• M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            They are asking for the source of your statement that less then 0.1% of the victims where valid targets. Since most have seen evidence to the exact opposite of that statement.

            Oh and although I can put links to back that statement up, I will not. (Since that is the presiding fashion here apparently)

              • Klear@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                When asked for a source, you’re asked to link to a specific statement or report. If you just say who is your source without providing a link, it looks like not only do you don’t have any, but that you don’t have any idea of what you’re talking about.

                It’s extremely damaging to your side, no matter where the truth is.

              • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                2 months ago

                The same Hezbollah that claim this was an “act of war” and in nothing I can find give any indication of non Hezbollah casualties? Once again I can link the translated statement from Hezbollah to support this, but since you for some reason will not neither will I.

                Oh and to show this is not a lack of effort by myself here is a link to the information on Vitamin D toxicity

                • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Your argumentation genuinely made me lol, thanks for that. I especially enjoyed the vitamin d article substitution

                  • czech@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    13
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    You wrote that fewer than .1% of casualties from the detonations were not hezbollah. When asked for a source you wrote: hezbollah. When pressed for a source you’ve now countered: “why would hezbollah report that?”.

                    We don’t know; it’s your premise. Where did you get that stat?

                  • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Didn’t you say they were the ones who reported your non-Hezbollah casualty figure though?

                    You could just link to what you’re talking about, that might clear up any confusion.

                  • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Yes, and that would be why we are wondering how that would be proof of a lack of non-Hezbollah casualties.