Comment by sysguest

this

stark constrast to hezbollah's direct attack on civilians:

1. directly targeted civilians 2. direct action (not remote) 3. intentionally brutal (beheadings, rapes)

...what are they, animals?

pager attack is, however scary it looks, rather more "reserved and gentlemen-ly way" of doing things:

1. targeted hezbolla militants (would average civilian use walkietalkie?) 2. indirect action

for anyone saying otherwise, how more "gentlemen-ly" should israel be? do nothing? "talk" with the leaders? waste more precious lives by directly sending troops without any prior action?

I just don't get why people talk negatively about the walkietalkie boomboom campaign -- it's a masterpiece of "trying the most not to kill civilians but doing your job"