Of course it is. they targeted anyone with these pagers as well as anyone standing within a few metres of anyone with a pager. All of whom were definitely combatants. Because otherwise this would be a war crime, and Mossad would never.
That’s not what discrimination means in international law.
It was not an indiscriminate attack and only people who obviously do not have a clue what they’re talking about think that’s not the case.
If you don’t want to be a tragic yet lawful incidental casualty of war, don’t stand near people whose idea of good government is launching 1,000 rockets a month while their families are malnourished.
I’m finding it pretty difficult to find a definition of discriminate killing in international law. Most commentators seem to think that the pager attack was a very clear example of indiscriminate killing. Could you point me to the law which defines this term?
Immediately dismissed because first sentence describes the pager attack as indiscriminate, which is utterly idiotic.
Of course it is. they targeted anyone with these pagers as well as anyone standing within a few metres of anyone with a pager. All of whom were definitely combatants. Because otherwise this would be a war crime, and Mossad would never.
That’s not what discrimination means in international law.
It was not an indiscriminate attack and only people who obviously do not have a clue what they’re talking about think that’s not the case.
If you don’t want to be a tragic yet lawful incidental casualty of war, don’t stand near people whose idea of good government is launching 1,000 rockets a month while their families are malnourished.
I’m finding it pretty difficult to find a definition of discriminate killing in international law. Most commentators seem to think that the pager attack was a very clear example of indiscriminate killing. Could you point me to the law which defines this term?