this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
487 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
58150 readers
3912 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
War is war, civil or not. I also mentioned WW2 since Finland did ally with the Nazis.
No, I'm giving you a moral dilemma to show you your own hypocrisy. Injuring thousands of Hezbollah members will save lives too - these are the people firing missiles at civilians as well (unless you're saying every Israeli is guilty, in which that says a lot more about how ducked up you are if true).
Hence I gave you a similar scenario. Because if the tables were turned - if someone managed to explode Netanyahu and co's phones and kill him, you'd probably be cheering even if children died, because it would mean a genocidal war would be halted.
You prefer the few rather than the greater good. And that always leads to more death rather than less. And quite frankly, makes you a shit military member to boot. Because it means if Russia did attack Finland, you'd prefer Putin alive if the opening for taking him out would kill a few innocents - even though letting him live would mean many more dying.
None of this exonerates Israel btw - an evil accidentally doing a net good doesn't stop that evil from being evil. But Hezbollah taking such a heavy hit with very few bystander casualties is a best case scenario, because the alternative - doing nothing - would have eventually led to more deaths.
War isn't war crimes.
Youre ignoring actual international law and think your 12th grade philosophy rhetoric is some fucking gotcha?
War isn't war crimes. I shouldn't have even engaged with this shitty whataboutism, but it's so laughable this is honestly entertaining. "War is war". Weirdly we've never had to resort to bombing civilians? The only thing you can manage to find is "you had a civil war and you got support from Germany (before having a war with them), thus you're just as morally bad as anyone who voluntarily massacre children, like Israel."
We weren't allies with Germany. You think that can't be true, since you know WWII history. But what you don't realise is you don't understand that like warcrimes, "ally" also has a definition. We were not allies with Nazis, we we're cobelligerents. Until we had to have a war with the fuckers cause they weren't happy with us not being in thrall to them. The fuckers burned Lappland.
I don't have anything better to do rn, so I might as well. This is absolutely moronic. No, I wouldn't be fucking cheering at anyone's death, and Netanyahu dying wouldn't even realistically stop the genocides, because why the fuck would it? Do you think he's the sole person pushing everyone else to do something they loathe? You haven't heard the "we're fighting human animals" from Israel's defense minister?
War is allowed. War crimes are not. How is this hard for you to understand? And how is it you honestly still cling to your, "every country has blood on their hands" and comparing mother fucking Finland to Israel, trying to equate them because we fought for our independence literally more than a century ago, and did no war crimes in the process.
How is that even remotely comparable to sending off bombs to be exploded in population centers with children?
Like how fucked up do you have to be to even be able to think that?
You: an eye for an eye makes the world blind
Also you: well war isn't that bad, it's war crimes that are bad!
Also, failing reading comprehension again, but to be fair English is your second language. I said Netanyahu and co., as in company, as in also the defense minister. Yes, that would manage to stop the genocidal war, because the rabid leadership that wants it would be dead, and politically they would have to scramble in order to maintain majority coalition.
For someone in the military you really don't seem to understand how modern warfare works, at all. A lot of modern warfare is urban now, not in fields - you know, places where non-combatants are. This is why Finland also offers civilian support training as an option for the mandatory regimen - such as learning how to build defences in city streets. **Even regular war occurs where there are children in modern times.**Even in ancient times. Hence, war is war. Children die in war, and your thick ass skull doesn't seem to get the root issue is war itself. War crimes are the ugliest thing of war, but war itself is already terrible.
Secondly, this wasn't just "sending off bombs to be exploded". This was a directed supply chain attack - it's not like grenades or rockets were just launched at city streets. They specifically infiltrated Hezbollah, convinced then to use Walkie Talkies and gave them tainted ones, that seemed to have also been tapped , then convinced them to use pagers as an extra precaution and gave them tainted ones too, then detonated those first rather than the walkie talkies to make them think the first form of communication was safe, then the walkie talkies. These were items designed to be carried around by the enemy, not indiscriminate bombing, and designed to disrupt and slow down their comms. Even without killing, it has incapacitated a huge amount of the enemy, and made them easier to identify by cross referencing hospital records with other Intel.
That is vastly different than what you imply. This if anything resulted in the least amount of casualties, considering the enemy combatants are mostly non-uniformed, and rarely attack directly in a front line.
Could you come up with a better way to deal with a zealot theocratic group also intent on genocide that fires missiles remotely and indiscriminately constantly at the general population that isn't directly starting a war in another country? Of course, you'll ignore this question just like every other thing I brought up that's extremely inconvenient for you to answer.
That's why I also brought up Finland and the Nazis - the Nazis just happen to be fighting the Soviets at the time didn't make the Nazis good, did it? Same here with Mossad fighting Hezbollah.