Talk:2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon/Archive 1

Move to Third Lebanon War

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/the-third-lebanon-war-between-israel-and-hezbollah-has-begun-whats-next/

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/middle-east/lebanon/israel-launches-the-third-lebanon-war/2024/09/30/

https://www.israelhayom.com/2024/09/22/israel-deliberately-raises-stakes-against-hezbollah/

https://anglican.ink/2024/09/26/urgent-letter-from-anglican-bishop-of-cyprus-and-the-gulf-on-the-third-lebanon-war/

https://wavellroom.com/2024/09/04/on-the-brink-of-a-third-lebanon-war-can-israel-overcome-hezbollah-this-time/

Already widely used and technically correct 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:38FF:A30A:5A13:E402 (talk) 20:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR Selfstudier (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Agree with third Lebanon war or maybe just 2024 Invasion of Lebanon. HuntersHistory (talk) 22:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Those are all either Israeli or pro-Israeli sources, so hardly neutral. Calling it the Third Lebanon War removes any reference to Israel in the invasion, and suggests that Lebanon's official armed forces are involved, both of which are misleading Little Professor (talk) 20:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Please do not engage with non EC editors that are only permitted to make edit requests, nothing more. Selfstudier (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Article title

If this article is to retain the "invasion of Lebanon" part, it should be preceded by "Israeli" for clarity; as far as I can see, "Israel", "Israeli tanks" and other similar terms are universally used by reliable sources. I don't think this is too controversial, but at the moment 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon is a redirect. Nythar (💬-🍀) 20:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, would make more sense. Someone coming across the page wouldn't actually know the invaders until they look at the text. SK55555 (talk) 20:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Agree. HuntersHistory (talk) 22:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

@HuntersHistory@Nythar@SK55555. Our procedures require that if a bold move is reverted then it must be conducted via a formal RM. I have started one below.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 00:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Background

A background section should be added once the article's initial edits that are fleshing out the breaking/current events that this article focuses on are done. It should probably include references to immediate events (such as 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, 2024 Hezbollah headquarters strike, etc.) and past events (such as 2006 invasion of Lebanon). I know this article is really new, so I do not want to disrupt the current construction occurring. Mason7512 (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 30 September 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (early close per WP:SNOW) – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

---

2024 Israeli ground operation in Lebanon → 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon – Most RS are calling it an "invasion". "Ground operation" is what Israeli govt calls it (therefore WP:POVTITLE), just as the Russian govt called the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a "special operation". Rs using "invasion": GlobeAndMail, Reuters, Washington Post, CTV news, Arab News, MSNBC etc. Most sources that call it a "ground operation" do use scarequotes for it and don't always use their own voice. This also resembles an invasion given the amount of soldiers and tanks pouring into Lebanon. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

More sources using "invasion" in their own voice

"Shortly before the Israeli invasion, the army declared three northern communities near the Lebanese border to be". AP News "This appears to culminate a day of positioning for an Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon." CNN "Israel's widely expected ground invasion of Lebanon appeared to be getting underway early on Tuesday" Reuters "This follows reports of an Israeli ground invasion starting in the South of Lebanon amidst" Al-Ahram

Strong support per nom. Skitash (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support per nom. Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support and suggest speedy move This shouldn't even need to be discussed. Why was the article originally created with an euphemism? A ground operation is an invasion. Examples. Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip 2003 invasion of Iraq, Russian invasion of Ukraine. Viewsridge (talk) 23:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Israel had not officially started an incursion at the time this article was created. Israeli forces briefly entered Lebanon, but the argument that qualifies as an invasion is weak. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 04:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Also important to remember, as The Guardian points out, Israel had characterized its 1982 invasion of Lebanon as a "limited incursion" back then.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support 'Ground operation' is a euphemism. No matter the scale of this event, it is still an invasion. Khronicle I (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support agreed, would follow consensus and similar past events (including those also described as "ground operations" or "limited incursions" by Israel and others) Mason7512 (talk) 00:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong support per WP:SPADE. WillowCity^(talk) 00:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong support and speedy move, SNOW, plus this is blatant POV. Ground operation is hopelessly false-neutral voice, like using the word "officer-involved shooting". Needs moving immediately, we can't wait days for doubt to begin to creep in. </MarkiPoli> <talk /><cont /> 00:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Comment Maybe we should call it a "Special Ground Operation" in Lebanon. selfworm^Talk) 00:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment – The Ministry of Truth suggests moving this article to 2024 Israeli liberation of Lebanon and moving September 2024 Lebanon strikes to The De-escalation Operation. FunLater (talk) 02:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Support, if that's what the sources say, then it makes sense to move it there. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 00:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Strong support per nom. FunLater (talk) 00:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Support per above Waleed (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom rationale. XTheBedrockX (talk) 02:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom. As it is necessary to maintain a neutral and accurate representation of the event. — Ainty Painty (talk) 03:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Support HuntersHistory (talk) 03:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Support: Definitely worthy of calling an invasion now. Article was created when there was confusion over whether Israel was present in Lebanon yet. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 05:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose, the extent of the operation is still unclear at this point. The CNN are using "ground incursion" and "operation" in their coverage. Galamore (talk) 05:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  in it's current state our article says Israel called for evacuation of Beirut for bombing which suggests an extensive incursion, to put it mildly. Zuzu8691 (talk) 08:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Most reliable sources seem to be referring to it as an invasion regardless - besides, this incursion will likely continue to scale anyway. TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 11:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Support a "ground operation" is just the term used by Israel but is far too vague Braganza (talk) 06:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 06:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Support, per arguments above. Otherwise, change Wikipedia's policy to adapt all article titles to Kremlin-style euphemisms. Cscescu (talk) 06:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom. --Hoben7599 (talk) 07:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support as it is an invasion by definition whether or not one supports or opposes it. EAL819 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support and suggest speedy move consistency with airstrikes page which speaks of invasion of Lebanon. given the consensus and no reason given for current title, i support immediately changing the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuzu8691 (talk • contribs) 09:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Support. Reliable sources call this an invasion in their own voice. "Ground operation" is a euphemistic term used by the Israeli government and not neutral. Cortador (talk) 09:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom. CoaxAndBotany (talk) 09:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom. NHCLS (talk) 10:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Strong Support per nom. InterDoesWiki (talk) 10:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Strong support per everyone above, and suggest speedy close per WP:SNOW. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom, this is the naming used overwhelmingly by reliable news sources TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 11:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

