[diggan]

Yeah, I wasn't 100% sure of using the "assassination" wording in my comment, but after thinking about it I felt it most neutral approach is to use the same wording they use in the article itself, in order to not add my own subjective opinion about this whole saga.

> In an unprecedented move, according to two of the sources, the army also decided during the first weeks of the war that, for every junior Hamas operative that Lavender marked, it was permissible to kill up to 15 or 20 civilians; in the past, the military did not authorize any “collateral damage” during assassinations of low-ranking militants. The sources added that, in the event that the target was a senior Hamas official with the rank of battalion or brigade commander, the army on several occasions authorized the killing of more than 100 civilians in the assassination of a single commander.

I'd agree with you that once you decide it's worth to kill 100 civilians for one target, it's really hard to call it "assassination" at that point...

[sitkack]

The system is designed to kill the targets family. This is a war crime.