As for the idea that "Iran = Hamas" or "Hamas is a proxy of Iran", it's so fucking ignorant. Not only do they not even have the same set of religious beliefs, but Iran has done very little to support Palestine since October. They let ~35000 Palestinians be slaughtered before they struck Israel directly, and even then they only struck Israel in response to an Israeli attack on themselves. (They didn't do much to oppose the ethnic cleansing of Armenians either, which was carried out by Israel-armed Azerbaijan.) Although, to be fair to Iran, it's not quite on the same level as Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Saudi, or Quisling-face Abbas.
It's quite interesting that the Iranian military signalled the launch of the drones so forcefully in state media (along with what look like ghost reports of ballistic missile launches). It smacks of the kind of strike against US forces in Iraq that followed trump whacking that IRGC general (Suelmeini?) in 2021, where they signalled intent to the US and targeting in advance to ensure that nothing got seriously broken. I think they needed to strike Israel to respond to an attack on their territory (under the Vienna convention) but are doing so in a way that more or less ensures that Israel and its allies wreck most of the drones before they arrive. It's dangerous but looks calibrated on the low side of possible direct responses against Israel. Most leaders would follow the dance, but this is Bibi and the Ghouls we're talking about. Hopefully Biden yanks their chain.
I think this is probably right.
Times of Israel is reporting that Jordan was heavily involved in shooting down the Iranian drones which is also very interesting. I didn't really expect them to passively let their airspace be violated but it's certainly a show of support.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Yes I don't disagree. It was a bit of a fuck you act. And I say this with caution but we are talking about Iran here which has never shied away from using all means at their disposal to attack its foes including on foreign soil.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Yes I don't disagree. It was a bit of a fuck you act. And I say this with caution but we are talking about Iran here which has never shied away from using all means at their disposal to attack its foes including on foreign soil.
Nope, Israel is our ally and our friend and despite our best efforts the only democracy in the region.
Which is part of the reason why so many on the far left hate it so much.
Nope. Our history of getting involved with wars in the Middle East is one of fiasco after fiasco. Each time we just make things worse.
Masterly inactivity is the way forward.
We need to stand up for the global order.
That’s why we support Ukraine, and that’s why we have to support Israel on this occasion. Otherwise dictators and tyrants will feel free to attack the innocent with impunity and the world will be a less safe place.
The 90's called; it wants its naive belief in liberal intervention back.
Liberalism is the greatest thing humanity has ever done.
And interventionism is the worst thing liberal humanity has ever tried, except for all alternatives.
Intervention worked in some cases and was ill conceived in others. Plenty of liberals could see the Iraq intervention for the disaster it was months before it happened. But non-intervention (or rather, toothless pretend intervention) in the Balkans early on led to Srebrenica.
Ukraine is a simple calculation: there’s good guys and bad guys, and the bad guys are out to get us. Gaza is nowhere near as simple. Either from a pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian perspective.
Hamas are bad guys. Iran are bad guys.
The calculus is simple.
Likud are bad guys too. This is more IRA vs UVF.
Likud are unpleasant guys, but not bad guys in the same way.
And Israel is currently led by a government of national unity like Britain in WWII, not by Likud.
This is more like Britain vs Nazi Germany.
It’s not Britain vs Nazi Germany. It’s not even Britain vs Irish republicanism, because the evidence of thuggery by the Israeli military is of a different magnitude.
Yes Israel is an ally and yes Iran in particular is an evil regime, but it does nobody any favours to exonerate Likud and their extremist political allies for some quite chilling behaviour in the last few months.
I started out in October fully and vocally supportive of Israel, and sickened by the rentamob immediately heading out on to the streets exercising their inner antisemitism. But this campaign and the dehumanising rhetoric coming from parts of Israeli society has really got me questioning my moral assumptions.
Please name one thing in Israel's campaign that is worse than what we did when we were existentially fighting for our survival.
