[BjoernKW]

> Now I'm struggling to see the differences between their activities and blowing up airplanes or launching rockets from schools and hospitals.

Well, the obvious difference is that blowing up airplanes or launching rockets at residential areas intentionally targets civilians in order to spread a maximum amount of terror among the civilian population while blowing up pagers that were used for coordinating attacks against Israel very specifically targets operatives involved in such activities.

Some of the initial footage shows such a device going off while innocent bystanders remain unharmed. You can't get any more targeted than that.

Yes, such a pager might have ended up in the hands of a non-involved person, but given the facts known so far that's very unlikely, because there's a reason those people were carrying these devices on them: They were afraid of being tracked down by Mossad in the first place.

[zer0x4d]

Many people fail to see this. You can't compare a terrorist attack that intentionally targets civilians with no apparent military target to a legitimate attack on a defined military target that unfortunately results in some collateral damage.

[abalone]

Many people fail to see this because they have an intact moral core. Conducting a military operation that has a fully predictable rate of civilian casualties is morally equivalent to targeting those civilians.

Israel has utilized a rate of expected civilian to militant casualties in Gaza at the rate of 100:1 [1].

[1] https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

[Terr_]

> Conducting a military operation that has a fully predictable rate of civilian casualties is morally equivalent to targeting those civilians.

By that logic only the absolute number of (expected) civilian deaths matters... which can't be right.

If it were true, then exploding a city bus (1 soldier, 10 civilians) would be more moral than striking a military base (1,000 soldiers, 11 civilians.)

It would also suggest a kind of blame-shifting if one side decides to install their missile launchers in the playgrounds of elementary schools or whatever.

[abalone]

You are simply incorrect. “Rate” is a ratio, not an absolute number.

But to your point, Israel’s ratio in Gaza was as high as 100 civilians to 1 soldier in the shopping mall (or more accurately, refugee family shelters).

[Terr_]

> “Rate” is a ratio, not an absolute number.

No, you've cut off the crucial second half of the sentence, which says a military operation with known risks of civilian deaths "is morally equivalent to targeting those civilians."

The phrase "those civilians" refers to a countable quantity of them.

Perhaps you meant to write "morally equivalent to targeting that proportion of civilians"?

[beedeebeedee]

This isn't pedantry, but what are you arguing?

[oneeyedpigeon]

There are many points on this grey line, and we often fail to recognise those in the middle. For example, between your two points is a very significant type of action that this one may well fall under: an attack on a military target that you are fully aware will result in significant collateral damage.

[chii]

> you are fully aware will result in significant collateral damage.

and the terrorists deliberately place themselves in a position where attacks on them results in massive collateral - aka, they want a human shield.

[stahtops]

The act of modifying and/or deploying the devices was targeted. That’s it.

Carrying out an explosives attack across a large geographic area that includes public spaces, with no specific intelligence on the location of the devices, or who is within the blast range, is the exact opposite of targeted.

[raxxorraxor]

What on earth would be more targeted than compromising pagers that only Hezbollah military is using?

At some point the criticism really gets absurd. There probably was collateral damage, yes. This is what you have to account for if you start wars against another nation. Repeatedly.

Opposite of targeted are the missiles that hit northern Israel.

[anon291]

For these people, there will never be an attack good enough, targeted enough, or proper enough

It's because they're not motivated by fairness but a pre existing idea of who is good or bad

[zaptrem]

In terms of collateral damage it seems much better than even the most precise missiles, though.

[abalone]

> Some of the initial footage shows such a device going off while innocent bystanders remain unharmed.

This is anecdotal and misleading. There are reports of civilians maimed including the murder of a child. This is entirely plausible due to the indiscriminate nature of these bombs with respect to immediate bystanders.

If an enemy had set off thousands of small bombs in American supermarkets and homes, maiming thousands of whoever was nearby and killing children, we would undoubtedly call it a mass terrorist attack.

[nindalf]

2000+ bombs hurting 2000 fighters and one child? I'd argue that almost no war is without collateral damage, but this one action might be uniquely low in the amount of collateral damage done.

> This is anecdotal and misleading

I saw 5 videos and in every case only the person carrying the pager was hurt. Even people less than a foot away weren't harmed. Look at the video on the front page of nytimes.com right now to see what it's like. Highly targeted at Hizbullah soldiers, no bystanders hurt. The exact opposite of "indiscriminate".

