Flames and smoke rise in an area targeted by an Israeli air strike on Beirut‘s southern suburbs, on October 6.
Fadel Itani/AFP/Getty Images
We were preparing to go live on air when the first airstrike hit the southern suburbs of Beirut shortly after 11 p.m. Saturday – kicking off a night of intense and constant Israeli strikes.
About 30 minutes earlier, I had been sat with a young woman who lives in the southern suburbs, when our phones flashed with a post on X. It was from the Arabic-language spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces, issuing new evacuation orders for several neighborhoods ahead of what he said would be strikes on Hezbollah targets.
The woman gasped. Her family’s home was within one of the evacuation zones. Like many residents of one of the most densely populated parts of the country, she had fled her home as Israeli strikes intensified in recent days, leaving with very little.
Hours earlier she had wanted to go back home to grab some warm clothes, as winter is approaching. But even during the day a return to the suburbs would have been dangerous, so she decided to take the advice of colleagues and not return home. And as feared, there were multiple strikes with no prior warning.
Saturday night’s strikes were among the most sustained and intense I have witnessed hitting the southern suburbs since this war began. First we heard rumbling sounds, followed by flashes in the distance. Then we heard the blasts. At least two of the strikes triggered what appeared to be secondary explosions – balls of fire that at times would light the night sky, accompanied by blasts that echoed across the city.
Amid the explosions came another evacuation order and another IDF post on X saying it is “currently targeting Hezbollah terrorist targets in the Beirut area.”
Many people I have spoken to over the past 10 days do not believe statements about “targeted” and “precise” strikes. They fear this war is going to be as destructive as the war in Gaza, that reduced much of the enclave to rubble and killed more than 41,000 people.
As I am writing this at 3:30 a.m., I hear another big blast rattle the windows of my hotel room. I can still hear the constant buzz of Israeli drones over the city – usually an indication of more strikes to come – and I can’t help but think of the people of Beirut who have been through so much for so long.
How many casualties are there? Did people evacuate in time? How are parents comforting their children during this long and terrifying night?
Is that young woman’s house still standing?
Here’s a PAA-related question that aligns with the provided title and prompt regarding ethical implications of airstrikes in populated areas:
Given the escalating tensions and recent airstrikes by Israel in Lebanon, a thought-provoking question for debate could be:
“What are the ethical implications of targeted military strikes in densely populated civilian areas, and how should the international community respond to such actions?”
This question encourages discussion about the balance between military objectives and civilian safety, particularly in light of reports that Israeli airstrikes have resulted in significant civilian casualties, including incidents where strikes in Beirut have killed and injured many, as reported in multiple sources [1[1[1[1[1[1[1[1][2[2[2[2[2[2[2[2]. Moreover, the debate can explore the responsibilities of both military forces in adhering to international law and the adequacy of the international community’s response to prevent such occurrences in the future.
This question opens avenues for discussing the moral obligations of nations during conflict, the effectiveness of existing rules of engagement, and potential solutions or frameworks that could mitigate harm to civilians in conflict zones.
Protection of civilians in armed conflict PDF
Eli in densely populated areas, to what extent should military forces prioritize civilian safety over their strategic objectives, and what moral responsibilities do nations have in ensuring the protection of non-combatants during acts of war?