strong support per nom and speedy move — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephan rostie (talk • contribs) 11:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I think someone can move it now, its nearly unanimous support Braganza (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong support, makes sense to move it now, there's virtually universal consensus - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 12:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment this discussion will need to be closed by a page mover or admin as the new title has edit history. I would but I don't currently have either permission. Aydoh8^[contribs] 12:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Strong support WP should not use any country's military euphemisms for an invasion however "limited". Makeandtoss (talk) 12:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Support, per arguments above. Hosein (talk) 12:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom and the discussion above. I would also suggest speedy close per WP:SNOW. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 13:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

More reactions by countries

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/10/1/us-out-of-step-as-world-reacts-to-israels-ground-offensive-into-lebanon Seems like Japan, the UAE, and the Us have responded now aswell. Rad da writer (talk) 10:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Map of the conflict

Maybe it would be handy to add some kind of map for the conflict? Berobalkan (talk) 11:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Since the invasion just started, we dont know yet how the frontline is, once we know, a map will be made Lucasmota0975 (talk) 12:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Support someone should make a map once the front lines are known. HuntersHistory (talk) 16:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The good editors in my opinion are @Glrx and @Physeters. They are both skilfull and have edited Ukraine war map. Berobalkan (talk) 17:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 October 2024

Change "2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon" to "2024 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon following 8,000+ rocket attacks on civilian targets"

Source: https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4893654-hezbollah-has-fired-more-than-8000-rockets-toward-israel-since-october-7-ambassador/

Source: Danny Danon, Israel Ambassador to UN, in a speech to the UN 2601:189:4100:1FD0:28FC:7342:ADC7:C09C (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cannolis (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Terrorist incidents in Tel Aviv

Is there an article about the current attacks in Tel Aviv? Web-julio (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

this is not relevant to the topic of this article. 2024 Iran–Israel conflict would be better suited for this Mason7512 (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Reactions

The summary of Italy's reaction is somewhat deceptive as it leaves out the key detail that it would only be offering military support in a situation supported by Israel.

Also, I've searched for the original source of the quote attributed to the Danish Prime Minister, but have been unable to find it on either English and Danish sources. At best I've found one Danish and one Swedish publication that quotes other publications as having quoted her as saying such, but have found no original sources. Additionally the quote appears to have little to no traction in other reliable sources especially in English language media, and the sources I have been able to find are of questionable reliability and sometimes offer different summary of her apparent words. Something that certainly seems odd. Consequently I suspect Al Jazeera got duped by a fake quote and therefore more reliable sources, and ideally the original source of the quote, should be added. ChristofferItzakah (talk) 00:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Iranian missile attack

Since the Iranian missile attack today on October 1st was a result of the Israeli aggression in Lebanon, any casualties and damage from the missile attack should be included, as well as the involvement of Iran and other Axis of Resistance members in the "belligerents" section since an attack on Hezbollah would mean an attack on the alliance itself Mauzer's random BS (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

request to change name from 2024 israeli invasion of lebanon

change it to: 2024 israeli invasion of south lebanon or, israel-hezbollah war or, 2024 israel-hezbollah conflict or, 2024 israeli invasion of hezbollah or, 2024 israeli invasion of hezbollah controlled lebanon

reason for request: israel has not declared war against lebanon, only hezbollah General Phoenix (talk) 05:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

If you want to make a formal move request, see instructions at WP:RMCM. However, keep in mind that there was very recently a recent RM that had consensus to move the page title to what it currently is. ArkHyena (talk) 08:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 October 2024

The strength is compromising of 4 divisions, the Israeli army has put in 70K troops. 2A02:8109:B607:5000:2582:1E0C:F105:76A8 (talk) 11:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 12:14, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Lede

I've made further improvements to lede that I have not been able to instate due to 1RR:

On 1 October 2024, Israel invaded Lebanon as part of the ongoing Israel–Hezbollah conflict.

The ground invasion followed a week of major Hezbollah setbacks in September that degraded its capabilities and devastated its leadership, that began with an Israeli attack that detonated their communication devices, and culminated with the assassination of its leader Hassan Nasrallah on 27 September. Throughout that week Israeli airstrikes targeted Hezbollah's infrastructure across southern Lebanon.

