• PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Sabotaging dual-use communications devices that are used, specifically, by members of an enemy paramilitary group is not a clear-cut war crime. On the other hand, there is a very strong argument that ‘blind-firing’ such devices en-masse without regard for the proximity of civilians or possibility of civilian harm is a war crime via insufficiently discerning use of force. But even that is something that could probably be argued in a legitimately-unbiased international court - not that it’ll ever fucking get to one, considering Israel’s history with international courts.

      Either way, it’s a shite move that was only meant to escalate the situation so Bibi can stay in power a few more minutes. Vile shit.

      • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Hezbollah isn’t just a paramilitary group, though, it’s an actual political party in Lebanon.

        You’d have to have an extremely narrow understanding of who Hezbollah even is to claim the attack was legitimate

        Not to mention the intentional fear the strike created that now legitimizes Hezbollah’s mandate against Israel. Yea, it was ‘shite’, but it seems pretty well designed to manufacture fear and chaos and to bait Lebanon into a broader conflict.

    • hoch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I don’t think you can just call things you don’t like a ‘war crime’

      • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        What definition of terrorism? What legal system? There’s no objective, scientific measurement for “terrorism”. It’s purely political ideology.