceptable collateral damage”.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Not unless you’re making a meaningful attempt to target combatants. “All civilians are combatants” is the kind of Nazi shite that Israel indulges in, so I’d thank you to not peddle such grotesque views.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I don’t ascribe to it.

                  Then repeating things like this

                  Hmmm I guess with Israel having a conscript army then rocket barrages aren’t acts of terrorism.

                  in attempting to equate collateral damage with attacking civilians should probably be avoided.

          • xenomor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            On the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks:

            “© those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.”

            https://www.justsecurity.org/81351/the-prohibition-on-indiscriminate-attacks-the-us-position-vs-the-dod-law-of-war-manual/

            It’s important to note that this is the consensus of much of the international community and the US (and I presume its surrogate Israel) have not signed on to the above provision despite speaking to support it. The weasely approach we (the US) have taken to these standards really demonstrates how hollow our sentiments are when we feign moral authority in international affairs.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              “© those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.”

              Would you like to explain how setting up bombs within the personal devices of enemy combatants is striking civilians or civilian objects without distinction? Or do you think all collateral damage is a war crime?

              Like, fuck’s sake, not every dogshit act by a criminal state like Israel is a war crime. Jesus H. Christ.

              It’s important to note that this is the consensus of much of the international community and the US (and I presume its surrogate Israel) have not signed on to the above provision despite speaking to support it. The weasely approach we (the US) have taken to these standards really demonstrates how hollow our sentiments are when we feign moral authority in international affairs.

              Was this really all just to say “US BAD” and “US PUPPET ISRAEL”? Holy shit.

              • xenomor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                First of all, there was no way for Israel to know whether the people they claim to be targeting were combatants when the attack occurred since Israel had no information about the status of these bombs when they chose to detonate them.

                Secondly, placing a bomb in a common device that you have every reason to believe will spend much of its time in the proximity of civilians, in homes, markets and other public spaces, and choosing to detonate it without knowledge of the location of the bomb, or it’s proximity to your supposed target, is actively avoiding distinguishing between ‘combatants’ and civilians. I can’t believe that western brain rot requires this to be spelled out for it.

                • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Israel learned that Hezbollah was ordering new pagers to be given to members of Hezbollah and no one else. Every member of Hezbollah is a sworn enemy of Israel. These pagers were to be used for secure communications between members of Hezbollah. It was highly likely that nearly every one of these pagers would be carried by members of Hezbollah at the time they went off (IIRC 3pm local time).

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  First of all, there was no way for Israel to know whether the people they claim to be targeting were combatants when the attack occurred since Israel had no information about the status of these bombs when they chose to detonate them.

                  So it’s your view that any explosive that isn’t tracked at all times with 100% accuracy is a war crime.

                  Uh. ‘Interesting’.

                  Secondly, placing a bomb in a common device that you have every reason to believe will spend much of its time in the proximity of civilians, in homes, markets and other public spaces, and choosing to detonate it without knowledge of the location of the bomb, or it’s proximity to your supposed target, is actively avoiding distinguishing between ‘combatants’ and civilians. I can’t believe that western brain rot requires this to be spelled out for it.

                  ‘Western brain rot’, apparently, is when someone else disproves your utterly and blatantly incorrect claim about the definition of a war crime and then you flail around desperately seeking another justification for your claim once disproven. Okay.

          • xenomor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            2 months ago

            18 U.S. Code § 2441 - War crimes

            Prohibited conduct: “(D) Murder.— The act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause”

            https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2441

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              -According to Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, combatants are:

              the armed forces of a party to a conflict, and also groups and units that are under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that party is answerable to a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system, which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                According to this rule, when military medical and religious personnel are members of the armed forces, they are nevertheless considered non-combatants. According to the First Geneva Convention, temporary medical personnel have to be respected and protected as non-combatants only as long as the medical assignment lasts (see commentary to Rule 25).[14] As is the case for civilians (see Rule 6), respect for non-combatants is contingent on their abstaining from taking a direct part in hostilities.

                The military manuals of Germany and the United States point out that there can be other non-combatant members of the armed forces besides medical and religious personnel. Germany’s Military Manual explains that “combatants are persons who may take a direct part in hostilities, i.e., participate in the use of a weapon or a weapon-system in an indispensable function”, and specifies, therefore, that “persons who are members of the armed forces but do not have any combat mission, such as judges, government officials and blue-collar workers, are non-combatants”.[15] The US Naval Handbook states that “civil defense personnel and members of the armed forces who have acquired civil defense status” are non-combatants, in addition to medical and religious personnel.[16]

                Non-combatant members of the armed forces are not to be confused, however, with civilians accompanying armed forces who are not members of the armed forces by definition.[17]

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Which explains why the IDF has had so many “accidents” recently.

        • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          That is absolutely not true. An easy example to disprove your argument would be the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. The American Navy was caught completely by surprise. At the end of the war, there were some Japanese tried for war crimes, but not for the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

          • xenomor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m willing to argue that the unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor was replete with war crimes by modern standards. I’ve cited some documentation above. Since doing that I’ve learned that there are also specific prohibitions against booby-trapping: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/ccw-amended-protocol-ii-1996/article-7 Turns out that Israel has violated many international standards for war crimes and terrorism. It’s simple mystifying to me that any of this is controversial.

            • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’ll quibble with you on ‘booby trap’. Booby traps are like what Russian is doing in Ukraine when they retreat: putting primed grenades next to doors that will be opened when Ukrainian troops come through. Or maybe later if the Ukrainian troops don’t find the booby traps: civilians who come back to the ‘cleared’ areas. This is why booby trapping is prohibited. The enemy might miss it and later on a civilian might come across it.

              The Israelis modified devices meant for military purposes by a para-military organization. These pagers weren’t being sold in local markets to anyone who would buy them.

        • BussyCat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          That would make every crime a war crime going back thousands of years where they would lay siege on villages until the citizens starved

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      44
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not that I think the Israel is the good guy in this conflict, but your argument is pretty weak.

      Pager are designed to be trackable. If you have such deep access to these devices, you know exactly who got called by whom and when.

      Yes, there will be collateral damage, but that’s almost a given in any armed conflict.

      • Threeme2189@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If these were one-way pagers,they are not easy to track, as they don’t transmit messages, but only receive and display them.

        • leisesprecher@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          2 months ago

          …and you know which telephone numbers send data to the pager and at which time. That is sufficient to track or identify individuals.

          If this is a supply chain attack, the attacker already knows, which pagers are part of the organization they want to target.

          What this thread here shows really well, is that the general population vastly underestimates the abilities of intelligence agencies and technology in general.

          • Threeme2189@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            You wrote a bunch of things that have nothing to do with my comment.

            The terrorist organization Hezbollah used dumb pagers exactly because they don’t transmit anything, and therefore are very hard to track.

            • leisesprecher@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              22
              ·
              2 months ago

              No, they are not.

              As I wrote, you can track which pager got paged when. And you can identify who uses that pager. The pager itself does not need to transmit anything for that.

              You obviously don’t know how tracking works.

              • Dasus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                You can’t track a pager.

                A mobile tower will send it a message, but since there’s no two-way communication, theres no way to track where the pager received the message. (Even if it was a two-way one, you need at least three good points of connection to be able to triangulate it.)

                So how exactly do you identify who’s using a pager you don’t even know the location of?

                You obviously don’t know how tracking works.

                Ditto

                • leisesprecher@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  By tracking who sent what to whom?

                  If you know the phone number of a Hisbollah member and they send messages to a set of pagers, these are likely Hisbollah pagers. If you do that to several phone numbers, you get a pretty comprehensive list of members. You don’t need to know, where exactly they are. That’s simply not relevant.

                  And again: if it’s a supply chain attack, you don’t even need these contacts. Just a single entry point into the supply chain of the organization.

              • Threeme2189@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                You obviously don’t know how one-way pagers work.

                You can’t easily track a device that doesn’t communicate outwardly.

                Please track the location of my ceiling fan, it receives wireless transmissions from a remote and beeps in response. Kind of like a pager.

                • leisesprecher@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I don’t need your location.

                  Pager transmissions contain a sender and a receiver. That’s all the information you need. If a known Hisbollah sender sends to a receiver, that receiver obviously has some ties to Hisbollah.

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        So which armed conflict in the middle of Beirut are you talking about now?

              • febra@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Then I guess Hezbollah attacking IDF servicemen wherever they might be, including civilian areas in Tel Aviv, is completely okay. Even if it comes to some civilian casualties.

                • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I doubt if Hezbollah would attack the IDF directly. The IDF is armed and would shoot back immediatley.

                • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Both of them are ‘wrong’ and ‘okay’ when they do this. But in some way Hezbollah is ‘more wrong’, because they (re)started it. The only result being a lot of useless casualties with no end in sight.

            • leisesprecher@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              2 months ago

              So, what exactly do you think would be a proper reaction here?