The Israeli military declared parts of Israel's northern border are a closed military zones. Israel states that the operation seeks to root out Hezbollah's forces and infrastructure that pose a threat to civilian communities in the north of the country Israel. The country also stated that Hezbollah was preparing for an attack similar to Hamas' 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel.

On the same day, the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) withdrew from the Blue Line. Hezbollah denied that the Israeli military had entered Lebanon. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Losses

Israel has lost 3 merkava tanks in the invasion as of now per hezbollah

https://www.lbcgroup.tv/news/lebanon-news/801167/hezbollah-says-destroyed-three-merkava-tanks-advancing-on-lebanon-vill/en

https://en.abna24.com/story/1490939 217.150.82.145 (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

IDF casualty

as of 10/2 since the invasion the death toll is 8 not 14 [1]https://idfanc.activetrail.biz/ANC0212024124457 https://www.idf.il/%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%9C%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%97%D7%9E%D7%94/Aqwsf (talk) 16:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

sky news arabia

@Viewsridge I'm beginning to see a pattern here but I won't comment on it.

I do not see that sky news arabia is considered a depreciated or otherwise unreliable source. Part of me wants to say that an Arabic source is immediately deemed unreliable when no previous review of it concluded such a thing suggests bad faith but that's neither here nor there. Basically my question is, is there any reason you consider sky news arabia to be an "unreliable source" Genabab (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 October 2024

Would reccomend adding on the infobox the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Israel-Lebanon-Syria-border-Conflict-2023.svg since its the map, also it has to be updated since some reports and footage show Israeli troops are already in Lebanese territories. Lucasoliveira653 (talk) 18:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Hezbollah claim of 3 destroyed Israeli tanks

I don't think these deserve to be added to the article, let alone, to the infobox. During the Gaza conflict Hamas falsely claimed destroying hundreds of Israeli tanks. And Hezbollah has made similar ludicrous claims during its conflict, claiming to have killed 2,000 Israeli soldiers, while the real tally is less than 25. Viewsridge (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything wrong with it, its already got the "Hezbollah claim" disclaimer. </MarkiPoli> <talk /><cont /> 22:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. furthermore, cites a reliable source, as does the "2,000 Israeli soldiers" claim viewsridge removed earlier today. In my opinion, both ought to be included under the heading Per Hezbollah Genabab (talk) 23:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

The real casualties are definitely higher than 25, which is the IDF claim 185.127.127.29 (talk) 07:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. Viewsridge (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

It's literally impossible for the IDF to lie about it's casualties, since the number is so small, all the soldiers have phones, and every death is made public; A family member is bound to say something if they notice their family member's death was not made public, especially if it's 2,000 additional deaths like Hezbollah claims. 2A0D:6FC7:43C:CAB5:A78:5634:1232:5476 (talk) 07:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. Viewsridge (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

in the Gaza War Israel claims to just have 800 casualties Braganza (talk) 07:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Hezbollah doent claim 2,000 deaths but casualties Genabab (talk) 09:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Theres something called israeili military censor, if the losses are high they will find a way through, they did this in the south lebanon conflict, gradually citing losses 185.127.127.29 (talk) 09:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. Viewsridge (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

what do you mean here? the IDF can't lie? these are delusional claims, like for example: the IDF claims that the number of Palestinian fighters killed is 17,000, while sources like the Euro-Med monitor, a Non-profit Human Rights Organisation headquartered in Geneva, reported a number close to 3,000 fighters dead, you can't say the IDF claims are the most reliable, what we should do is to write what both sides claims and opinions. Fares3195 (talk) 10:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. Viewsridge (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@ViewsridgeWhat does that even mean ?_? Genabab (talk) 11:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Non extended confirmed editors cannot participate in ecp article disputes, see the move page discussion above. Viewsridge (talk) 11:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

woah.. Genabab (talk) 13:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

So you'd like info to be changed based of your assumption? Do you have any contradicting information or proof to back your assumption? 108.45.148.183 (talk) 11:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBECR. Viewsridge (talk) 12:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Please add an (IDF claim) disclaimer on Hezbollah casualties reported by the IDF

In order to differentiate between the reports and claims made on both sides, could someone please add the disclaimer "IDF claim" or "per IDF", same thing for Hezbollah. Fares3195 (talk) 01:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it's been done already. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Background

The current background version is incorrect (eg it claims Hezbollah attacked northern Israel on Oct 8, which is not true). The same incorrect material keeps getting replicated across many articles. There was a consensus version here and I suggest we use that. It is:

Shortly after the onset of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023, Hezbollah joined the conflict, citing solidarity with Palestinians, which quickly escalated into regular cross-border military exchanges impacting northern Israel, southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights. Hezbollah said it aimed to pressure Israel by forcing it to fight on two fronts. Hezbollah has offered an immediate ceasefire should a ceasefire also happen in Gaza, where 40,000 Palestinians have been killed, majority being women and children. From 8 October 2023 to 20 September 2024, Hezbollah has launched 1,900 cross border attacks, and Israel has launched another 8,300. The fighting killed 564 in Lebanon (including 133 civilians), and 52 in Israel (including 27 civilians), displaced entire communities in Israel and Lebanon, with significant damage to civilian infrastructure.

After this we'd write about the pager attacks, assassination of Nasrallah, and other bombings. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 11:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC) VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 11:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Add names of all hezbollah commanders involved (incl. slain ones like hassan nasrallah and ali karaki)

in the israeli side some of the commander names are given, yet not all. add the names of hezbollah commanders in the belligerents not just the leader. also if possible, add iran/irgc and axis of resistance/other islamic terror groups present in south lebanon. 2A02:2908:4101:8F7F:6182:F8F4:FD7E:8164 (talk) 05:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 October 2024

Change the israeli casualties to 14 soldiers

https://www.lbcgroup.tv/news/middleeastnews/801118/sky-news-arabia-14-israeli-soldiers-dead-in-clashes-on-the-ground-in-s/en AlMuslim17 (talk) 02:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

 Note: The Sky News Arabia article that this appears to be citing was recently removed as an unreliable source - is there consensus on this? WP:RSP says they are partially owned by Sky News UK, which is generally reliable, but its unclear if this applies to Sky News Arabia too. Jamedeus (talk) 03:34, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

US waning influence on Israel

The article's analysis section emphasizes the Israeli invasion of Lebanon demonstrates the US losing influence over Israel. This case is made because the US administration publicly urged restraint, however, there are reports of the US privately pushing Israel to invade.

I think adding a sentence or two about this public vs private stance may paint a fuller picture of the situation.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/30/us-israel-military-hezbollah-00181797 72.50.213.39 (talk) 12:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

US does not support Israeli campaign

The infobox reference cites this sentence

“I made it clear that the United States supports Israel’s right to defend itself,” Austin said.

This does not make the US a belligerent to the conflict at all, I suggest US gets speedily removed from the campaignbox. Viewsridge (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Institute for the Study of War

Hello all! I noticed that the ISW has started releasing maps on the ground invasion, similar to how they do for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I'm wondering are we able to use those maps here as we do elsewhere? It's very helpful for us visual learners. Completely Random Guy (talk) 20:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC) https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-october-2-2024

I'm not sure if it meets Wikipedia's non free content policy. If someone can find a valid rationale, I guess there wouldn't be any problems. We do have to remember Wikipedia is subject to U.S. copyright law. Aydoh8^[contribs] 02:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

ISW is a hawkish neoconservative NGO of questionable reliability, with most of its references on the war uncritically sourced from the Israeli military. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Casualties

I know there's a link and all, but I haven't seen the claim 60+ casualties on the Hezbollah side anywhere other than here? 60? Am I living under a rock? I checked the IDF twitter account and it says nothing about it, surely they would say something if they had killed 60 of them? Someone double-check this please, I am very skeptical of this info. Fishthatflies (talk) 22:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

The IDF is not a reliable source when it comes to casualties, particularly on the non-Israeli side (Palestine, Hezbollah or what not), as it is in their best interest to lowball the numbers. I know throughout this conflict people have been taking issue at Al Jazeera as well due to it being funded by the government of Qatar, who has a close relationship with Iran, who Hezbollah (along with Hamas, the PFLP, the Houthis and Syria) are generally regarded as proxies of. It's not clear whether either (or both) source/s are toying the numbers to make it seem better or worse than it is, we just have to take it at face value. Aydoh8^[contribs] 02:35, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

The consensus you link to shows that Al Jazeera is considered reliable, although biased, for the purposes of the conflict. We can't draw an equivalence with using the IDF itself as a source, and this certainly doesn't justify taking these numbers "at face value". Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Involvement of Amal

Amal announced deaths of two of its militants. Shouldn't we include it as a party to the conflict? Gorgedweller (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Share the source. Bitspectator ⛩️ 01:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

https://abualiexpress.com/en/en35949/ Gorgedweller (talk) 10:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I would personally wait for a better source. Bitspectator ⛩️ 15:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 3 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus seems to be clearly against, no point waiting the full 7 days on a recently created article. If sourcing changes, this may be revisited. (non-admin closure) Soni (talk) 05:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

---

2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon → Third Lebanon War – reliable sources that say 3rd Lebanon War:

1. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-third-lebanon-war-is-underway-what-you-need-to-know/ "Here’s what to know about Israel’s incipient Third Lebanon War."

2. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/the-third-lebanon-war-between-israel-and-hezbollah-has-begun-whats-next/ "The Second Lebanon War lasted for thirty-four days in 2006. The length of the third war will depend largely on how quickly Hezbollah will come to the table."

3. https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-822644 "Here’s what to know about Israel’s incipient Third Lebanon War." (for some reason, identical to imes of Israel page? but doesnt change what it says)

4. https://thedispatch.com/article/has-the-third-lebanon-war-begun/ No mention of third war in the main body, but the title does.

5. https://wavellroom.com/2024/09/04/on-the-brink-of-a-third-lebanon-war-can-israel-overcome-hezbollah-this-time/ Ditto Genabab (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Wouldn't Israel-Hezbollah conflict (2023-present) be better for the renaming. Waleed (talk) 14:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose - The names "First-", "Second-" and "Third Lebanon War" are only used from an Israeli point-of-view. There have been several other Lebanon Wars, and this one would actually be the fourth or fifth involving Israel, following its 1978 invasion, 1982 invasion, the South Lebanon conflict and the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 14:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I think this is a good point.

I would "counter" by asking, should we at least include "Third Lebanon War" in the Lede? Perhaps by saying "also called by Israeli sources The Third Lebanon War" or something along those lines? @Asarlaí Genabab (talk) 14:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

If there are enough good sources, we could include it as an alternative name in the lead, noting that it's primarily used by Israeli sources. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 15:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Asarlaí Aren't the listed sources enough for that? Genabab (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I think it is quite interesting how countries often name conflicts after the country that they are fighting. For example, it is widely called the Vietnam War (especially by the US), but I've heard that people in Vietnam call it the "America War" instead. In the case of Vietnam specifically, it still makes sense to call it the Vietnam War anyways since that's the widely accepted name for it, but it still serves as a good example. In this case however, it would make more sense to be as neutral as possible and try not to use a name that is used only from an Israeli point-of-view.

Calling it the Lebanon War because you are speaking from the POV of Israel would be biased in the same way as calling it the Israel War because you are speaking from the POV of Lebanon. Since there are reliable sources that call it the Lebanon War, it wouldn't be as bad, but it would still show bias. For that reason, I think it would be better to stick to a more neutral term, especially one that refers to both countries. "Israeli invasion of Lebanon" makes it clear that Israel is one one side and Lebanon is on the other, while "Lebanon War" does not make any kind of clarification on who is fighting against Lebanon. Anonymous Libertarian (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose: This might be appropriate in the future but seems premature at the moment. An article title "Has the Third Lebanon War Begun?" can hardly be used as evidence for this name change, per Betteridge's law. The final source says the countries are on the brink of war, but does not assert it's an actual war, and I'm insure if the Israeli sources are considered WP:NPOV in this context. 0xchase (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I considered this, but I can't find any source that said that about the conflict pre-invasion. so if something is to be changed, it should be here. Genabab (talk) 14:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. At this point, the sourcing is too weak for a name change. Cortador (talk) 15:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose Only a few sources calling it "Third Lebanon war" WP:COMMONNAME is still called the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Viewsridge (talk) 15:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose: Only Israeli sources have mentioned this and its not third war in Lebanon's POV so its a clear WP:NPOV violation. Prodrummer619 (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

oppose: Third Lebanon war

Support: Israel–Hezbollah war or the current title of 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon HuntersHistory (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

That's like saying the Vietnam War was actually the American War from Vietnam's perspective. That's true, but not the standard applied anywhere else. Shankar Sivarajan (talk) 22:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

But the difference here is that the US perspective tends to dominate English language media and publications; by contrast, Israel-preferred terminology is usually not adopted by most English language media outlets and publications, with the exception of the minority who identify as particularly pro-Israel. We see other examples of this – for example, what Israel wants to call "Judea and Samaria", most English language sources call "the West Bank" instead. "Third Lebanon War" is another example of Israel-centric terminology that the global English-language media are likely to ignore. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose Links provided are cherry-picked (pro) Israel-centered sources. Most media does not use this terminology, (at least not yet) and the term is almost solely used by one 'side', some Israelis. '2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon' is way more accepted, specific, and clearly understandable. Mason7512 (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose / Wait: Oppose at this time, seems premature. Support above notion of Israel–Hezbollah war rename. In the coming days, should reassess to see if Third Lebanon War is more appropriate.Spilia4 (talk) 22:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. ToI and JPost are Israeli and are known for not being neutral, ACUS is a pro-Israel source, The Dispatch is a conservative news outlet that is also pro-Israel (despite claiming to be non-biased), and the Wavell Room is a British military think tank (the UK being an Israel ally as well). I can't find anyone else calling it the 'third Lebanon war' or anything along those lines, not to mention the NPOV issues discussed in the last RM. So until more sources from both sides start calling it as such, I think it's best to stick with the current title since it's simply when and what. Aydoh8^[contribs] 02:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. The "Third Lebanon War" terminology is primarily used by Israeli sources. Yes, you can come up with examples of some non-Israeli/neutral sources using it, but those are a small minority. Most major global English-language media outlets – such as the BBC or New York Times – aren't using that phrase. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 04:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Wait: Conflict hasnt escalated to proportions like Israel vs Gaza. - shJunpei :3 07:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose POV title exclusively used by Israeli sources, as it is the "third" only from Israel's point of view. The current title is more factual. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose for now. The invasion of Lebanon is undergoing, it is too early to call it anything else. Cscescu (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose per Asarlaí.--فيصل (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose suggested name per Israeli POV reasons already mentioned by others. Propose 2024 Lebanon War in line with 1982 Lebanon War or 2006 Lebanon War. ZionniThePeruser (talk) 19:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose Invasions are part of wars and not the wars themselves. Examples include 2003 invasion of Iraq and Iraq War. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: What I have mostly heard it being called is either an invasion or a ground operation, not a "Lebanon war" Anonymous Libertarian (talk) 13:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose The proposed name change would mean adopting an Israeli POV of the war. Name seems to be used almost exclusively in Israeli sources, not in any other media. Jeppiz (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Clean up list tag