Israel is not existentially fighting for its survival. It’s conducting a counterinsurgency campaign. If Iran or Syria were planning a full scale invasion of Israel then you’d have a basis for comparison, but they’re not.
It’s like a nastier, bloodier version of the troubles. Only we weren’t dropping bombs over the bogside. And the behaviour of settlers, for example, is not dissimilar to that of Protestant marchers on the 12th July, only 10x more violent.
We have the luxury of saying that Israel is not existentially fighting for its survival. Israel does not.
You are indulging in western supremacism telling everyone else what they should or shouldn't be thinking.
Well I’m all for leaving the Middle East to it. It’s western supremacism to assume we should play an active role. It’s at least partly our fault the place is such a mess in the first place after our previous efforts at meddling.
Interesting. I mean looking at the various regimes in the middle east you are saying they should all be left alone to do their thing.
It's amazing that so many posters on PB are wholly ambivalent about repressive middle eastern theocratic regimes trying to exert their power over the region.
Even I don't want Hamas to lose @Dura_Ace saw it within himself to bomb their allies every day for a year or so.
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
I'm not emotional at all. I just marvel at the illogicality of some of the arguments and think hyperbole is in such instances a useful tool.
People are rushing to defend Iran by saying Israel started it.
Look at the history of geopolitics in the middle east is all I'm saying. And also look at what values you are endorsing when you pick a side.
I am equally enthralled, bemused , amazed by the early Catholic Church and its attempts to define heresy.
It's not Israel as much as general bonkersness.
The illogicality does my head in.
Nobody’s defending Iran. Nobody’s picking that side.
EDIT: well maybe apart from @Donkeys who seems to be going full on Corbyn on this topic.
Netanyahu is of a type: he’s in the same bracket as Modi, Erdogan, Bolsonaro, Trump. Modi in particular. Don’t let him lead the West into situations they shouldn’t be in, just because they suit him.
Plenty of people are saying how ghastly it is that Israel hit Iran's embassy and it really wasn't fair.
As for Netanyahu I have no idea how he compares to those other leaders. But he is in charge of a war cabinet and I'm not sure the others are.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Yes I don't disagree. It was a bit of a fuck you act. And I say this with caution but we are talking about Iran here which has never shied away from using all means at their disposal to attack its foes including on foreign soil.
Israel has carried out assassinations and kidnappings around the world. In Belgium, Britain, you name it. It has also been waging undeclared war against Iran on Iranian soil for many years. Perhaps you think they are kind shy nice boys for allowing Iran to have any embassies anywhere, or for allowing friends of Palestine to talk to each other on the phone in Germany even if the German police do Israel's bidding by breaking up their meetings. And some Palestinian women have even successfully given birth in refugee camps in Gaza.
Dunno who blacked out Tel Aviv today. Someone did. Who do you reckon?
PS And as for this shit about Israel wanting to protect all the Jews, Israel has no right to speak for all Jews. Many Jews do not support the existence of Israel.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Yes I don't disagree. It was a bit of a fuck you act. And I say this with caution but we are talking about Iran here which has never shied away from using all means at their disposal to attack its foes including on foreign soil.
Israel has carried out assassinations and kidnappings around the world. In Belgium, Britain, you name it. It has also been waging undeclared war against Iran on Iranian soil for many years. Perhaps you think they are kind soft nice boys for allowing Iran to have any embassies anywhere, or for allowing friends of Palestine to talk to each other on the phone in Germany even if the German police do Israel's bidding by break up their meetings.
Dunno who blacked out Tel Aviv today. Someone did. Who do you reckon?
Those poor Iranians I do feel for them. Is there a group we can join.
Nope, Israel is our ally and our friend and despite our best efforts the only democracy in the region.
Which is part of the reason why so many on the far left hate it so much.
Nope. Our history of getting involved with wars in the Middle East is one of fiasco after fiasco. Each time we just make things worse.
Masterly inactivity is the way forward.
We need to stand up for the global order.