You're working yourself up into some righteous anger about this, which is fine, that's your choice. But at least recognise that that's what you're doing. You need a certain narrative to be true so you're twisting facts to suit that.

[abalone]

> no bystanders hurt

This is incorrect. There are reports of maimed civilians and a murdered child.

There is no comprehensive information yet on the ratio of civilians to militants maimed by this attack, and any claims otherwise are propaganda.

[dlubarov]

Sure, there has been at least one civilian death, and others might be reported later. While we don't have numbers yet, the evidence so far suggests a low ratio of civilian casualties, probably much lower than what's possible using convention warfare against an enemy embedded in a civilian population.

[WillowBullock]

Israel also do bad things. Maybe it flies under the radar of being called terrorism by the west - but look at west banks settlements, jailing kids forever for throwing stones, turning Gaza into something that makes Mad Max look like a dream in the name of self-defence, appartheid conditions in Israel and the occupied territories. Offensives on Gaza before Oct 7 - 2023 was particularly bad, and the general embargo aroudn Gaza that made life pretty rotten before the current war - etc.

Israel do enough operations that ticks the "look we killed soldiers guys!" box and they really like to get media attention on that. Otherwise it is "Hamas was hiding there". Hard to verify - they may be right sometimes, but I bet not all the time based on the the number of deaths and the amount of destruction in Gaza.

[km3r]

> jailing kids forever for throwing stones

This isn't happening. Kids are being jailed for throwing stones, yes. Just like you or I would be jailed if we threw a rock at a cop. But it is not "forever".

[remram]

> Eight killed and 2,750 wounded

Such a pager did end up hurting non-involved people, in great quantity.

[temporalparts]

I know there is a documented case of a non-involved person getting injured, but do you have evidence that this attack was not 99% effective? The attack vector was the device specifically used only by involved people.

[snypher]

A 9 year old child was killed, proving this attack wasn't as targeted as you think. However Israel is happy to accept any amount of collateral damage as long as it doesn't happen to them.

[rougka]

Any child death is tragic, but this is really one of the most targeted strikes in the history of warfare. It is safe to believe that everyone that was given a pager for secret communication by a terrorist group, is associated with such group, probably in a military capacity. Furthermore, videos show that extremely close bystanders are left unhurt.

I think this only goes out to show that criticism towards Israel waging warfare is not really about the way that warfare is fought, but really on the right of Israel to fight at all. As no one in history has achieved a more precise attack in urban setting towards a non-uniformed organization ever.

[abalone]

There is no comprehensive information yet on the ratio of civilians to militants maimed by this attack, and any claims otherwise are propaganda.

If an enemy had exploded small remote controlled bombs in American supermarkets and homes targeting members of the American political parties, the sponsors of terrorism and oppressive dictatorships in many foreign countries, there is no question we would characterize it as a terrorist attack.

[talldayo]

> but this is really one of the most targeted strikes in the history of warfare.

You are making that up and quoting yourself. There was not a single fire-control system onboard these pagers; there was no visual designation of the target, and no confirmation that it was being carried by it's owners. The target was broadly designated and not even discriminated on a case-by-case basis. A button was pressed, and consequences including the death of a child are now in play.

Israel has the capability to field targeted strikes on their own using domestic Litening and SPICE munitions (not to say they don't end up targeting civilians anyways). The unforunate bottom line is that this was an indiscriminate and presumptive attack that generally relies on a complete disregard for collateral damage. Innocent bystanders died, ones that would not be targeted by any morally accountable soldier in the command-and-control loop. That means an error was made, in civilized armies.

[gizajob]

Your terrorist group is their legitimate government. In Lebanon today their legitimate government was attacked by a terrorist group.

[charbroiled]

Hamas may be the “legitimate” government of Gaza (or at least the most recently elected one), but Hezbollah is not the legitimate government of Lebanon; it’s a minority party with outsized influence in parts of Lebanon due to its militia and intelligence services.

[Sabinus]

Incredible, Israel can use tiny bombs in the personal possession of terrorists and they'll still be accused of warcrimes.

[remram]

Whatever words you're reading when you look at mine might be incredible, what I wrote is almost 3000 wounded in the crossfire, including children.

You're ignoring that and pretending they're accused of something else. Why?

[whacko_quacko]

Almost 3000 wounded are not a problem if they're Hezbollah, no? The child is tragic of course, but one dead child when targeting enemy soldiers is more ethical than the dead children in deliberate attacks on civilians, which is what Hezbollah is doing.

