I got quite a kick out of visual image bombs going off simultaneously in the pockets of thousands of terrorists, sort like the slapstick comedy of the Three Stooges, or the abuse inflicted on the hapless Coyote by the wily Roadrunner. And the resulting indignant sputtering of Hezbollah leadership was nearly as much fun. But the recent Israeli pager attack on Hezbollah served an even more important purpose than my personal amusement.
Am I being flip? Well, who is less deserving of sympathy than a terrorist?
To summarize, Israel and Hezbollah have been engaged in hostilities for some time now, with Hezbollah periodically launching missiles into Israel, and Israel periodically bombing Hezbollah's sites in Lebanon. Hezbollah is allied with Hamas in the ongoing Gaza war, both sharing a determination to destroy Israel. Both are funded by Iran and engage in periodic terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.
The widely disbursed Hezbollah is required to maintain communications with its operatives. Wary of using cellphones because of a fear they can be tracked by Israeli intelligence, they have adopted old-school pagers. Apparently, at some time during manufacture or shipping, Israel equipped these pagers with a small but lethal amount of explosives that could be remotely detonated by signal.
On Sept. 17, thousands of the pagers were simultaneously detonated, reportedly killing more than 12 people, including two children, and seriously injuring several thousand. A day later, a large number of Hezbollah walkie-talkies detonated, reportedly killing and injuring more. Since these devices were being carried by Hezbollah operatives on their person, the vast majority of casualties were Hezbollah personnel.
Predictably, Hezbollah leadership and allies were enraged and unleashed their usual torrent of florid threats and hyperbole, declaring that Israel had crossed a "red line" creating a state of war, as if the years of missile attacks were peaceful gestures. Perhaps not surprisingly, some of those who usually advocate for the Palestinian cause, have joined in condemning the Israeli attack, with U.N. "experts" insisting that it was some sort of "war crime."
In an active war like this, it is difficult to see what could be more moral. Weapons, of course, are designed to kill and injure enemy combatants, and these exclusively targeted enemy combatants and minimized the threat to noncombatants. Israel has long been under attack from Hezbollah and is entitled to use force to defend itself under all recognized international conventions.
A weapon that specifically targets only the enemy's active combatants seems very ethical compared to the usual weapons like bombs and bullets, which do not discriminate between civilians and terrorists. These devices were issued only to those who needed to be contacted by Hezbollah command and are necessarily carried on the person of the terrorist. The combatant is most at risk due to physical proximity, and the danger to those nearby limited by the minute amount of explosive use. This was confirmed by the large number of Hezbollah casualties and the small number of civilians reportedly hurt.
Some object to the pager tactic as a danger to international trade. Admittedly, I imagine that the regional sales of rings, wristwatches, and full sets of gloves are down.
A common and understandable lament of those who oppose Israel's fight against Hamas in Gaza is the terrible toll that the fighting has taken on civilians, with thousands having been killed and injured. Most civilian casualties are due to Hamas using civilians as "human shields" by deliberately siting military facilities under or near schools, hospitals, and mosques. This complicates Israeli targeting and provides public relations advantages by enabling Hamas to howl in contrived victimhood over the inevitable civilian deaths and injuries they caused.
When pressed, many objectors dutifully condemn Hamas' October 2023 atrocities and acknowledge Israel's right to defend itself, carefully limiting their objections to the deadly toll that the Israeli responsive strikes take on the civilians of Gaza but directing their anger at Israel alone.
It would seem that these objectors would be quick to approve of tactics like the exploding pagers, which target only terrorists and largely spare noncombatants. But, counterintuitively, I have yet to hear any of the usual opponents of the Gaza war support this pager tactic. Instead, we are hearing some, like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, angrily attacking Israel and U.S. military support over the new tactic. Why?
Tribalism. These supposed "humanitarians" are actually just upset that "their side" suffered a big setback. Most find it politically disadvantageous to publicly acknowledge advocating for a terrorist organization and the atrocities that they commit, so they just cloak their outrage in feigned concern for the innocent victims of the fighting. But, in reality, they view the civilian population of Gaza just as Hamas does—as expendable public relations tools to be exploited in conducting the war.
Tip to Hezbollah and Hamas: Watch out for any parcels labeled "Acme." Beep beep. Δ
John Donegan is a retired attorney in Pismo Beach who is going back to his old, safer flip phone. Respond with an opinion of your own by emailing it to letters@newtimesslo.com.