That’s why we support Ukraine, and that’s why we have to support Israel on this occasion. Otherwise dictators and tyrants will feel free to attack the innocent with impunity and the world will be a less safe place.
The 90's called; it wants its naive belief in liberal intervention back.
Liberalism is the greatest thing humanity has ever done.
And interventionism is the worst thing liberal humanity has ever tried, except for all alternatives.
Intervention worked in some cases and was ill conceived in others. Plenty of liberals could see the Iraq intervention for the disaster it was months before it happened. But non-intervention (or rather, toothless pretend intervention) in the Balkans early on led to Srebrenica.
Ukraine is a simple calculation: there’s good guys and bad guys, and the bad guys are out to get us. Gaza is nowhere near as simple. Either from a pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian perspective.
Hamas are bad guys. Iran are bad guys.
The calculus is simple.
Likud are bad guys too. This is more IRA vs UVF.
Likud are unpleasant guys, but not bad guys in the same way.
And Israel is currently led by a government of national unity like Britain in WWII, not by Likud.
This is more like Britain vs Nazi Germany.
It’s not Britain vs Nazi Germany. It’s not even Britain vs Irish republicanism, because the evidence of thuggery by the Israeli military is of a different magnitude.
Yes Israel is an ally and yes Iran in particular is an evil regime, but it does nobody any favours to exonerate Likud and their extremist political allies for some quite chilling behaviour in the last few months.
I started out in October fully and vocally supportive of Israel, and sickened by the rentamob immediately heading out on to the streets exercising their inner antisemitism. But this campaign and the dehumanising rhetoric coming from parts of Israeli society has really got me questioning my moral assumptions.
Please name one thing in Israel's campaign that is worse than what we did when we were existentially fighting for our survival.
Israel is not existentially fighting for its survival. It’s conducting a counterinsurgency campaign. If Iran or Syria were planning a full scale invasion of Israel then you’d have a basis for comparison, but they’re not.
It’s like a nastier, bloodier version of the troubles. Only we weren’t dropping bombs over the bogside. And the behaviour of settlers, for example, is not dissimilar to that of Protestant marchers on the 12th July, only 10x more violent.
We have the luxury of saying that Israel is not existentially fighting for its survival. Israel does not.
You are indulging in western supremacism telling everyone else what they should or shouldn't be thinking.
Well I’m all for leaving the Middle East to it. It’s western supremacism to assume we should play an active role. It’s at least partly our fault the place is such a mess in the first place after our previous efforts at meddling.
Interesting. I mean looking at the various regimes in the middle east you are saying they should all be left alone to do their thing.
It's amazing that so many posters on PB are wholly ambivalent about repressive middle eastern theocratic regimes trying to exert their power over the region.
Even I don't want Hamas to lose @Dura_Ace saw it within himself to bomb their allies every day for a year or so.
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
I'm not emotional at all. I just marvel at the illogicality of some of the arguments and think hyperbole is in such instances a useful tool.
People are rushing to defend Iran by saying Israel started it.
Look at the history of geopolitics in the middle east is all I'm saying. And also look at what values you are endorsing when you pick a side.
I am equally enthralled, bemused , amazed by the early Catholic Church and its attempts to define heresy.
It's not Israel as much as general bonkersness.
The illogicality does my head in.
Nobody’s defending Iran. Nobody’s picking that side.
EDIT: well maybe apart from @Donkeys who seems to be going full on Corbyn on this topic.
Netanyahu is of a type: he’s in the same bracket as Modi, Erdogan, Bolsonaro, Trump. Modi in particular. Don’t let him lead the West into situations they shouldn’t be in, just because they suit him.
Plenty of people are saying how ghastly it is that Israel hit Iran's embassy and it really wasn't fair.
As for Netanyahu I have no idea how he compares to those other leaders. But he is in charge of a war cabinet and I'm not sure the others are.
