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

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

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