Can the user who placed the 'cleanup list' tag under the 'International reactions' section (or anyone else) explain why the tag was placed. What issues are present within the contents that need to be resolved? Mason7512 (talk) 20:13, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll remove the tag since nobody has come forward. Cortador (talk) 12:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Edit request – civilian casualties

I would like to request that in the Casualties and losses section, "1,000+ Lebanese civilians killed[36]" will be removed or rephrased. That is because the article itself doesn't mention if they were civilians or fighters, while Hezbollah hasn't published official death numbers since the beeper attack. Thus we can't know how many civilians were killed - and the Al Jazeera article doesn't say it either — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.55.173.215 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Copying this over from WP:RFED. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done Bowler the Carmine | talk 23:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

"Third Lebanon War" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Third Lebanon War has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 9 § Third Lebanon War until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 18:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Update Lebanese army casualties

Today 2 Lebanese soldiers are killed source so please update the template from 2 to 4. 70.26.36.11 (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done Next time, please include:

{{#invoke:protected edit request|extended|answered=no}}

at the top of a talk page comment requesting an edit. Mason7512 (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Involvement of Lebanese Armed Forces

It would appear the Lebanese Armed Forces is now a belligerent and should be added to the infobox. According to the Lebanese Army "the Israeli enemy targeted an army post in the Bint Jbeil area - in the south, and the personnel at the post responded to the sources of fire"[2].VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 13:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I had earlier added this with a note too,[3] looks like @Mikrobølgeovn: reverted this. I would appreciate if you could restore the note. Viewsridge (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

A single clash does not mean that the Lebanese Army has entered the fight. There was a deadlier skirmish between Israeli and Egyptian forces along the Egypt-Gaza border. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes but Israel did not invade Egypt, but Israel is in fact invading Lebanon here. Not a fair comparison. Viewsridge (talk) 15:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Its not just the clash, but the statements associated with the clash. After the Egyptian-Israeli clash both sides worked to de-escalate. By contrast, Lebanon claims Israel "targeted" it (implying this was deliberate) and there's no attempt to de-escalate. Viewsridge correctly points out that Israel is still pressing ahead with the invasion of Lebanon's territory.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 15:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Has Israel named the LAF as a target alongside Hezbollah? Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 19:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

To reiterate: To fire back when fired upon is pretty standard behavior. Even UN peacekeepers would presumably do that. To say that the LAF has now entered the war is at best original research, at worst a fabrication. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Its not OR, its based on reliable sources. Whether Israel declares or not, is not relevant. Israel is invading their territory and firing on them and they are firing back. All of this is supported by RS and makes them a belligerent.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 21:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

The sources say that the LAF clashed with the IDF (which, by the way, also happened in 2006). They do not say that the LAF has joined the war. It is misleading to list the LAF as a belligerent based on single incidents. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 00:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Firing on each other and invading ones territory is very much what belligerency is about. Here is another source that considers LAF to be a belligerent.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 01:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Mikrobølgeovn makes some good points. This was one incident, and neither Israel nor Lebanon have said that they're at war with eachother. The source you cite is an American political magazine. We'd need something from Israeli or Lebanese officials, or from mainstream news outlets. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 08:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Its not one incident, but two. And official statements are never necessary to be included in the infobox, and many times countries deny their involvement. For example: Second Nagorno-Karabakh War's infobox says "Turkey (alleged by Armenia, denied by Turkey)" and "Syrian mercenaries (denied by Azerbaijan)"; Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad's infobox says "Indian Intelligence (alleged by Pakistan, denied by India)" etc. Finally, what makes you think that Reason (magazine) is not reliable? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 19:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

We are now in the absurd situation where the LAF is listed as a belligerent in the war, while an attached footnote states that it is staying out of the war. These things are mutually exclusive. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

The footnote isn't in Wikivoice. It's a statement from Lebanon. A country can say something and do something different. I don't see much confusing about the current set-up. If A attacks B, and kills members of B, and B responds and intends to continue responding... B is a belligerent. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

All while A is invading the territory of B. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

So if UNIFIL is attacked and fires back strictly in self-defense, it's also a belligerent? Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

"All while A is invading the territory of B."

The Lebanese Armed Forces is the army of Lebanon itself. This article is about the invasion of Lebanon. Bitspectator ⛩️ 11:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

It is unusual, but not unheard-of. Although the Russo-Japanese War was fought on Chinese territory, China did not get involved. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

But the LAF is involved. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

This is a poor argument. The LAF has 80,000 active personnel. They have no intention of joining the war at this point. Israel has no intention of fighting the LAF either. There have been one or two incidents of exchanges of fire; this does not make the LAF a belligerent. Afdshah (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

See comment bellow by Cortador. Bitspectator ⛩️ 15:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

According to BBC News, the IDF has "targeted" the Lebanese Army, who has referred to them as the "enemy". 1

The Guardian reports that the Lebanese Army has "returned fire" for the first time. 2

The Times supports that, and once more cites the Lebanese Army referring to the IDF as an "enemy". 3

