95
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by zephyreks@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net

There's a ton of information coming out from a bunch of different sources and it's difficult to keep track of who's said what and who has evidence of what. This thread is to keep track of who's making what claims, who has what evidence, and discussion surrounding those.

For top-level comments, please separate into two categories:

Evidence (videos, facts, circumstantial evidence, etc.) that we can validate, invalidate, or provide supporting sources for

Claims (IDF, Hamas, Western media, etc.) that we can prove or disprove using current evidence

=== 2023-10-19 ===

It's established fact that Israel was operating aircraft near the hospital, that Israel was striking targets near the hospital, that Israel had indicated that they would strike the hospital, that Israel had striked the hospital in the past, and that Israel had targeted multiple hospital staff in the days leading up to the strike.

It's currently up to debate, but many indications suggest that Israel's message has changed multiple times. The initial claim was that the attack was on Hamas operatives within the hospital. The claim afterward was that this was a Hamas misfire (using demonstrably falsified audio evidence).

The videos show that a single large explosion triggered whatever happened, not a sequence of smaller explosions or secondary detonations. The video circulating of a Hamas rocket "misfire" is more indicative of a MANPADS launch given multiple comparable flight paths from other MANPADS. It's a clear usage of a multi-pulse rocket motor, something Hamas does not have domestic capability for but does have access to through Iranian MANPADS. An Iranian Misagh-2 fires a missile with less than 2kg of explosives and less than 20kg of total weight.

At this stage, my most likely conclusion is that the damage was the result of an airburst bomb.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago

BBC Verify (New BBC 'fact checking' unit):

"Inconclusive" is their top line.

They spoke to independent weapons experts. All but two apparently declined to make a conclusion. One is a British State linked military think tank and the other is an American University scholar with fellowships at The Council on Foreign Relations and the NATO Defence college. BBC Verify does not disclose these facts.

J Andres Gannon, an assistant professor at Vanderbilt University, in the US, says the explosion appears to be small, meaning that the heat generated from the impact may have been caused by leftover rocket fuel rather than an explosion from a warhead.

Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) in the UK, agrees. While it is difficult to be sure at such an early stage, he says, the evidence looks like the explosion was caused by a failed rocket section hitting the car park and causing a fuel and propellant fire.

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
95 points (100.0% liked)

news

24737 readers
721 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS