He is injured but not dead

  • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Does it maybe seem like the pilot intentionally missed, though–disobeying orders? Isn’t this like missing an ant?

    • mathemachristian [he/him]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      11 days ago

      it supposedly was shrapnel munition, so you want to hit closeby but not necessarily on the target. But the bomb went through the hole and exploded in the canal under the street which is what saved his life. I see no reason to give an IOF stormtrooper the benefit of the doubt. They wanted to kill him, but accidentaly bungled it simple as.

    • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      11 days ago

      It’s in the exact same spot as a previous strike. It’s called a “double tap” attack, and it’s a war crime.
      The guy only survived because the bomb went off inside the crater from a previous strike, he would’ve been turned into powder if that had exploded in the surface.

        • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          To a degree it is, but target selection is (or should be - there are reports of the IDF using AI to designate targets, which is a whole nother omnishambles) done by human hand. If there is a group of people inside the lethality radius of your bomb, then you are designating them as targets.
          Not sure I understood exactly what you’re asking?

            • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 days ago

              I think it was a paveway according to other comments here. Big and heavy, not accurate to the meter, not modern. Targeting is less important than the weapons technology. Incredibly advanced targeting algorithms still won’t steer a big dumb jobbie from the 1970s any faster under changing wind conditions, for example.

    • lad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      If you mean missing an ant with a gun, then maybe. But it doesn’t look deliberate, and the explosion could have killed them anyway

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 days ago

        They can target specific buildings in a group. They put that bomb exactly where they wanted to. He was targeted.

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 days ago

          The one I responded to assumed he was missed on purpose, I don’t argue he was not targeted, I argue it’s practically impossible to miss him by so little on purpose and not make him die in the explosion at the same time

          • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 days ago

            Valid. I also heard that they didn’t really target him, they targeted his truck, but still, you target anything near people, and they are at great risk of shrapnel injuries if you don’t get entirely blown up, and reportedly this journalist was injured by shrapnel. I don’t know how he could have avoided it by anything but sheer luck.