              Hisbollah is de facto a state actor in Lebanon. Lebanon is doing nothing against a group whose declared goal is the destruction of Israel, including shooting unguided rockets into civilian areas.

              Now, how would you address that? Unless you have any idea how else to solve this, you’re simply talking out of your ass.

              • Akagigahara@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                I hardly think it is necessary to be an expert in Near-East conflict or politics in order to condemn what basically amounts to a terrorist attack.

                Whether or not they should do something is a different issue all together. But dismissing criticism because they don’t provide an alternate solution to an intricate problem is hardly any more helpful. Israel has many more pathways to do this properly, one idea would be the ICJ.

                You’re also falling into an overgeneralization fallacy. While Hezbollah is in the lebanese government, this doesn’t make all citizens of lebanon complicit. Hezbollah doesn’t represent all of Lebanon, neither do Hamas all of Palestine or Netanjahu all of Israel.

              • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                2 months ago

                Obviously Israel should kindly ask that they turn themselves over a the border so they can have a fair trial

                • febra@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Maybe they should stop their genocide in Palestine. Hesbollah has said on multiple occasions that they’ll stop any hostilities if a permanent ceasefire is implemented.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Frustrating to do another long-form argument of “actually, when you distribute a bunch of explosives and set them off in crowded areas, you’re not fighting terrorism but doing terrorism”

        For some reason people struggle to believe flinging hand grenades into a crowd is bad public policy when a US ally does it.

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      this is considerably more targeted at the actual bad guys than their usual MO of bulldozing palastinian neighborhoods though so… an improvement?

  • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Truly the depravity of Israel knows no limits.

    It seems they did learn some stuff from WW2.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Y’know, by the standards of a military assault, this one was actually pretty targeted. So far there’s a handful of children in thousands of casualties, who mostly fit the profile of a military or military-adjacent individual. Compare that to a ground assault of your choice, by any military anywhere.

      Let’s shit on them for all the actual atrocities they’ve done.

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        You mean killing children as par for the course, or killing people who are attending a funerary rite for other people who were killed by the same killer, is somehow not an atrocity?

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think I explained how the children were not par for the course this time, actually. Rage jerk away, but I thought I’d inject some factuality while it’s still uncool.

      • i_ben_fine@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m going to shit on them for this too. I don’t need to give them any credit.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        know, by the standards of an Israeli military assault, this one was actually pretty targeted

        FTFY, and yeah, at least this time they didn’t actively bomb a known humanitarian corridor or refugee camp, so that would be comparatively targeted.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          By any normal standard. By the standards of recent Israeli military assaults, this was a damn miracle.

  • Chyioko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I am quite shocked after reading the comments. There are some people who believe Israel are the victims, after all what Israel did this past few months.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is a huge technical operation to intercept an order and replace it with modified devices without the target knowing. Particularly when the target has to be extra careful in ordering things in the first place to avoid sanctions.

      In contrast sending out an “execute order 66” message is pretty trivial to trigger them

    • bad_alloc@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      There are videos capturing lots of explosions going off simulataneously. Since pagers already can recieve messages and these devices were deeply infiltrated, they likely added a special trigger message to set them off. THis could also allow other scenarios, like only setting off one (for whatever reason).

        • bad_alloc@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          If they can plant explosives they can 100% tap into the circuit or maybe reprogram the board. The CIA is known to be able to do this to specific devices by plucking them from the mail. Mossad could likely do their own production run and ship that to Hezbollah.

        • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          you really might not.

          before there were mobile phones there was analog dtmf wired telephones. they replaced pulse dialing and allowed for all kinds of additional signalling and triggering. ring a bell, operate a relay, kick people off so you could call the president, entire automated analog switching centers, you name it.

          when mobile networks came on the scene there were all sorts of additional triggers but because the (second gen? the ones that could do sms) signals were actually digital, there was a much wider array of possibilities. dtmf had a handful of frequencies it supported and if you wanted to do something more you had to basically make sure the entire network you were using could send, transport and receive those frequencies.

          now imagine instead of sixteen combinations of frequencies played at the same time you have access to thousands of possible triggers. once you have simple stuff like the basic receiving of text and lighting a led or playing one of several legally distinct jingles covered, you could do do much more. and people did. there were all kinds of things pagers could do through combinations of local interface and digital communication with a cell tower, all mediated through a handful of baseband chips on the pager pcb that could have the pins for stuff they wouldn’t be used for disconnected.

          but how would you make a pager set off an explosive?

          well, the same way you use a casio f91w wristwatch to. you use its built in functionality (the speaker when the alarm goes off) to trigger a battery that can deliver enough electricity into a resistor to heat it up enough to make your (primary) explosive detonate.

          in the case of a pager, those baseband chips have all kinds of on and off switching built in. it’s not hard to imagine that basic, out of the box functionality would include pulling a pin high when it gets “*97” or some such. now tie that pin to the base of a transistor across the positive and negative terminals of the battery and sitting against a little petn and you got yourself a remotely triggered explosive.

          you wouldn’t even need a pcb.

          there’s probably a lot of stuff thats incorrect in this reply. it’s late and this is off the dome.

        • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If they can intercept the message where it isn’t encrypted, they can simply sniff the messages coming on the page and wait for their signal.

          Then, they can trigger the explosive to a specific message.

          That’s a wild guess though.

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    I have a some question(s).

    Did all pagers in Lebanon just explode or was it only targeted pagers of terrorists that exploded? where they rigged with explosives? how can such a small device in the hands of so few people hurt so many people if they were not rigged with explosives? Was it only terrorist using pagers or is this still a thing i Lebanon?

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hezbollah decided to switch to using pagers because you can’t track them. Not sure if anyone else (eg. Medical personnel) was also using them.

        • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m going to guess she was very close to her father when the bomb went off. According to reports, a message (phone number?) was sent to all of the intercepted Hezbollah pagers at 3pm local time (IIRC), after a couple of seconds, the bomb went off. So a likely scenario is the father had the girl on his lap, the pager starts buzzing/ringing, dad reaches into his pocket and pulls out the pager to read the message. Proximity to the pager killed the girl while only injuring dad since he has a much greater body mass. Or, perhaps the pager was laying on a table and the girl picked it up? It’s sad, either way.

    • small44@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Doesn’t matter if it was hizbollah pagers or not. Hizbollah fighter also had to live normal life, go to shops to buy food etc

      • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        This is why i also ask if they were rigged with explosives or they somehow made the batteries explode or smth. There are no details in the local news but clips of some guy falling over because something in his pocket exploded. This made no sense that something like that, could cause 2750 injuries unless almost 3000 pagers exploded in a similar way, especially because everything around these guys, was barelly affected!

        • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          From what I have read elsewhere, batteries don’t explode. They can heat up and catch fire, but not explode. From what I have read online, a small amount of explosives were added to the pagers plus a very small detonator.

          • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah… i have read multiple explanations from the shipment being intercepted and rigged, to the actual pagers being old but they all had their batteries replaced recently with rigged ones. It does indeed sound like some explosives were introduced into the pagers, one way or annother.

      • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Hezbollah fighter could choose to live normal life and not be a member of Hezbollah. Lay down with dogs, wake up with fleas…

        • small44@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t care about hizbollah. I care about the civilians who didn’t choose to be with a hizbollah fighter in the same place. Israel did the plan knowing really well that civilians and members of the fighter families would die.

          • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t care about hizbollah.

            And Hezbollah doesn’t care about any civilians that get killed near them. ‘Involuntary Martyrs’ is the term I believe they used. According to reports, only 14 people have died, which is an extraordinarily low number considering that Israel went after thousands of targets that don’t wear uniforms and deliberately intermix freely amongst civilians.

            • small44@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yes hizbollah doesn’t care about civilians, the problem is that you are removing alll the blame from israel. You are forgetting the hundred of injured too. If you think it’s ok for israel to sacrifice civilians to kill militants you are a terrible human being

              • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                2 months ago

                From the videos I have seen, very few truly innocent bystanders are being hurt. These are very small explosive charges. In one video, a Hiz dude looks at his pager while he is in the produce section of a market. There are about 4 - 5 people within 10 feet of him. The pager explodes, Hiz dude goes down, no one else is hurt. In a second video, Hezbollah member is paying for something. He is within arm’s reach of the clerk he is giving the money to. The pager goes off, he goes down. The clerk runs away unscathed.

                In the history of warfare, this operation may be the most surgical of strikes ever in regards to intended targets hit vs innocent civilians hit.

                It’s a sad fact of modern warfare that if a militant group doesn’t wear uniforms and tries to hide amongst civilians, it opponents will eventually go after them and there will be civilian casualties.

                Here are the videos I was talking about. Be warned, they are a little rough to watch. There isn’t any blood, but the audio is quite disturbing. You may want to mute them.

