• sozesoze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Bibi really wants a war with Hezbollah, doesn’t he? I mean you can’t call it defending Israels safety anymore when you provoke any and all responses every other month with a missile here, a bomb there and now thousands of bombs everywhere. This is just another measure to keep Netanyahu in a conflict so that he doesn’t have to bear the consequences of multiple corruption cases against him and the dissolving of his coalition outside unity cases in a war. Why is Europe and the US still covering for him? What is the rest of Israel doing?

      • sozesoze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        A war in Lebanon is actually bad for Netanyahu. His interest is a slow-burning war so he can prolong the current situation as much as possible

        The current situation is that he’s in a war in Gaza and that is keeping him in office. He can still spin this as “we are fighting against an existential threat”. Rocket defence and retaliation strikes aka the slow burning war in Lebanon is not enough for the Israeli society to unite behind Bibi. Only if they seriously attack. And I think Netanyahu wants to provoke such an attack.

        Sending thousands of bombs God knows where they land is not a proper defense. It’s a huge escalation where Hezbollah will answer. I think the best argument against this strike has been thrown around everywhere: What if Hezbollah made such an attack where 3000 bombs where sent to IDF people. We would talk about a terrorist attack. Why is that different now?

          • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            They planted bombs in hardware that is used exclusively by Hezbollah operatives and their accomplices to evade gathering sigint. Yes, civilians got hurt. That’s the nature of war, and what makes it so horrible - people who might hold no malice nor pose any threat to the other side get hurt and die.

            How is this argument different than defending the use of landmines?

            So the pagers were ordered by Hezbollah. You send that text you don’t know if they are at a daycare picking up their kids, if they lost the pager and it’s sitting on some restaurant owner’s countertop next to some other family, etc etc etc.

            There are so many things that can happen between when those pagers get rigged and sent out and the time they are detonated.

            If Israel seemed at all like they tried to avoid bombing and shooting civilians in Gaza we could at least defend their actions there by saying “clearly they are trying to avoid civilian casualties” (we can’t, but we could) - but there is nothing but hopes and prayers to avoid civilian casualties in an attack like this.

            Literally if any non-governmental entity did the same thing, no one would hesitate to call it a terrorist attack. And that’s what it is here, a terrorist attack.

            Edit: Acknowledging that I typed Hamas out of habit instead of Hezbollah. Corrected.

              • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                The pagers were used by Hezbollah, not Hamas.

                I realize that, I was drawing a parallel between the two circumstances.

                And again - when you drop a bomb, you can credibly have made an attempt to ensure no one is in the vicinity who you don’t intend to bomb. (Not that israel seems to do this) - this is especially true with modern technology.

                You cannot reasonably predict the path that a pager takes once it is shipped, no matter who it is intended for, not least because no one expects a pager to be the source of a deadly threat. You control who owns that “bomb” you have just sent into the world only until the moment it is unpacked and given to the first person who takes possession of it.

                  • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    You can, of course, think differently.

                    And I do. It’s been one argument the entire time, and I don’t see how it’s worth reframing the parallel when you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand it the first two times.

                    Good day.

                    Edite: I see I typed Hamas when I meant to type Hezbollah in one place. Will correct now. I admit that was potentially confusing.

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s war they wanted and it’s what they have. Couldn’t make it work in 75 years. We’ve heard enough and seen enough, nobody gets the benefit of the doubt in this. And I’m scared to even post this mild critic will make me an information warfare target. So tired of this shit.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      He wants the US at war before the sea change. once elected or close enough to it Harris can change her tune.