Earlier quoted context omitted.
woah just linking to wikipedia article without any substance? damn...
There are extensive references in there. Feel free to back up your own assertions with documentation.
Don't be lazy and cite them
Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
801–810 of 832 posts
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#802Earlier quoted context omitted.
The “20th century atrocity denial” comparison is disgusting and transparent. Holocaust denial is rejected because it contradicts a mountain of primary evidence. You are doing the opposite. You are trying to manufacture certainty where the documentation is missing, then calling anyone who asks for records a “denialist.” On the Truman claim, you keep saying “adequate evidence” while producing none. The best you have is…
>The “20th century atrocity denial” comparison is disgusting and transparent I was talking about the Holodomor, obviously.
“Obviously” is a nice rewrite, but you did not say Holodomor. Holodomor or Holocaust, the move is the same: you are trying to smear “denialism” over a claim you cannot document. Denialism is rejecting mountains of primary evidence. I am asking you for primary evidence and you have produced none. Post a contemporaneous Secret Service or FBI record tying a Truman bomb to Lehi, or admit you are repeating hearsay. Either way, I appreciate you providing a written record of your conspiracy theories and holocaust bating here on Hacker News.
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#803Earlier quoted context omitted.
Suppose we believe all captions in your links, so for example we'll assume that guy in shorts and flip flops was some sort of “spy balloon manager.” It wouldn’t matter, because once you perform terrorist attacks, you’re still a terrorist even if you also attack valid targets sometimes. Same as Hamas, which is still a terrorist org despite attacking some IDF bases. Even Amnesty has acknowledged Hezbollah’s routine use…
Could you quote from that article where Amnesty makes a statement calling actions by armed factions of Hezbollah terrorism?
I didn't say that Amnesty used the term. If bombardment of population centers, with no targeting of military assets, isn't terrorism than what is?
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#804Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you quote from that article where Amnesty makes a statement calling actions by armed factions of Hezbollah terrorism?
I didn't say that Amnesty used the term. If bombardment of population centers, with no targeting of military assets, isn't terrorism than what is?
Yeah, why don't they do that? And why do you?
My suspicion is that you expect it to short circuit the conversation, and that no one is willing to side with terrorism or affiliate themselves with it in any way, which would give you a degree of power over the conversation.
It's a weasely word, and has about zero relevance in criminal law regarding warfare, it being a political designation mainly used by states that meet resistance to colonisation and the like.
Yeah, sure, Hezbollah has committed war crimes. So what? They look like a pathetic little rounding error beside the usian and israeli war crimes over the past decades, or even just the last year or so. Like Hamas I'm sure Hezbollah would gladly send people to the Hague for prosecution if Israel did too.
So tell us, why is this designation so important to you? Is it because you lack arguments? Is it because you're lazy and just want to waste other people's time?
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#805Interestingly just nine days ago someone here shared a link to the US's Law of War manual for military personnel. It's pretty good for what it is. Since countries base this stuff on the same international treaties they've all signed, it's a guide to Israel's conduct during war (or just about anyone's) as well as the US's. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46147605 https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-…
I have questions about the concept of legality in a war like the one between Hamas/Hezbollah and Israel. The idea that in a war there can be legal and illegal actions established by international treaties to protect civilians as much as possible can only work if two (or more) legitimate states are fighting each other, with leaders who can be held accountable for the orders they give. But does it still make sense to t…
Even if it were true, it sounds like an obvious loophole if one party could simply refuse to consider the other party a state and instantly get rid if all legal liability.
Which is actually one of the major issues of conflict with the Palestinians. The Palestinians want to be a state and most of the world considers them one. It's just that Israel and the US (together with other countries) don't and that the US also blocks official designation by the UN.
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#806Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi there, I see you too trust Hamas sources (the origin of the Hind Rajab sotry) and not Israeli sources, so you too are in the camp of "believe hamas" and "doubt israel". 1. Hamas used World Central Kitchen vehicles, according even to the head of World Central Kitchen, who initially condemned the attack and then later admitted Hamas used WCK vehicles. You didn't know this, did you? 2. A few questions on the Hind Raj…
As per my previous assertion, it is now on Israel and their sympathizers to answer all those questions in a manner that leaves no doubt about their veracity. Watching what they are doing and what they are saying for two whole years, and the results of it all, leaves them with zero benefit of the doubt with the vast majority of people in the world.
You simply invent crimes and claim Israel is guilty until proven innocent. That's not how it works.
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#807Earlier quoted context omitted.
As per my previous assertion, it is now on Israel and their sympathizers to answer all those questions in a manner that leaves no doubt about their veracity. Watching what they are doing and what they are saying for two whole years, and the results of it all, leaves them with zero benefit of the doubt with the vast majority of people in the world.
You simply invent crimes and claim Israel is guilty until proven innocent. That's not how it works.
Nothing's invented, what I listed are real events with extensive documentation and evidence behind them.
You are stating some questions which are supposedly going to lead to IDF's innocence in the matter if they are truthfully answered. The burden of that additional proof is now on you. Mere questions being enough to dispel a case against the IDF is a thing of the past. They worked very hard to earn such a reputation, and now there are consequences for it.
Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#808Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#809Re: Israel used Palantir technologies in pager attack in Lebanon
#810Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say that Amnesty used the term. If bombardment of population centers, with no targeting of military assets, isn't terrorism than what is?
Yeah, why don't they do that? And why do you? My suspicion is that you expect it to short circuit the conversation, and that no one is willing to side with terrorism or affiliate themselves with it in any way, which would give you a degree of power over the conversation. It's a weasely word, and has about zero relevance in criminal law regarding warfare, it being a political designation mainly used by states that mee…
While there isn't one standard definition of terrorism, Hezbollah's untargeted bombardment of Israeli towns qualifies under pretty much any definition.
You seemed happy to use the term against Israel [1], claiming an operation which specifically targeted Hezbollah operatives was somehow terrorism. Why do you suddenly have a blanket objection to a term that you were just using yourself?