Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#671

Post by anramon »

golergka wrote: post #19
datameta wrote: post #15

If it walks like terrorism, and quacks like terrorism... I struggle to understand how they're imagining they're obviating the optics of this, unless they don't care what the dissenting population in Israel thinks (or the world for that matter) until "it is done".

Can you explain how ultra targeted, small explosive charges quack terrorism? I have been reading comments like this yesterday, and I'm completely bewildered as to how any sane person could come to this conclusion. Did you consider the US operation to take down Bin Laden an act of terrorism too?

[flagged]

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#672

Post by anigbrowl »

longbrass wrote: post #624
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced this was a terror attack and I think Israel is within its rights to target Hezbollah, but here's a question: If the assailant and target were reversed, would Western media hesitate at all to call it terrorism? Or, forget Hezbollah and Israel. If ISIS had detonated thousands of explosive devices all over, e.g., the UK injuring and killing hundreds of UK military personnel and some civilians, would th…

If the IDF were to detonate the rockets Hezbollah uses to explode before launch would this be different? What about gps devices or range finders? Without a doubt it’s asymmetrical… and the common binary is military/terror but I fear this is a distinction left to the last century. The loss of children is always unacceptable, but Hezbollah has a history of courting child soldiers… so skepticism is not unwarranted. http…

Mmmm...

Hizbollah

Hizbollah was the largest armed political group in the country with a base mainly in Shia areas. It said that it supported the country's ratification of the Optional Protocol in meetings with government officials.29 The group denied any use of children in the ongoing conflict with Israel, including the war of 2006.30 In 2007 there were reports that its military wing was recruiting boys aged 16-19. [...]

The US military accepts recruits at age 17, so I think you're really stretching the definition of 'child soldiers' here. The report goes on to mention that Hezbollah organizes youth camps and suchlike, and in turn we could point out that ROTC accepts recruits aged 14 and up. While I would not say they're exactly alike, as someone who grew up outside the USA, this society is very militaristic compared to a lot of others. I was genuinely shocked when I discovered that US schoolchildren are expected to recite a pledge of allegiance every morning.

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#673

Post by hnpolicestate »

Arch485 wrote: post #192

I'm genuinely curious: how is this not considered terrorism on Israel's part? (or is it considered terrorism?) From a tactical standpoint, this is very similar, and the only big difference I see is that this is technologically more advanced/more complex than just planting a bomb or something. If it's not terrorism, what is the differentiating factor(s)? *side note: I'm quite sure other western countries have used tac…

"If it's not terrorism, what is the differentiating factor(s)?" The power structure in charge of labeling.

What's the old saying? "One mans terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#674

Post by anigbrowl »

danbruc wrote: post #387
robertlagrant wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Not all violence is terrorism. Not all bad things are terrorism either. But terrorism is always bad. Ukrainians killing Russian soldiers isn't terrorism. Hezbollah trying to kill Israeli civilians is terrorism.

But terrorism is always bad. Suppose some country occupies another country and the occupied country has no proper army to fight back, therefore they resort to methods of unconventional warfare to fight back against the occupation. Would some call this terrorism? Would this qualify as terrorism given some proper definition of the term and objective judgment of the situation? Would it be bad? What if they not only targ…

This book does an OK job of examining those philosophical arguments.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/terrorism-and-the-right...

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#675

Post by cornercasechase »

snakeyjake wrote: post #605
lupusreal wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Younger Americans are by in large not buying Israel's bullshit. American support for Israel is a generational phenomenon and that support will be aging and dying out of the political process in the next 20 or so years, after that Israel will be on their own to face all the enemies they've made, and that won't end well for them. I think this is why they've been so aggressive in recent years. They know their window of…

[flagged]

No one wants to holiday in an apartheid state. The younger generations have access to actual footage on the ground in Palestine, they will never support Israel.

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#676

Post by cozzyd »

miki123211 wrote: post #293
dmicah wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the variety of consumer electronics is too large to be limited to only a few large manufacturers.

I'm pretty sure you could run an entire household on nothing but Samsung at this point. Phone? Check. Watch? Check. TV? check. Washer? Dryer? Fridge? Dishwasher? All there. Laptop? Well, they at least used to make those, not sure if they still do.

they make chromebooks, at least...

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#677

Post by bamboozled »

rtsil wrote: post #352
stetrain wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of terrorism is controversial and political, so there isn't a hard answer. But I think a general distinction is the targeting of combatants vs civilians. There is a difference between infiltrating military or para-military organizations or operations and intentionally targeting mass casualties of civilians for attention.

I don't know about that. When Al Quaeda attacked the USS Cole, a purely military vessel without a single civilian casualty, the US administration and the entire US military called it an act of terrorrism.

[flagged]

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#678

Post by [deleted] »

afavour wrote: post #315
Arch485 wrote: post #192

I'm genuinely curious: how is this not considered terrorism on Israel's part? (or is it considered terrorism?) From a tactical standpoint, this is very similar, and the only big difference I see is that this is technologically more advanced/more complex than just planting a bomb or something. If it's not terrorism, what is the differentiating factor(s)? *side note: I'm quite sure other western countries have used tac…

Terrorism targets civilian populations. This operation, as described, targets Hezbollah militants. That feels like an oversimplification to me. Some of those devices have surely injured civilians. I think the question is how many. Broadly it's the same question that's plagued Israel's actions since last October: there will always be civilian casualties as a result of military action, but how many is too many?

[deleted]

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#679

Post by bamboozled »

anigbrowl wrote: post #667
PepperdineG wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Al Qaeda isn't a nation-state so by definition it falls into terrorism. It's like if Greenpeace sunk a military vessel because the sonar was killing sea life that would be terrorism. It would have some serious side effects if it was OK for private non-governmental actors being able to target militaries and be seen as legitimate in their actions.

But by definition the founders of the USA were terrorists. And they knew it too, viz. Benjamin Franklin's famous line 'Gentlemen, we must all hang together or we shall most assuredly hang separately.' Preemptively invalidating all non-state actors is just a way for people with power to avoid challenges to it. Every single oppressive regime describes rebels as terrorists and employs circular arguments to assert its ow…

[flagged]

Re: Hezbollah hand-held radios detonate across Lebanon, sources say

#680

Post by anigbrowl »

rtsil wrote: post #438
nradov wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Federal government uses the following definition: the term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:22%20section:...

And yet the same Federal government called the attack against USS Cole "terrorism" and its perpetrators "terrorists", and implemented a range of "anti-terrorism" measures in the Navy after that. And it was a military target, and all the victims were military. So really, terrorism is what people say is terrorism.

It's really quite bizarre how official history sources unironically talk about a 'terrorist boat' inflicting a surprise attack on a 'destroyer'.

https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/uss-cole-bombing

Post reply on HN