                Here is the market video I was talking about. https://funker530.com/video/hezbollah-operatives-getting-wrecked-by-exploding-pagers

                Here is the payment video: https://funker530.com/video/another-hezbollah-pager-explodes-on-camera

  • A'random Guy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

    Lmfao this attack is aimed at nailing terrorists. Well lookie there. Lemmy you never let me down

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Is it OK for a nation state to plant bombs in suspected opponents and then explode them at random without respect for collateral damage? If Russians did the same to Americans, you’d be all “fair play, mate”?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If Russians did the same to Americans, you’d be all “fair play, mate”?

        At wartime, sure. Using explosives on enemy combatants outside of military-exclusive areas is not inherently a war crime.

        Israel is in the wrong here because it’s part and parcel of their continuing strategy of escalation in service to Netanyahu’s forever war so he can stay in power, and the collateral damage is thus pointless from any perspective except that of keeping an authoritarian in power.

        They’re not in the wrong because they chose explosives as their choice of attack against Hezbollah. Unless it comes out that their distribution of rigged pagers was utterly untargeted or something of the sort. Which I would not discount the possibility of, considering Israel’s history, but doesn’t seem to be the case according to what’s come out so far.

      • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If there were an anti-Russian militia that set up shop in America and occasionally attacked Russia and Russia figured out a way to target many members of this militia and a few innocent bystanders were also injured or killed, the rest of the world would say “yeah… that is what you get” and Americans would say “Why are we allowing these armed assholes to set up shop in America and attack Russia?”

        • PiousAgnostic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Lol, if there was an anti-anybody militia that sometimes acted against other states within the US. The US would raid their complex, set it on fire, and shoot people trying to escape.

          Then, the government would blame the children and other non-combatants’ deaths on the militia. The public then will watch documentaries made on the subject over dinner.

          Pager bombs aimed at extremists are not an American concern. Even if there was a level of non-combatant causilities. If anything, it’s a fun news blip of the week and will be forgotten in less than a month.

          • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Thanks Broseph. I totally agree with your response. I was doing my best to provide a proper analogy to db0’s question: “If Russians did the same to Americans, you’d be all “fair play, mate”?”

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    44
    ·
    2 months ago

    Reported as a biased source and MBFC backs that up… when talking about Turkish issues, they are very pro government.

    As this doesn’t readily involve the Turkish government, I’ll allow it.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      “MBFC” is basically a single dude’s opinion, containing a shitton of bias. Using it to verify credibility of anything is wrong.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you have a better solution involving an API we can use for free, I’m open.

        I see no issue with the MBFC assessment on this source.

        • Maalus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Lots of people said openly “we’d rather not have it at all”. The bot gets downvoted every thread with comments criticizing it. It doesn’t need to exist and is openly harmful.

          I understand someone put a lot of work into it, but it simply doesn’t work for what it needs to do. Unless you want to be spreading misinformation, then it works perfectly.

        • Krauerking
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          LOL this is the hilarious response of
          “Oh yeah?! Don’t have anything better than putting a biased source of credibility attached to every article for no reason other than for people to use to dismiss articles and not read them?!
          Well too bad removing it isn’t an option! Find me a different one cause it makes me feel good!”
          said the minority.

            • Krauerking
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The only idea you will accept is yours, literally has to be there cause of no particular reason other than personal desires and wants.

              Its like saying the only option is punching or kicking children cause you won’t accept the answer of “stop abusing them!”

              Maybe just back off and listen? Or at this point I am forced to assume the mods are being paid for including something that has not been positively talked about once. And they are just taking payment.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                2 months ago

                Oh, no, we’re fully accepting of other ideas. We even had a meeting with another fact checking company who wanted to charge us 6 figures for API access, so that’s a non-starter.

                The basics are really simple - You think MBFC is biased? Cite an example and name someone better.

                We’re waiting…

                • Krauerking
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You aren’t accepting of other ideas you just want someone to tell you what they are apparently. These “fact checkers” are for making a profit or paying themselves and mostly exist to make you feel good about being picky with what information you ignore in a world where there mostly isn’t good options for any number of reasons depending who you agree with.

                  You can’t seen to get the idea that we don’t view it as necessary and visual clutter. And the option we are aiming for isn’t a replacement that you seen to be stuck on because, see above.

                  https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/the-presence-of-unexpected-biases-in-online-fact-checking/

                  People aren’t likely to change their stance either it just reconfirms set feelings for the most part unless it is a lie at which point it should already be removed right?

                  So this is at best a badge for pretending civility. It’s pointless.

            • fishos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Are people really arguing with you and not realizing you already ruled in their favor?

              Pick your battles people. You don’t bite the hand that’s feeding you and all that…