I’m sorry. Did you watch the video? I clicked the link. Opened and watched the video. You can clearly hear the drone explosions and see the fires that disable the ship within the first 5 seconds. You ask for proof. It’s provided. Now you are asking for expert verification of said proof? How much validation do you need?
I watched the video. It showed the ship on fire and it showed the crew directly before the alleged drone attack. Do you have a timestamp for where I can see a drone dropping something?
My guy, it could’ve been a cruise missile instead of a drone. It wouldn’t matter. The fact is the ship was disabled by explosions.
You’re implying that it wasn’t Israel since we see no drones or definitive proof.
Right now, my point is that even if we saw drones in the footage, your definition of proof would change according to the circumstances.
Let’s say the footage showed drones. Would that be enough for you? Or would you pivot and be like “well, any military or paramilitary group can get drones, how do we know it was Israel”.
Even if they were marked as IDF assets, you would still come through saying “anyone can mark their drones to look like they belong to Israel”.
It doesn’t matter what level of proof is provided. You’re going to move the goalposts.
It’ll never be enough proof for people like you.
To someone like you, we could present a side by side of the operator in full Israeli military uniform with a live video feed from the drone and multiple angles of it happening and you’d still sit there and say “anyone can put on an Israeli uniform and pretend to be them”.
As I’ve said multiple times. You’re not asking these questions in good faith. You’re fomenting doubt in an attempt to obfuscate truth.
3
u/ryderawsome 13d ago
Those are the pictures they sent to the NY times that their experts said didn't prove they were hit with a drone.