Why are you pretending otherwise? Is it the bigotry of low expectations? Arabs/Muslims can act very reasonable and humane too, so there's no reason to measure them with a different yard stick

[remram]

> Almost 3000 wounded are not a problem if they're Hezbollah, no

They are a problem in both cases. Stop the whataboutism.

[snovv_crash]

Why are you assuming those 2700 people weren't Hezbollah? Who else was carrying the pagers to avoid Israel location tracking?

[easyThrowaway]

Anyone who got resold / loaned those devices, those who were next to blast radius of those devices while going with their lives, any relatives who were unfortunate enough of having an hezbollah member in their family.

This is basically just one step above a chemical attack, and can only be excused as "the end justifies the means" by the interested parties.

[whacko_quacko]

Why would you use 80s technology that allows you to circumvent Israeli tracking, and get that from Hezbollah if you're not in cahoots with them? People in Lebanon can afford smart phones.

With the people next to the blast radius you have a point, but when targeting guerilla fighters that blend in with civillian populace it's hard to not inadvertantly target innocents too. But a small explosive device that is used by enemy soldiers and kept close to their bodies is the best way to avoid innocent casualties.

Also, Hezbollah hiding between innocents doesn't mean Israel shouldn't defend themselves. If you hide behind civillians you're the one to blame for casualties, not the party that defends against you

[alickz]

> Anyone who got resold / loaned those devices

Aren't the pagers specifically for transmitting Hezbollah instructions / orders?

Why would a Hezbollah member sell/loan such a device to a non-Hezbollah member?

[remram]

Yes I'm assuming not every Lebanese is a terrorist, which seems to be problematic to some. In particular 8-year-old children are probably not.

[mupuff1234]

I'm confused, how do you know the 99% of those wounded aren't Hezbollah operatives?

How many innocents would get harmed during a more conventional military strike against the same group of operatives?

I would be fairly surprised if Hezbollah opsec guidelines didn't say that you must have the pager at you at all times, and make sure it can't be accessed by others.

[thret]

This is likely the most precise large scale military strike of all time. You can't control for everything - some pagers might have been in the hands of innocent people - but it sure seems like an ideal attack vector.

[ineedasername]

What is the quantity? Reports are the beepers were purchased directly by Hezbollah for their use.

[ineedasername]

Found it: multiple reports say 5,000 pagers

[alphan0n]

Who though? Who, exactly?

[rakoo]

> blowing up airplanes or launching rockets at residential areas intentionally targets civilians in order to spread a maximum amount of terror among the civilian population

Which is exactly what Israel has been doing for decades by

installing an apaitheid regime https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_apartheid

colonizing palestinian land https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

kicking hundreds of thousands of people off of their homes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

putting guns on their head day in day out https://www.msf.org/palestinians-face-harassment-and-violenc...

running on them with tanks while their families must watch https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6385?s=35

destroy the graves in an attempt to dehumanize even more https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_razing_of_cemeteries...

and on and on and on since a time when none of us was even born. Let's not pretend Israel is the good guy here. There are no good guys, and while I don't accept the acts of Hezbollah, what is a colonized people being genocided to do when the world doesn't care about them being denied human rights ?

[pvaldes]

> running on them with tanks while their families must watch https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6385?s=35

Wow. Just, wow!.

They run a tank over the mother until assassinate her in front of their four children? Really?

I'm speechless. This is an absolutely hideous act

[Taniwha]

They were lucky someone wasn't carrying one on a plane

[belorn]

I wonder if it would endanger the plane. A 20g explosive sitting in the pocket of a person will clearly cause serious injury, but I am unsure if it has penetration power to actually go through the plane body. I am reminded of mythbusters experiments with small amount of explosives to block up doors, but I don't recall how much they needed in the end.

[WalterBright]

Poking holes in the fuselage of a jetliner isn't going to take down a plane. Consider the cases of a turbine fan blade taking out a window, the case where the MAX door panel blew off, the cases where the cargo door came off, and the 737 "convertible" case. You'd have to take out a large part of the structure to bring it down.

Take a look at all the photos of B-17s taking severe combat damage yet returning home. Jetliners are a lot more redundant today than the B-17s were.

However, if the hole took out the flight controls, or set a fire, then the airplane has a big problem.

[komali2]

In some of the cases you mentioned, there were passenger deaths due to being ejected from the aircraft. I'm on mobile or I'd link exactly which incidents but I remember at least two cases from when I was bored in a lecture and read through most of Wikipedia's "list of deaths in aircraft incidents" list or whatever it's called

[WalterBright]

Yes, there are passenger deaths from some of those incidents. But the plane wasn't brought down.

