← Back to context

Comment by dralley

5 days ago

"The reports" are that 12 were killed total, not that 12 civilians were killed. Only 2 of the killed were civilians as far as I can tell. Several of those who people on Twitter tried to claim were civilians, including a doctor, were admitted by Hezbollah to be Hezbollah members and given Hezbollah funerals.

I've never heard of "42 targets", and given 12 people died total, obviously 42 targets were not killed.

You should provide some sourcing for your numbers.

Incorrect. The reports are 42 total killed, 12 civilians including 2 children.

"Operation Grim Beeper" (seriously) on Wikipedia cites these numbers from Lebanese government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Lebanon_electronic_device...

  • The figure of merit in a military strike is casualties, not KIA; it's the "wounded" part you actually care about (in fact, in some tactical situations, wounding is preferable to killing, as it ties up adversary logistical resources).

    Since the pagers that were targeted were exclusively used by Hezbollah (which fought an actual civil war with the Lebanese security forces specifically in order to establish its own telecom network), I would be extraordinarily wary of any source that has claimed more injuries to noncombatants than to combatants.

    You can still tell a story where the pager attack was unacceptable owing to civilian casualties: there could be so many civilian casualties that any number of combatant casualties wouldn't justify it. But if you're claiming that there were more casualties to noncombatants over small explosions from devices carried principally in the pockets of combatants, it is rational to draw the conclusion that your reasoning (and sourcing) is motivated.

    • > it is rational to draw the conclusion that your reasoning (and sourcing) is motivated.

      Have you provided any sources at all for you numerous claims throughout this thread? Would it also me rational to draw a the conclusion that someone who has provided no sources at all is also engaging in “motivated reasoning”? At least be consistent.

      1 reply →

  • Fair enough, 12 total only includes the original pager attack, not the subsequent radio one. However, you seem to have made the same mistake. 42 people were killed total, but that does not mean that there were 42 targets.

    In any case, if Hezbollah themselves admit that 1500 of their fighters were injured by the attack (according to your own source), it seems extremely dishonest to claim that all 4000 were civilians or that there were only 42 targets.

    • >42 people were killed total, but that does not mean that there were 42 targets.

      So they only managed to hit 30 targets with 12 misfires… that makes it even worse.

      > In any case, if Hezbollah themselves admit that 1500 of their fighters were injured by the attack (according to your own source)

      That’s 1500 in addition to the 4,000 civilians. The fact they managed to wound 2.5x+ as many civilians as targets isn’t exactly making them look better…