I don't really care about deceased IGRC generals, but the principal of diplomatic inviolability does matter. Breaking it, particularly by blowing embassies up to kill a senior military official, is a precedent that's likely to come back to haunt us in the future. What moral recourse does a Western nation have to an attack in its diplomatic facilities if a nominally Western nation that claims to uphold international law has set a precedent that it's okay to attack such places if a nasty person we don't like is there? Embassies and diplomatic staff have to be protected, even if it leads to people we don't like conducting business there. Otherwise the channels between countries break down.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Yes I don't disagree. It was a bit of a fuck you act. And I say this with caution but we are talking about Iran here which has never shied away from using all means at their disposal to attack its foes including on foreign soil.
Israel has carried out assassinations and kidnappings around the world. In Belgium, Britain, you name it. It has also been waging undeclared war against Iran on Iranian soil for many years. Perhaps you think they are kind shy nice boys for allowing Iran to have any embassies anywhere, or for allowing friends of Palestine to talk to each other on the phone in Germany even if the German police do Israel's bidding by breaking up their meetings. And some Palestinian women have even successfully given birth in refugee camps in Gaza.
Dunno who blacked out Tel Aviv today. Someone did. Who do you reckon?
PS And as for this shit about Israel wanting to protect all the Jews, Israel has no right to speak for all Jews. Many Jews do not support the existence of Israel.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Good question. Was the Enniskillen bombing legitimate.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Many on PB: Israel is acting disproportionately in bombing Gaza it should conduct surgical strikes on those responsible. Also many on PB: how dare Israel conduct surgical strikes on those responsible.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Were any consulates affected by the Nagasaki bombing or is this a red line you are willing to die in a ditch for.
I get the desire to uphold international norms and the discombobulation when countries don't conform to them but you must understand that those norms are fluid to say the least.
Many on PB: Israel is acting disproportionately in bombing Gaza it should conduct surgical strikes on those responsible. Also many on PB: how dare Israel conduct surgical strikes on those responsible.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Good question. Was the Enniskillen bombing legitimate.
This is uncharted territory fraught with risk and unpredictability.
Iran and Israel have fought shadow wars for decades, but for the first time Iran is now targeting Israel directly from Iranian soil.
This is no longer a confrontation led by Iran’s array of powerful proxies across the region against an enemy which has long kept silent about its own attacks on Iranian assets and targeted assassinations.
Israel describes Iran as the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism; for Iran, hostility towards Israel, what it calls the “Zionist regime” is a core tenet of its 1979 revolutionary doctrine.
The risk of confrontation had risen with every month the Gaza war has ground on.
Iran has long prided itself on playing a long game, on exercising “strategic patience".
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has avoided all-out war ever since he came to power in 1989 in the shadow of the destructive Iran-Iraq war.
Now the world waits to see the impact of this unprecedented strike.
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Were any consulates affected by the Nagasaki bombing or is this a red line you are willing to die in a ditch for.
I get the desire to uphold international norms and the discombobulation when countries don't conform to them but you must understand that those norms are fluid to say the least.
It sets a very bad precedent and was designed to escalate the situation. It was a reckless move and designed purely to force the west to come back on side .
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Were any consulates affected by the Nagasaki bombing or is this a red line you are willing to die in a ditch for.
I get the desire to uphold international norms and the discombobulation when countries don't conform to them but you must understand that those norms are fluid to say the least.
It sets a very bad precedent and was designed to escalate the situation. It was a reckless move and designed purely to force the west to come back on side .
It was designed to kill a target and it was not without precedence. Already this year alone Ecuador violated Mexico's consulate, these things have always been "guidelines more than actual rules" too.
You object when Israel kills its targets without innocent Palestinian deaths. You object when Israel kills its targets with Palestinian deaths. Just what will be good enough for you!
This is uncharted territory fraught with risk and unpredictability.
Iran and Israel have fought shadow wars for decades, but for the first time Iran is now targeting Israel directly from Iranian soil.
This is no longer a confrontation led by Iran’s array of powerful proxies across the region against an enemy which has long kept silent about its own attacks on Iranian assets and targeted assassinations.