[shiroiushi]

>Poking holes in the fuselage of a jetliner isn't going to take down a plane. Consider the cases of

These are all fake news. According to Hollywood, a single bullet from a gun will cause an airplane to break apart in mid-air. You can't honestly expect me to believe Hollywood movies get physics wrong.

Similarly, as soon as a car's wheels leave the ground, it bursts into a fireball according to many TV shows I've seen.

/s

[Sindisil]

What about the person sitting next to the target?

[belorn]

Naturally the close quarters will results in multiple people being harmed. The question is more about the physics and if the explosives has enough penetrating power to go through the walls of the plane.

The bigger risk to the plane (and passengers) would likely be if the person carrying the explosive was working in the airport and the explosion occurred during a critical moment, like when a pilot is taxiing.

[mattmaroon]

Most of the flight would be out of range and I’m not even sure that explosion would take out a plane. Plus it would probably be powered off because Hezbollah is serious about flight safety.

[hypeatei]

> I’m not even sure that explosion would take out a plane

I take it you would have no problem being on a plane with one (or even multiple) of these pagers going off then? What kind of argument is this?

[mattmaroon]

I wouldn’t want to be near it anywhere so what’s the difference between a plane and a grocery store?

The comment implied Israel was risking blowing up an entire plane when we were discussing whether it was targeted or not.

Go play in the other room, the grownups are talking.

[jarsin]

Do we know whether or not they embedded gps tracking into the bombs?

I would think they would have that ability, not just to avoid a horrible accident like blowing up a plane, but also to gather valuable tracking intel on a terrorist organization.

[satori99]

My understanding is that pagers are typically radio Rx-only, and that it is not possible to track their location like a cellular device -- which is likely why Hezbollah chose to use them.

Though it would be possible to add this ability when the hardware was intercepted, a transmitting device is also easy to detect.

[jasonwatkinspdx]

Two way pagers have been a thing since the 90s. You're limited to replying with a very short alphanumeric message.

That said, pagers don't continuously ping the tower like cell phones do. They can stay receive only until the moment you chose to send a message.

[BuildTheRobots]

The AR924's in question are POCSAG pagers; broadcast from base stations and receive only at the pager end. Two way pagers are a thing but use an entirely different protocol for communications.

[knight_47]

I was thinking about this, but then it probably wouldn't even get past a security xray scan. Which makes me think, in the 5 or so months these were reported to being in the wild, one never boarded a plane?

[agapon]

Hamas terrorists boarding commercial airplanes? With their secret pagers on them?

Somehow I don't think so.

[alphan0n]

A pager wouldn’t have been able to connect to any networks at altitude.

[Terr_]

From what I can find, the targeted pager-model can receive UHF messages in the 450~470MHz range. That could reach passenger jet cruise altitudes if the transmitter is strong enough.

I think it's safest to assume Hezbollah are using strong transmitters, because they'll want to be able to broadcast across rather large areas and in a way that resists potential jamming.

On the flip side, I'm having a hard time imagining these as threats to an entire airplane, given the tight constraints on how much explosive power can be secretly snuck into a functioning pager.

[alphan0n]

Penetration of 450-480MHz through the shell of an airplane would, on the ground,require a transmission strength of approximately .4dB/m at a distance of 1 kilometer, which is doable by most measures, but would quickly become unrealistic as the plane gained altitude.

https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/68269081/560768.pdf

[blantonl]

Pagers don’t “connect” to networks.

[alphan0n]

What do they do, then? Are you implying that connections can only exist as a two way relationship? Are rivers not connected to streams, tributaries, etc?

Receiving data from a network is a connection, no matter how you want to define it.

[blantonl]

Yes, I am definitely implying that a connection only exists in a two way relationship. Don't be obtuse.

[alphan0n]

Don’t be vague then. What do pagers do, if not connect?

[Taniwha]

The towers resend the message for a while so that they get through - some guy might be in a plane on approach to Beirut right now his pager coming into range as they land ....

[esjeon]

> You can't get any more targeted than that.

We can nuke a dictator. It's going to blow up everything within miles, evaporating millions of people, but it can't get any more targeted than that. Deal with it.

Seriously, tho, it's infuriating that a government literally triggered explosion among general public, right in front of innocent eyes. This is an act of terrorism, harming the lives of innocent people who've been largely unrelated to the conflict.