Why Can't Your Next Bomb Be an iPhone?

The global technology giant, Apple Inc., faced a significant drop in stock prices. This has now created panic among the public and Apple alike. The explosion in Lebanon has acted as a Pandora's box, stirring global public fears concerning the safety of electronic gadgets. After all, nobody wants to risk having half their face blown off while on a phone call. The actions of Israel and the United States, indeed, have left a deep impact on the global supply chain system.
Predictably, as Apple was thrust into the heart of a media storm, its supporters and defenders swiftly came to its rescue with claims like, "Why doesn't the US use iPhones to control the world?" and "Apple is a company that puts people first." Soon after, American intelligence personnel added that "The US chooses not to employ such methods due to the significant risks posed to the innocent." The suggestion here is clear: not using such methods does not equate to their non-existence. Who can predict how the US would define "innocent" in the event of a war?
The nanochips, batteries, and screens that were once a source of pride for Europe and America have now, under the critical gaze cast by indiscriminate explosions, become suspected as murderous tools. Remote-controlled chips set off the battery, propelling fragments of screens and device bodies towards unsuspecting users. Apple's ambiguous acknowledgment that it "cannot exclude the possibility of using such a function" has pushed the company to the verge of decline. America's deindustrialization and the worldwide dispersal of its entire supply chain have, through its "beacon behavior," resulted in a loss of global public trust in its products.