My standards? My standards? Just sit through one single briefing by a JAG officer on the Laws of Armed Conflict. There's a reason anyone under U.S. jurisdiction would have refused to set this up and carried it out because they know they'd be charged for any innocent deaths.
A drone strike from your president Biden blew up all sorts of innocent people in Biden’s efforts to save face after his disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.
And he should be charged for that crime. Where have I said "Jao Bai-din did it, so they should be also allowed to."?
Any bombing risks collateral damage.
Any legitimate bombing requires confirmation of the target. "Do you have a visual on the target?"
Any shooting does, too. When your hero shot at Trump in PA, he shot and killed a fireman. I bet you are OK with that.
Just wow. Your projection is off the charts. You read something you didn't agree with and you lash out like a lunatic. You actually called Trump's attempted assassin my "hero". Get bent. I have stated that innocent lives are not to be put at risk. You, in your disturbed response, somehow state that I'd be "OK" with not one, not two, but thousands of innocent people at a rally being put at risk? You need help. Your bias and mental illness is spilling right out of you.
Your double standard for Jews killing terrorists is noted.
Double standard? What double standard? I've stated the exact opposite. The targeters should be held to the same standard as anyone else - if you can't confirm the target and ensure innocent lives are not at risk, you can't blindly detonate an explosive. YOU are the one pushing the double standard. If terrorists had done the same, you'd be screaming. You also assume that everyone killed was a terrorist. As I've stated in this thread, anyone could have been holding the device or standing near the owner of it. Women, children, EMTs, doctors, - I even mentioned someone innocently pumping gas. Remember that the next time someone is carrying a mobile phone when pumping gas next to you at the station.
Once again, you apply a set of standards that isnt applicable and you imply that ROE (which can change) is law of war. You are incorrect on both counts.
The laws of armed conflict apply to uniformed military, not unlawful combatants. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, not a military unit beholden to the accepted conventions of war. Additionally, it was not Israeli soldiers who pulled off this op. It was clearly covert operatives. Given you know nothing of who or how they managed this, your uninformed criticism is...uninformed.
We like to believe we have that luxury. The Israelis don't.
This thing is so lopsided on the side of killing/injuring terrorists, that it is unimaginable that the downside possibility of any civilians getting hurt could offset the huge benefit of hurting the terrorists.
“st sit through one single briefing by a JAG officer on the Laws of Armed Conflict. There’s a reason anyone under U.S. jurisdiction would have refused to set this up and carried it out because they know they’d be charged for any innocent deaths. “
Well, no. This was exceptionally precise, with about a 3000:1 enemy combatant to civilian casualty ratio. There have never been, in the history of warfare, a more precise attack of such scale among a disbursed enemy.
But name a war the USA has won since JAG took over command of the military.
The Israelis are playing to win, and in an amazingly restrained manner.