Al Jazira likewise. 4

This wording by RS and their choice of words to cite is IMO sufficient to cite the Lebanese Army as a participant in the conflict. If this was about shells having unintentionally hit Lebanese Army positions, it would be different, but that is not how sources present the situation. Cortador (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I forget, where is this war taking place? How can we not include Lebanon... when Israeli forces are invading Lebanon. Scuba 15:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Because the sources don't say the Lebanese Army are actively involved in the fighting, and the Lebanese Army itself said they're saying out of the conflict for now and have moved away from the border. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 15:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that this situation is similar to the Russo-Japanese war, because that war was fought between two countries but took place in a third country, while this war is primarily a fight between the Israeli military and a Lebanese organization, which is being fought within Lebanon and the Lebanese armed forces are being directly targeted and engaging in combat. We can note the rhetoric of the armed forces of Lebanon, where they say that they will "stay out", but we should also give weight to their actual behavior of attacking Israeli troops that have entered the country (in returning fire) and how they have retreated from certain military positions. Both of these are clearly what a belligerent in an armed conflict would do, no matter how minor their role is.--JasonMacker (talk) 19:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I think that's overstating things. How many times have the Israeli and Lebanese armies engaged in combat during this conflict? The sources say there was one exchange of fire. Withdrawing from the combat zone and saying they'll "stay out of it" is the opposite of what a belligerent would do. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 13:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

As with all other material in the article, contentious claims need to be supported directly by reliable sources. The cited source does not claim that Lebanon is a belligerent or a party to the conflict. If the material cannot be directly supported, it should be removed. Wikipedia editors are not entitled to present their own conclusions in articles. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Did you read the source? "The fighting between the U.S.-funded army of Israel and the U.S.-funded army of Lebanon seems to be another such consequence of U.S. policy...American taxpayers have helped arm and train both the armies that are now apparently shooting at each other...on Thursday, the Lebanese army announced that it had, in fact, been sucked into the conflict...An official in Lebanon told Agence France-Presse that it was the first time the Lebanese army fired on Israeli forces throughout the war...Two hours before, the Lebanese army had announced that one of its soldiers was killed by Israeli fire." How can anyone read that and conclude the Lebanese army is not a combatant? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

It's an American libertarian political magazine, which is pushing a certain political point-of-view. The article's wording makes that obvious (e.g. "American taxpayers have helped arm and train both the armies that are now apparently shooting at each other"). Do any major news outlets say the Israeli and Lebanese armies are now at war with eachother? If they don't, neither should we, as that would go against Wikipedia policy against original research. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 09:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Once again, you're asking me to bring sources for a claim that I'm not making. I never said Lebanese army "declared war" on Israel. Rather they are engaged in combat with Israeli forces, hence they are combatants. Are there any sources that deny the Lebanese Army's combatant status? The "Infobox military conflict" is not just for declaration of war, but for engagement in military combat.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 15:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Well here is one source. We also have the Lebanese military's own statement that it's staying out of the conflict for now. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 15:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

That source seems ambiguous. It says "These sources argued that the LAF shouldn’t be expected to intervene" but it also says "the LAF claims that it has only responded [to Israeli forces] once. “A soldier was killed after the Israeli enemy targeted an army post in the Bint Jbeil area” in southern Lebanon, “and the personnel at the post responded to the sources of fire,” the army said in a statement on Oct. 3." Ps, that article also has its biases, all sources do.

Maybe the best course is to list Lebanese Army with a qualification like "Disputed by X".VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 16:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

The purpose of the infobox is not to engage in public relations for the countries listed. Russia says that it's a limited "Special Military Occupation" and they're not at war with Ukraine according to their laws. Does that mean they shouldn't be listed as a belligerent on the Russo-Ukrainian war infobox? Of course not. For the same reason, it doesn't matter how the LAF (or the IDF or anyone) portrays themselves. We have to look at the actions they have undertaken (according to WP:RS) and judge their belligerency that way. I don't know how else to describe it when a country's armed forces are under attack by an invading army... that country's armed forces are belligerents. They're obviously not the main belligerent, and that should be noted, as it currently is: "The Lebanese government stated they will stay out of the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, but would respond to Israeli attacks on their positions." The war has been going on for 10 days and Israel has already attacked the LAF multiple times, as recently as just a few hours ago: as reported by NPR and other news sources. If it was a one-off thing similar to the border clash on the Egypt-Gaza border, then sure, I could understand the argument, but this is clearly different. As the NPR article states, "An Israeli airstrike killed two Lebanese soldiers and wounded three other troops on Friday, Lebanon's military said, an incident that entangles the country's official army in the escalating conflict [(emphasis mine)] between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah militants in Lebanon." Just looking up the definition of "belligerent" makes that clear: "a nation or person engaged in war or conflict, as recognized by international law." The LAF are clearly engaged in this conflict, regardless of what their PR says. Reviewing the Wikipedia articles on Belligerent and Non-belligerent, it's clear that Lebanon is in the former classification and not the latter. JasonMacker (talk) 02:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I think the current footnote is what is needed to deal with this nuance. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes. I think the footnote should be expanded to note that while the LAF intended to stay out of the fighting, they have been involved to a limited degree. Cortador (talk) 06:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• This might be getting slightly technical, but several sources have suggested an "International Armed Conflict" (IAC) exists between Lebanon and Israel, even before the invasion. "IAC" is a specific term in international law that has implications on how parties must behave, and is contrasted from "NIAC" (Non-International Armed Conflict). None of these sources deny that a NIAC exists between Israel and Hezbollah, but argue an IAC also exists between Israel and Lebanon. The ultimate question for us is what exact criteria do we want to use before listing a party as a belligerent.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 16:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

