The Resistance group said it targeted the Kiryat Shmona settlement with a barrage of rockets, resulting in fires according to Israeli media. Firefighting teams were dispatched to the area in an attempt to extinguish the fires.
Hezbollah also struck the Meggido military airbase west of Afula - north of Jenin - three times throughout the early hours of the day with salvos of Fadi 1 and Fadi 2 rockets.
Additionally, in a strategic operation, the Resistance announced targeting with Fadi rockets the Israeli base, which is the Israeli occupation army’s main transport and logistical support base for the northern region.
Furthermore, the group targeted the logistical warehouses of the Israeli 146th Brigade at the Naftali base. A northern correspondent for the Israeli i24NEWS confirmed that Hezbollah had hit “a very large weapons depot and a logistical center belonging to the [Israeli] army,” noting ongoing efforts to extinguish the fires around the targeted site.
Okay reporting is reporting but speaking as another pro-Palestinian guy couldn’t you have found a better source?
Almaydeen is a great source. They are Lebanese.
I mean it is a Lebanese paper but it’s also notoriously biased towards Iran (and therefore Hezbollah) and Syria, and Hezbollah is suspected to be their source of funding. They’re just not the most likely to impartially report on Hezbollah’s activities in the same way people don’t unconditionally trust Al-Jazeera’s reporting on Qatar. Also the title is oozing bias for something that’s not an opinion peace.
Do you have evidence of Al Mayadeen lying or falsely reporting something?
They are biased in the sense that they amplify resistance voices where mainstream media crushes those voices. But I have never seen them falsify reports.
Apparently they failed three fact checks on mediabiasfactcheck.com, so you can check that. Also even if they don’t falsely report they can omit information or put a spin on things (for example in this case there could be other targets in this round of bombings that don’t sound as good and were left out). In these cases it’s better as a rule to compare the reporting with that of other sources.
MBFC is heavily biased in favor of Israel. Their failed fact checks appear to be three videos which predated the article and were thus misreports. Western newspapers should have had all their falsified reports about beheaded babies rated as misinformation but those are not mentioned.
Apparently that doesn’t matter.
Good on you for looking at facts that support you objectively.
Removed by mod
This is definitely not a great source, but I’m counting one population center and three Israeli bases in the article. Do you have a source that says otherwise?
Don’t engage with the bots.
Looked through history, they aren’t a bot.
Did you look, or just assume because you disagree?
I guess I’m just better at spotting them. Cheers.
Except that colonial settlements are not considered as strictly civilian population centers under the Geneva conventions, and are significantly more likely to meet the requirements of a lawful or legitimate military target.
I’m not saying that they’re a war crime exempt free fire zone, just pointing that for someone who clearly cares about critical thinking, it’s something you might want to consider while we wait for additional reporting and corroborated reports.
Not OP.
“Not strictly civilians” is a pretty loose arguement. Were those targeted combatants, and if not why were they?
Looking critically, is it the name or people that actually matter? I could argue Israeli war crimes from the same angle - namely its not until these specific criteria are met.
Not an argument, statement of fact about how colonial settlements have much looser rules as to what can be considered a legitimate strike, even if that area is primarily civilian in nature. It is not the same as targeting a civilian area within a nation’s internationally recognized borders, legally speaking that is.
There are still requirements that must be met, but the bar is much lower in that regard.
I also said that there wasn’t enough information available to know if those requirements were met, or not.
My point was that just them being colonial settlements significantly alters what is, and is not considered a war crime.
