1 minute ago, Danny Australia said:

 

Exclusive: Nearly half of the Israeli munitions dropped on Gaza are imprecise ‘dumb bombs,’ US intelligence assessment finds | CNN Politics

 

The sad image you have posted, along with numerous others like it on the internet, serves as evidence of the consequences when Israel employs dumb bombs with complete disregard for the safety of innocent civilians.

 

Not sure who is dumb here, the bomb or the war criminal who use them in the first place.

 

Even dumb bombs dropped with modern bomb aiming equipment are relatively accurate. These bombs were dropped deliberately where they landed.

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/from-precision-devastation-unraveling-impact-legality-wesam-tqcsf

 

From Precision to Devastation: Unraveling the Impact and Legality of Israel's Modern Carpet Bombing Tactics in Gaza

 

The evolution of these military tactics has translated into a contemporary iteration of carpet bombing, characterized by the systematic erasure of civilian areas. The human cost is immense, with countless lives lost and entire communities shattered.

 

What makes him an expert a credible opinion on that?

 

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

What makes him an expert a credible opinion on that?

 

 

no need to ask me, just click his bio

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

no need to ask me, just click his bio

I did that's where I got his profile....lol No he is not an expert.

 

Is this carpet bombing? Blowing up a tunnel network? It leaves a lot of destruction that's for sure but carpet bombing....................

 

The IDF releases footage showing a Hamas tunnel in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, used to attack and kill three soldiers several days ago, being destroyed in a large explosion.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I did that's where I got his profile....lol No he is not an expert.

 

Is this carpet bombing? Blowing up a tunnel network? It leaves a lot of destruction that's for sure but carpet bombing....................

 

The IDF releases footage showing a Hamas tunnel in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, used to attack and kill three soldiers several days ago, being destroyed in a large explosion.

 

No, that's not carpet bombing. Odd that you can't tell that all by yourself. You've presumably seen enough photos of actual carpet bombing in Gaza.

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

No, that's not carpet bombing. Odd that you can't tell that all by yourself. You've presumably seen enough photos of actual carpet bombing in Gaza.

I never gave an opinion on whether it is or not, did you notice that...........lol

 

You need to be consistent in your posts, you claimed:

 

When I see total destruction of a large area I see carpet bombing.

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

I never gave an opinion on whether it is or not, did you notice that...........lol

 

You need to be consistent in your posts, you claimed:

 

When I see total destruction of a large area I see carpet bombing.

 

If your point was not to troll, what was it?

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

If your point was not to troll, what was it?

Ok deflection so you no longer have to explain your claims and inconsistency, thanks for that

22 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

The two terms mean exactly the same thing. Again.

 

The term area bombing refers to indiscriminate bombing of an area and also encompasses cases of carpet bombing, including obliteration bombing.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombing

 

 

 

 

Your link does not have that sentence. Your link does not back that claim of yours.

42 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Your link does not have that sentence. Your link does not back that claim of yours.

 

 

Shocking....

In the latest report from the IDF it was noted that the killing of the first 2 hostages did not violate their rules of engagement. In other words, it's OK to kill 3 half naked men carrying a white flag. Maybe that does comport with international law?

15 minutes ago, placeholder said:

In the latest report from the IDF it was noted that the killing of the first 2 hostages did not violate their rules of engagement. In other words, it's OK to kill 3 half naked men carrying a white flag. Maybe that does comport with international law?

Can you cite the claim that it "did not violate their rules of engagement"

 

In publishing the results of its final probe into the issue, the IDF said that despite the soldiers clearly violating the rules of engagement – by firing on persons who presented no immediate danger and were waving a white flag – the enormous complexity of the circumstances led to no immediate punishment.

 

IDF sources suggested that once the war was over it was possible that disciplinary or other action might theoretically be taken against some of the soldiers involved, but in the meantime the soldiers are being left to continue to fight in the field.

 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-779923

On 1/1/2024 at 11:24 AM, placeholder said:

In the latest report from the IDF it was noted that the killing of the first 2 hostages did not violate their rules of engagement. In other words, it's OK to kill 3 half naked men carrying a white flag. Maybe that does comport with international law?

I assume you're not going to acknowledge the false claim you made?

On 1/1/2024 at 11:42 AM, Bkk Brian said:

Can you cite the claim that it "did not violate their rules of engagement"

 

In publishing the results of its final probe into the issue, the IDF said that despite the soldiers clearly violating the rules of engagement – by firing on persons who presented no immediate danger and were waving a white flag – the enormous complexity of the circumstances led to no immediate punishment.

 

IDF sources suggested that once the war was over it was possible that disciplinary or other action might theoretically be taken against some of the soldiers involved, but in the meantime the soldiers are being left to continue to fight in the field.

 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-779923

 

On 1/1/2024 at 11:42 AM, Bkk Brian said:

Can you cite the claim that it "did not violate their rules of engagement"

 

In publishing the results of its final probe into the issue, the IDF said that despite the soldiers clearly violating the rules of engagement – by firing on persons who presented no immediate danger and were waving a white flag – the enormous complexity of the circumstances led to no immediate punishment.

 

IDF sources suggested that once the war was over it was possible that disciplinary or other action might theoretically be taken against some of the soldiers involved, but in the meantime the soldiers are being left to continue to fight in the field.

 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-779923

 

On 1/4/2024 at 10:19 AM, Bkk Brian said:

I assume you're not going to acknowledge the false claim you made?

 

IDF conclusion: 

The investigation concluded that the soldiers acted rightly to the best of their understanding and that "there was no malice in the event". 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-29/thousands-move-fresh-exodus-central-gaza-israeli-advances/103271274

 

So, on the one hand, the soldiers violate the rules, but on the other hand they "acted rightly to the best of their understanding"? The snipers who saw 3 men naked from the waist up (in order to show they weren't wearing explosive vests) and waving a white flag acted rightly according to the best of their understanding? So the rules exist but when they're violated it's not a violation?

It is to laugh.

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 

IDF conclusion: 

The investigation concluded that the soldiers acted rightly to the best of their understanding and that "there was no malice in the event". 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-29/thousands-move-fresh-exodus-central-gaza-israeli-advances/103271274

 

So, on the one hand, the soldiers violate the rules, but on the other hand they "acted rightly to the best of their understanding"? The snipers who saw 3 men naked from the waist up (in order to show they weren't wearing explosive vests) and waving a white flag acted rightly according to the best of their understanding? So the rules exist but when they're violated it's not a violation?

It is to laugh.

Again....lol

 

I know what this means do you?: "did not violate their rules of engagement" (from you and not any article)

 

I know what this means do you?: "soldiers clearly violating the rules of engagement" (from the IDF investigation and linked article)

@Neeraram, source for both quotes please.