“you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand [the parallel?] the first two times

When I typed that I hadn’t spotted my own typo yet. Sorry.

If that’s the case, you’re making it so easy for me other people might think we’re in cahoots

I don’t care in the least if anyone thinks I’m in cahoots with anyone; it won’t change that I’m in cahoots with no one.

You can, of course, think differently.

Typo notwithstanding, it remains true that I do think differently, and if your argument boils down to what has actually been banned vs an understanding of how absolutely heartless and tragic it is to deploy a bunch of explosive pagers that will randomly move around a populated area because you want to kill a limited set of bad guys in that area, there is nothing left for us to discuss.

You can, of course, think differently.

And I do. It’s been one argument the entire time, and I don’t see how it’s worth reframing the parallel when you seem not to (or have chosen not to) understand it the first two times.

Good day.

Edite: I see I typed Hamas when I meant to type Hezbollah in one place. Will correct now. I admit that was potentially confusing.

The pagers were used by Hezbollah, not Hamas.

I realize that, I was drawing a parallel between the two circumstances.

And again - when you drop a bomb, you can credibly have made an attempt to ensure no one is in the vicinity who you don’t intend to bomb. (Not that israel seems to do this) - this is especially true with modern technology.

You cannot reasonably predict the path that a pager takes once it is shipped, no matter who it is intended for, not least because no one expects a pager to be the source of a deadly threat. You control who owns that “bomb” you have just sent into the world only until the moment it is unpacked and given to the first person who takes possession of it.

They planted bombs in hardware that is used exclusively by Hezbollah operatives and their accomplices to evade gathering sigint. Yes, civilians got hurt. That’s the nature of war, and what makes it so horrible - people who might hold no malice nor pose any threat to the other side get hurt and die.

How is this argument different than defending the use of landmines?

So the pagers were ordered by Hezbollah. You send that text you don’t know if they are at a daycare picking up their kids, if they lost the pager and it’s sitting on some restaurant owner’s countertop next to some other family, etc etc etc.

There are so many things that can happen between when those pagers get rigged and sent out and the time they are detonated.

If Israel seemed at all like they tried to avoid bombing and shooting civilians in Gaza we could at least defend their actions there by saying “clearly they are trying to avoid civilian casualties” (we can’t, but we could) - but there is nothing but hopes and prayers to avoid civilian casualties in an attack like this.

Literally if any non-governmental entity did the same thing, no one would hesitate to call it a terrorist attack. And that’s what it is here, a terrorist attack.

Edit: Acknowledging that I typed Hamas out of habit instead of Hezbollah. Corrected.

In that hypothetical I think my comment would stand either way.

Why do all their jackets look three sizes too big?

I mean, something has to counterbalance their headwear.

Wow what a dodge. It doesn’t matter the extent of the trauma or whether it’s the worst trauma they have had. You are minding your own business, have done nothing wrong, then the cops show up with a random accusation and “need” to put you in cuffs while they determine if you are a threat. Comply or violence. It’s not right.

And I’m saying, even if they are polite, they are polite because I comply. If I don’t really want to be in handcuffs right then - doesn’t matter. If I’ve got an important appointment or was about to leave to pick up my child from school before police arrived to “make sure I’m not a threat” - doesn’t matter.

Your options at that point, even as someone who has done nothing wrong are comply, or expect violence. THAT is inherently traumatic.

I don’t disagree with you about this specific case, I was reacting to your “people put too much stock in being cuffed.” Removing another person’s bodily autonomy under direct threat of violence is just another day for police, but for the rest of us it’s a pretty fucking traumatic thing to be on the other end of.

Perhaps if you don’t understand what police officers go through, I could see it.

I understand they can pick a different job if it’s too much for them, and that they knew what the job entailed when they picked the career in the first place.

I always felt like people put too much stock into being handcuffed or not

Too much stock? Your bodily autonomy is being removed, under overt threat of further violence if you resist. It’s humiliating if seen in that condition because of assumptions people make. For someone who has done nothing wrong why the fuck wouldn’t they be indignant?

I’ve been handcuffed before, In a similar but not nearly as severe circumstance.

Me too, and I knew that they at least had a reason to think I was up to no good (I was not), it’s not the same as literally minding your own business in your own home and having them barge in. Not really apples to apples to this situation here.