Based on yesterday's MoA post though, it seems that Israel is gearing up for a war with Hezbollah, which would make the story of the discovered explosions more plausible. So the possibilities are like:
Israel intended to use the device explosions to hamper an initial Hezbollah response, but they were discovered and it had to be done early, which is unfortunate for them if Israel intends to invade in the coming days or weeks. The most popular explanation here, I think? It's what my opinion is.
Israel did not intend to use the device explosions to hamper an initial Hezbollah response, just general disruption of Hezbollah (and any civilians that die are a "bonus"), therefore the discovered explosions story is false/irrelevant because it's fine if it's activated at any time. This seems kind of a strange thing to do, but there's a lot of unknown unknowns here.
Israel did not intend to use the device explosions to hamper an initial Hezbollah response because they think that it would not be effective for whatever reason (perhaps Hezbollah has several backup communication methods?), it was purely for terrorism and to boost internal support (and any soldiers that die are a "bonus"). This seems to be what MoA is arguing if we want to keep their posts consistent.
This would only make sense if Israel did not have nukes. The fact that they possess them necessitates a strategy of attrition. You can disagree, but it is the very reasonable decision of the Resistance leaders to not (yet) risk their respective countries being hit by nuclear strikes. I cannot tell them from my position in the West that they should 'man up' and start destroying Israel in these circumstances.
Hamas is not "contained", it is a constant draw of Israeli resources to try and destroy them, and the tunnel network makes neutralizing or even significantly weakening Hamas extremely difficult. Even the US has repeatedly admitted this. And Hezbollah would be orders of magnitude harder to destroy than Hamas. Unless you mean that Hamas has been contained within Gaza, in which case: no shit? Where else are they meant to be?
A major terrorist attack does not suddenly un-explode Israeli military bases in the north nor return settlers to their villages nor revitalize the Israeli economy.
I've seen reports that non-wireless devices are going off and then counter-reports that they aren't going off, only the wireless ones are, and that was just misinformation to spread fear
As someone whose phone occasionally heats up
As for Lebanon itself, it will likely collapse before Israel does. The zionists likely plan to genocide everyone within the borders of greater israel.
the needless pessimism here is reaching such heights that I can't even be sure if this is a joke or not, lmfao. i'm like 80% sure it is? is this a post making fun of how the doomers sound are they just that far gone?
Hezbollah has racked up so many Ws over the last year that it seems plausible that they could single-handedly doom Israel, hundreds of thousands of settlers displaced, the Israeli border effectively pushed back kilometers in Israel, the mass destruction of border surveillance, regularly striking targets with ineffective Israeli interception. But the second that Israel responds with a terror attack which is more-or-less a slightly more elaborate aerial bombing run with devices imported five months ago, suddenly the entire global socialist revolution is over and Israel's borders shall span from the Sahara to the Caspian Sea, and Iran is a mere satrapy. it's pretty incredible how American imperialism was collapsing up until this point, but suddenly they do a desperate terrorist attack which seemed to mostly harm civilians exploiting a supply chain issue for which there are several potential future solutions already suggested down below (inspecting/burning random samples of equipment) and now everybody might as well give up.
Cynicism is not the same as objective fact. Nobody here should rationalize their internal panic/dismay as some astute geopolitical analysis for the sake of appearing more "mature" or "world-weary". If your predictions are untrue, you cannot then just be like "Well, the world sucks, so it was a decent guess that things were going to get infinitely worse". No, your analysis was bad, and you should self-crit.
Or maybe it's "Oh, well, you guys were predicting that everything would be fine and that magical rainbows would fix everything and that Ukraine/Israel would collapse in a week, so my analysis where I don't have the belief is based in realism." Nobody serious was predicting anything like that in any conflict. For Gaza, the understanding was that the tunnels would provide a safe haven from which to conduct a months or even years-long attrition strategy regardless of what Israel claims to control above ground. This has come true. For Ukraine, the understanding was that Russia was deciding to attrit Ukrainian and NATO forces rather than risk very heavy troop losses in big arrow offensives, and that this process of destroying the enemy army would take as long as needed and that the West was incapable of outproducing Russia. This has come true.
And, to make a bold prediction about how a war with Lebanon will go, just to pre-empt the people who will be like "You said that Hezbollah would instantly destroy Israel in a rain of missiles and that Israel would fail to get past the border!": Israel will very probably manage to get miles, perhaps even tens of miles into Lebanon, but the tunnel networks would allow them to maintain massive pressure on Israel and after a period of weeks or months, Israel will be forced to eventually withdraw. Hezbollah may or may not decide to hold back on big missile strikes against Israeli infrastructure depending on the extent to which the rest of Lebanon is being affected. This is the Official 72T Prediction.
My preliminary guess is that Israel determined that Hezbollah was going to start or had already started investigating all their devices and so had to blow up most everything else, although they may still have more, who can say. Unsure why they didn't do it during the first wave except for just spreading the terror and confusion out over a couple days. I suppose Israel just really wants future articles to read "During the terminal phase of Israel's collapse, they committed among the two(+) largest terrorist attacks in history."
If we continue to not see movement on the border for the coming hours and days, it doesn't change my conclusion from yesterday. If the hypothesis that these explosion-laden devices were imported in Lebanon fairly recently is true, I also strongly disagree with any take that suggests Hezbollah has been substantially weakened, it's "merely" a problem of distributing backup devices from before imports occurred, which is much easier if there isn't the distraction of being invaded.
On the civilian side, while the terror attacks will undoubtably cause another wave of emigration from Lebanon and a period of fear and confusion, these sorts of indiscriminate attacks on civilians do not historically tend to make populations give in - the opposite, in fact. People generally rally to their protectors when they're being hurt, not to the people hurting them. There's a reason why the Resistance targets military bases instead of civilian centers, where they might hypothetically achieve much larger death tolls - it doesn't solve any military problems to kill and maim civilians.
I agree with this take the most IMO. We obviously shouldn't delve into full-on "this is great, actually" copium or anything, these things should have been checked and thousands are injured (thankfully not dead), but it is objectively better that this happened now rather than in the first hour of an invasion. Every tool that is removed from the Israeli toolbox in the least harmful context (even if that "least harmful context" still involves many people harmed) is one less tool that can be used when it would otherwise do maximum damage. One wonders if a lot of the Israeli self-backpatting has a bittersweet tinge to it.
That pier was just a way to briefly get some stuff to Israel
what are you talking about? they ship tons and tons of weaponry to Israel every day. the pier was designed to allow US special forces to try and infiltrate Gaza from a less conspicious spot under the guise of aid delivery. sure, they largely failed in their aims, but I don't think the US intentionally designed the pier to suck, what would even be the point? they could have used it repeatedly for more missions,
do you just enjoy getting a ton of angry comments every now and then? why do you keep doing this to yourself
They can easily build ports if they really wanted to
they cannot construct a single pier
@SeventyTwoTrillion
@hexbear.net