I’ll engage with your shitty whataboutism after you answer which it is: were the bombs “surgical” and killed a 9-year-old girl on purpose, or were they sloppy attacks which caused civilian casualties on accident?
Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today. The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction. Human Rights Watch
Although they did kill that girl (and others) on accident, the attack as a whole seems to have been far more surgical that what we usually see in this conflict (and dare I say, certainly more surgical than most attacks from Hezbollah)
You can’t have it both ways.
Either it was “very surgical” and still killed a small girl (ie the girl was targeted) OR Israeli attack methods are so indiscriminate and poorly aimed they end up killing INNOCENT CHILDREN.
It’s one or the other.
That’s a very childish way to look at it.
Imagine if Hezbollah managed to send a missile right up Bibi’s bedroom window and killed both him and, unbeknownst to them, some child that was with him. Would you then conclude that it was an ‘indiscriminate’ attack? Would you not make a difference between that and say a carpet bombing where they just try to level the city block he’s in?
Please use more caps and bold formatting in your posts