References

UNIFIL Casualties

Two peacekeeping soldiers from the Garuda Contingent were injured after their observation post was fired upon by IDF troops. The Indonesian government, through Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi, strongly condemned this attack.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Additionally, there is a photo that serves as visual evidence, presented by Sindonews (Sindonews is one of Indonesia's credible media outlets), confirming that the Indonesian peacekeepers were indeed injured. [7]

I hope the information I have provided can be included in the conflict timeline and infobox, as I have observed that most of the sources cited in the infobox and timeline come from Al Jazeera. As additional information, the commander of the Garuda Contingent for UNIFIL is Colonel Gouvar. [8] Bukansatya (talk) 05:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Are there any specific changes/additions you are requesting be made? If so, what? Mason7512 (talk) 16:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I would just like to clarify the information regarding the timeline for August 10 and add references for it, as I believe that citing only news from Al Jazeera carries the risk of bias.

And I am not sure whether this is correct or not, but I would like to add the Garuda contingent as a party involved in the conflict in the infobox. Bukansatya (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

The issue is that there are 8 countries that have contributed troops that number more than 500. While is true that Indonesia has contributed the most troops for UNIFIL, it seems like the infobox should be representative of UNIFIL as a whole and not just one country. Thats why when I put the troop strength (10 000) for UNIFIL, i kept the combined number and didnt break it down individually for each country (which would take up a lot of space in the infobox for a peacekeeping force that isnt a main combatant!). Thats why I think it might be better to have a list of all of the national units involved somewhere in the UNIFIL article, and then the infobox here should link to that.--JasonMacker (talk) 03:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for your help Bukansatya (talk) 03:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

More Israeli soldier Injured reported by Yedioth Ahronoth

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-10-13/news-1xFrvPs43Li/p.html 2A02:AA1:114E:DFAE:FA94:9092:1F46:79D0 (talk) 11:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 October 2024

• What I think should be changed:

Under Strenght-Israel

−

12,000–14,000

+

15,000

And removing reference [d].

• Why it should be changed:

Update number of troops to include all 4 divisions.

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

The guardian, Middle East Eye Guy Haddad 1 (talk) 16:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done

Thank you for this suggestion. JasonMacker (talk) 19:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Nasrallah as Leader

Although he was KIA, he was the leader for the first days of the Lebanon War, if you consider the pagers to be Day 1. I recommend adding to the Hezbollah leaders Hassan Nasrallah (KIA, Sept 27, 2024) 2601:602:8C81:C690:6CD6:6D69:2686:DD93 (talk) 21:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

This article is based off of a timeline where the invasion starts on the 1st of October, when Israel officially announced/admitted to it's ground actions in Lebanon. Therefore, Hasan Nasrallah was never involved, but had already died once the invasion 'officially' began. If you think the official start of the invasion should be changed, that is another issue, but, as it is now, his addition would be inaccurate. He is still mentioned in the Background section, though. Mason7512 (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

UNIFIL

While this discussion was ongoing, User:Durranistan added UNIFIL to the belligerents section of the infobox. I checked, and there is precedent for this, such as Mali war and War in Darfur, both of which have UN peacekeeping missions listed as belligerents. For that reason, I agree with the addition of UNIFIL here, but similar to the listing of the LAF, I added a clarifying note that UNIFIL is not actively engaged in hostilities.--JasonMacker (talk) 17:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I should add that this makes the debate about whether to include the LAF a bit silly. Under a standard in which UN peacekeeping missions can be listed as belligerents in conflicts, despite not firing upon anybody, surely LAF should be counted as a belligerent when they have returned fire on Israeli forces?--JasonMacker (talk) 17:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I think peacekeepers should be listed as combatants if they actively engage in combat, but that's really not the case with UNIFIL. If it were, the countries that provide troops would effectively be at war. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 18:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Whether or not a country is "effectively" at war is not for us to decide. We leave that judgment to reliable sources. As for "engaged in combat", I think that armed personnel being fired upon counts as being "engaged in combat", even if they don't return fire. That's the conclusion I reached per the Engagement (military) article. Firing on UN personnel counts as the initiation of a combat engagement. However, it doesn't count as active engagement (on the part of UNIFIL), because UN peacekeepers did not return fire. So it would count as passive engagement since it required evacuation of combat personnel to a hospital to remove a bullet. JasonMacker (talk) 19:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

We would literally need to rewrite military history. Switzerland shot down several German aircraft during WWII. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 22:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

While Switzerland was not a belligerent in world war 2, it was a belligerent specifically when it came to violations of their airspace and other physical attacks on their territory. This is correctly described in the Aerial_incidents_in_Switzerland_in_World_War_II article's infobox that lists Switzerland as a belligerent. So, you can relax. No rewriting of military history needed. JasonMacker (talk) 22:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• UNFIL is definitely not on the "side" of the LAF, their mandate is neutral. I'm moving the LAF back under the Lebanese side. The other issue is that "medics killed" casualty counts also includes Hezbollah-affiliated medics. BBC reports: "One organisation has been hit more than any other. The Islamic Health Society (IHS), funded by Hezbollah, operates emergency services, hospitals and medical centres across the country." VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 17:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)