BEIRUT, Oct 16 (Reuters) - The batteries inside the weaponised pagers that arrived in Lebanon at the start of the year, part of an Israeli plot to decimate Hezbollah, had powerfully deceptive features and an Achilles’ heel.

The agents who built the pagers designed a battery that concealed a small but potent charge of plastic explosive and a novel detonator that was invisible to X-ray, according to a Lebanese source with first-hand knowledge of the pagers, and teardown photos of the battery pack seen by Reuters.

To overcome the weakness - the absence of a plausible backstory for the bulky new product - they created fake online stores, pages and posts that could deceive Hezbollah due diligence, a Reuters review of web archives shows.

The stealthy design of the pager bomb and the battery’s carefully constructed cover story, both described here for the first time, shed light on the execution of a years-long operation which has struck unprecedented blows against Israel’s Iran-backed Lebanese foe and pushed the Middle East closer to a regional war.

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Bulky pager is a fun way to spin terrorism. Let me try.

    How Al Qaeda’s surprise itinerary shocked New Yorkers

    • pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I don’t know if this can considered terrorism, the same way I don’t consider car bombs driven into coalition FOBs in Iraq or Afghanistan, or roadside IEDs and VBIDs that killed soldier on patrol, as terrorism.

      If you’re targeting military personnel, it’s not terrorism. But, if you’re doing it in a way that unnecessarily causes collateral damage, too much collateral damage, etc., that’s a war crime. Which I believe this was.

      I can understand the argument that considers this terrorism, and I’m not putting down this flag saying that my understanding of it is right and yours is wrong. Just explaining my current view of the situation.

      But at this point, I’m not sure it makes any difference. Israeli troops, and settlers, are regularly committing unquestionable acts of terrorism and war crimes on a daily basis, so what difference does it make classifying this one incident as terrorism, or just another war crime.

      • prole
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It is textbook terrorism. Imagine being in the supermarket shopping for produce when suddenly the person standing next to you has their legs blown off… Would “terror” be a good description of how that would likely make someone feel?

        It’s just state-sponsored, which is why it was more sophisticated than what we’re used to seeing from non-state actors. Which makes it even worse.

          • PyroNeurosis
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            If the goal was military casualties, they’d have been better served by having Hezbollah mobilize its insurgents, by maybe massing on the borders in a very obvious show of force, then firing off the pagers once the militants were grouped and away from civilian populations.

            But then they’d be on the back foot because the survivors would be already massed and coordinating in person, which would hamper their actual invasion.

          • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Did Israel intend to instill terror in the civilian population

            Yes. Absolutely yes. And the terror attack with pagers was just one part of the larger, ongoing terrorism.

        • pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          And I can pull out a dozen other US military and CIA officials, current and present, who would say differently.

          Would their status as current, or former, as cogs in the wheels of the US military and intelligence branches, make them credible as well?