"Pagers as boobytraps" Topic

Some are claiming that the exploding pagers were boobytraps, and boobytraps are forbidden in international law.

Do they count as boobytraps? What is international law on boobytraps?

Ah, this will take you down the rabbit-hole of Hezbollah's right to take refuge in a Geneva Convention that outlaws one of their favorite modes of attack, firing weapons at unarmed noncombatants. Is a non-state actor whose preferred method of making war is attacking noncombatants entitled to the protections agreed between civilized states? You will no doubt get a diversity of opinion there.

My view is, " ‘em." It's not as if there is any hope Hezbollah would reciprocate if Israel decided to limit its means of attack.

Nah, probably closer to a hand grenade. Enemy combatants were targeted, but hand grenades are pretty indiscriminate in their area of effect.

How are "boobytraps" defined in "international law"?
To my legally uneducated mind, a boobytrap is something one stumbles across, either accidentally or deliberately. For example a tripwire.
These, however, were distributed by the leadership itself.
Could it be an "unconventionally vague" term? 🙄🤷

Is this war declared, or undeclared?
One can easily indulge in the "Tu Quoque" logical fallacy here. In plain English, the "Oh yeah? What about…" sending rockets indiscriminately against civilian area?
Is there a certain "proportional ratio" of allowable civilian casualties in a claimed military target?

War crimes are prosecuted by the winners. I can see alleged perpetrators being kidnapped and tried in The Hague, or in a country that assumes competence to try war crimes. Like Belarus or Yemen. Nuremberg only happened because Germany lost.
Curtis LeMay joked that if America lost the war, he would be guilty of war crimes against Japan.

The whole mess is so far away from the "civilized" (ha ha) version of war the laws were designed for that any discussion is going to lead to a cascade of definitional questions.

If the modified pagers had just been dropped off at phone shops across Lebanon, in the hope that some would be bought by Hezbollah members and if they detonated when the user did something to them, that would be a boobytrap.

Intercepting Hezbollah's supply-chain for something they were buying for their own use and detonating on command – sounds quite a different thing to me.

Yes, I agree with much posted here. Where is the line drawn ? When fighting terrorists/those that didn't/won't sign any GC, etc. is there such a thing of a "moral equivalency"… Now We generally don't want to stoop to some of those levels. But sometimes reality comes into play.

IIRC the USA won't sign on about making minefields illegal ? Well if we signed on everybody should. However, in places like the DMZ in Korea. After two tours on the "Z", '84-'85, that would be a bad move. And not only IMO …

So again, where is the line drawn ? Our enemies use boobytraps/IEDs, mines, etc., why should we not. E.g. Starting ROTC in '75, we learned about boobytraps the VC used and learned how to make them as well.

Yes, we don't shoot prisoners, even if our enemies did/do … That seems to be keeping us/the West from stooping as low as they do. Yes, it seems we may have more humanity than our enemies. Especially islamic terrorists. E.g. they purposely target non-combatants. That is part of how they spread terror, e.g. 9/11, 0ct 7, etc. …

But if we won't use boobytraps, mines, etc. as our enemies do … well that just seems to go a bit too far. Violating reality, logic, etc. Having been an Infantry Rifle Plt Ldr, then Mech Co Cdr, as many here have served in similar positions. At that level, you don't want to make the job any harder than it can be.

Look Bobby trapping commo gear is not new. The OSS and Titian/ French agents Bobby trapped all types of gear.

When I was in the MI battalion, we interviewed several Czech deserters and a Female Lieutenant asked a sincere question. Are you more likely to take a female prisoner than a male. (The MI CEWI unit had females deployed in the front lines with the scouts and cavalry)
One responded, ‘No we will shoot all captives. Taking POW would interfere with mission parameters. And wearing a Red Cross would not save them either.

Booby traps kill/injure randomly. These did not so my vote is that they do not count as booby traps.

Realistically, the last opponent we fought who treated American prisoners in accordance with the Geneva Conventions was the Third Reich. I don't think Israel has ever fought an opponent who accorded captives full Geneva Convention protections. Given that one of the best practical justifications for observance is the expectation of reciprocity, we're probably more likely to obtain it by the opposite course of action- whatever brings the war home to our opponents.

There weren't many opponents that the Germans treated according to the GC, either.

Time Portal +1

That is a sobering thought how the Czechs and probably the Russians/other WP would treat NATO POWs. Guess they may not have the time to continue their missions to torture and rape the female NATO soldiers. Like Hamas did to the 1200 Israels on 07 Oct. Even filmed some of it with Go Pros … There is no way to forgive or forget such medieval barbarity, etc.

To lighten the mood a bit …

Also you just suffered for auto-correct/spell check from "AI" … 😉

Look Bobby trapping

Well I'd keep Bobby way from that kind'a stuff !

Just funn'n ya soldier !!! 😏🤩

I just went to go back to one of my recent posts. Had to correct "poles" when I meant "polls"…😣😏 Damn AI !!!! 😲🤬

There weren't many opponents that the Germans treated according to the GC, either.

FWIW – don't forget how the IJFs acted in WWII as well. E.g. Nanking, the PI, etc., etc., …

Are they "booby-traps?"

No. They were a subterfuge sabotage attack aimed at Hezbollah communications and command members. In that respect, they were actually more precisely targeted than even a typical guided missile. They weren't set off at random, either, but triggered by a remote command at an opportune time as judged by an IDF. If civilians were injured by the explosions— and that's a big "if" as absolutely nothing claimed by Hezbollah can ever be treated as truthful or accurate— then such results are simply the result of Hezbollah intermingling their forces within civilian communities. (One also has to consider that "civilian" does NOT mean "unsupportive of terror efforts" or "innocent" or "not working for Hezbollah." A civilian is merely a person who is not an officer or soldier formally within a recognized military organization. It is possible for a civilian to be employed by a military organization, or work closely with such an organization as a member of a related organization— as, say, an outside subcontractor for the Pentagon, a civilian advisor, or even some members of an intelligence force. In the case of Hezbollah (or Hamas) or other terrorist organizations, even the members themselves— actual terrorists— maybe technically "civilians" as they hold no official status as a soldier or officer. For that matter, partisans, saboteurs, and other fifth column supporters are not civilians— but they are still legitimate targets in war.
Furthermore, terrorist organizations don't care about the ages of their members— they will quite happily recruit minor teens as fighters, then claim them as "children" when they die in active battle. They may be children, but the fault of their deaths lies solely with the terrorist leaders who evilly used them.

The planning and execution by the IDF in this operation has brought something the terrorists never suspected. Costing them very large losses, especially with their leaders … Along with interrupting their communications. Costing the Israelis 0 losses …

Odysseus would be proud I'd think …

Context.

If we do it, or our special friends, it's brilliant.

If something like that was done to us by an enemy, we'd be screaming "war crime!!!"

So, perspective and POV.