They said “Seems unlikely [that pagers would be in the hands of doctors] considering only pagers belonging to Hezbollah had the explosives added.”
That article directly refutes that. It is heavily implied when you’re all saying “Hezbollah” you’re talking about militants. Again, it is unreasonable to suggest that workers, including doctors and nurses, that are part of the civilian arm of Hezbollah’s de facto government are fair targets in either morality or intentional law.
They said “Seems unlikely [that pagers would be in the hands of doctors] considering only pagers belonging to Hezbollah had the explosives added.”
I understood that as referring to doctors unaffiliated with Hezbollah, as it has been made pretty clear that Hezbollah doctors were targets of the attack.
It is heavily implied when you’re all saying “Hezbollah” you’re talking about militants.
No it isn’t. Maybe that’s how you interpreted it, but as I said in another comment it is not just Hezbollah soldiers that were targeted.
Again, it is unreasonable to suggest that workers, including doctors and nurses, that are part of the civilian arm of Hezbollah’s de facto government are fair targets in either morality or international law.
I don’t understand that interpretation. The original comment was:
Israel could have taken out entire hospital staffs with this “technique”. Hope they remain human and don’t.
To which macarthur_park replied:
Seems unlikely considering only pagers belonging to Hezbollah had the explosives added.
They do not think it’s likely that hospital staff, Hezbollah affiliated or not, could be in danger. I challenged that. I don’t think they were aware that Hezbollah had a civilian wing at all, and that many public sector workers are technically “Hezbollah-affiliated” due to the nature of the political situation there.
No one has suggested that in this comment chain.
Good, then we should all agree that this was a despicable attack on Israel’s part and this whole conversation is pointless.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 day ago
They went to Hezbollah, as the person you are disagreeing with said.
SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
They said “Seems unlikely [that pagers would be in the hands of doctors] considering only pagers belonging to Hezbollah had the explosives added.”
That article directly refutes that. It is heavily implied when you’re all saying “Hezbollah” you’re talking about militants. Again, it is unreasonable to suggest that workers, including doctors and nurses, that are part of the civilian arm of Hezbollah’s de facto government are fair targets in either morality or intentional law.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 day ago
I understood that as referring to doctors unaffiliated with Hezbollah, as it has been made pretty clear that Hezbollah doctors were targets of the attack.
No it isn’t. Maybe that’s how you interpreted it, but as I said in another comment it is not just Hezbollah soldiers that were targeted.
No one has suggested that in this comment chain.
SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
I don’t understand that interpretation. The original comment was:
To which macarthur_park replied:
They do not think it’s likely that hospital staff, Hezbollah affiliated or not, could be in danger. I challenged that. I don’t think they were aware that Hezbollah had a civilian wing at all, and that many public sector workers are technically “Hezbollah-affiliated” due to the nature of the political situation there.
Good, then we should all agree that this was a despicable attack on Israel’s part and this whole conversation is pointless.