An Israeli army tank killed Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah and injured six other journalists in Lebanon while they were filming cross-border shelling on Oct. 13, a Reuters investigation has found.
Sending in a drone could constitute an act of war. So while you’re protecting journalists, you may be straining diplomatic ties or even risk escalating retaliation.
Journalists are protected by international law, and right now the discussion should be focused at the crime at hand.
PS: your compassion for the lives of journalists is laudable, and I’m not one of those who are downvoting you.
How are the protections working? A whole a lot better than the nothing you are suggesting. Their life mission is to get the word out. I feel at this point, you don’t realize how important that work is. They will not wait for technology to solve this. Things are happening now.
I didn’t quote you. Where have you suggested anything that addresses anything anyone else has said? All you’ve said is “technology or alternative means”. You’re just being an “ideas man”. Let me know if you find someone to do the hard part for you.
We were never really discussing in earnest alternative superior protection mechanisms. I expressed at the top that satelites and tech should be used in place of journalists, the ultimate protection. I kinda feel like you just wanna be combative about this and I don’t honestlt see any value for either of us in continuing to engage beyond a base desire to have the last word so I trust you’ll seize on that as I respectfulky bow out
Edit: I will close by expressing that its combative convos like this that turn people off of caring to learn more to addres their own ignorance. I tried to learn and maybe made a bold hypothetical because its a complicated topic and I have to start somewhere to get some sort of foothold and I respectfully believe you are not the ideal audience or partner to help gently guide people towards a more nuanced immersion into the overall discussion
deleted by creator
Sending in a drone could constitute an act of war. So while you’re protecting journalists, you may be straining diplomatic ties or even risk escalating retaliation.
Journalists are protected by international law, and right now the discussion should be focused at the crime at hand.
PS: your compassion for the lives of journalists is laudable, and I’m not one of those who are downvoting you.
How well is that actually working for them with regard to the IDF and Hamas’ attitudes towards casually mortalizing them?
Please don’t misquote people.
How are the protections working? A whole a lot better than the nothing you are suggesting. Their life mission is to get the word out. I feel at this point, you don’t realize how important that work is. They will not wait for technology to solve this. Things are happening now.
deleted by creator
I didn’t quote you. Where have you suggested anything that addresses anything anyone else has said? All you’ve said is “technology or alternative means”. You’re just being an “ideas man”. Let me know if you find someone to do the hard part for you.
We were never really discussing in earnest alternative superior protection mechanisms. I expressed at the top that satelites and tech should be used in place of journalists, the ultimate protection. I kinda feel like you just wanna be combative about this and I don’t honestlt see any value for either of us in continuing to engage beyond a base desire to have the last word so I trust you’ll seize on that as I respectfulky bow out
Edit: I will close by expressing that its combative convos like this that turn people off of caring to learn more to addres their own ignorance. I tried to learn and maybe made a bold hypothetical because its a complicated topic and I have to start somewhere to get some sort of foothold and I respectfully believe you are not the ideal audience or partner to help gently guide people towards a more nuanced immersion into the overall discussion