Israel describes Iran as the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism; for Iran, hostility towards Israel, what it calls the “Zionist regime” is a core tenet of its 1979 revolutionary doctrine.
The risk of confrontation had risen with every month the Gaza war has ground on.
Iran has long prided itself on playing a long game, on exercising “strategic patience".
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has avoided all-out war ever since he came to power in 1989 in the shadow of the destructive Iran-Iraq war.
Now the world waits to see the impact of this unprecedented strike.
Something that hasn’t been considered - Iran, like nearly all dictatorial states is ruled by coalition of forces.
The IRGC is a big player, but haven’t got absolute power. Though they exercise quite a lot of autonomy in doing what they want.
So when Israel killed a bunch of their brass, the other players on the Iranian system had to give them some kind of action.
A one off, pre announced strike is quite possibly performative dance - it gives the IRGC a show of force, doesn’t trigger an all out war with Israel (probably) and doesn’t bring in the Americans.
Many on PB: Israel is acting disproportionately in bombing Gaza it should conduct surgical strikes on those responsible. Also many on PB: how dare Israel conduct surgical strikes on those responsible.
OK, I'll bite! Surgical strikes are OK!
Somewhat hard to do surgery with jagged fragments of metal travelling at the speed of sound.
Incidentally @nico679 has got international law wrong. International law prohibits the host country from violating the embassy, as Ecuador did against Mexico earlier this year. Nothing in international law prohibits third parties from engaging in acts of self-defence to kill legitimate military targets who happen to be in embassies.
If the attack had happened in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, it might have violated international law, but it didn't. It happened in Damascus. The Vienna Convention didn't apply to Israel. The attack happening in an embassy in Damascus is no different for Israel than if they'd bombed a Starbucks in Damascus that had a legitimate military target in it.
Actually the Starbucks would have had more innocents.
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
The most incredible thing is that Israel had all of the good will of the world on its side, including unanimously across PB. The fact they have lost so many people is a testament to how badly they have screwed up.
Goodwill so long as they don't do anything to defend themselves or do anything to destroy Hamas.
I've asked for six months from you an alternative to destroy Hamas. So far . . . crickets.
There's something in the idea that those who agree with the position that an ethnic-supremacist fascist regime "has the right to defend itself" - against its victims whom it will never cease attacking and killing as long as it exists and as long as any of its victims still survive in or near their own country - find themselves tied up in knots when the said regime continues to attack.
"Right to defend itself" is just PR in favour of the twin assumptions that 1. the said ethnic-supremacist regime has the "right" to exist, and 2. its victims don't have the right to defend themselves. That's why Israel and its supporters scream it so loud. They love it when the "debate" is reduced to one between themselves and the idiots whose response to "Israel has the right to defend itself" is "Yes but..."
(And I'll tell you what, you who say "Yes but" - Israel's not going to respect you.)
Ethnic supremacist fascist regime.
Very funny.
They seem to be giving your guys an almighty kicking, that said.
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
The most incredible thing is that Israel had all of the good will of the world on its side, including unanimously across PB. The fact they have lost so many people is a testament to how badly they have screwed up.
Goodwill so long as they don't do anything to defend themselves or do anything to destroy Hamas.
I've asked for six months from you an alternative to destroy Hamas. So far . . . crickets.
There's something in the idea that those who agree with the position that an ethnic-supremacist fascist regime "has the right to defend itself" - against its victims whom it will never cease attacking and killing as long as it exists and as long as any of its victims still survive in or near their own country - find themselves tied up in knots when the said regime continues to attack.
"Right to defend itself" is just PR in favour of the twin assumptions that 1. the said ethnic-supremacist regime has the "right" to exist, and 2. its victims don't have the right to defend themselves. That's why Israel and its supporters scream it so loud. They love it when the "debate" is reduced to one between themselves and the idiots whose response to "Israel has the right to defend itself" is "Yes but..."
(And I'll tell you what, you who say "Yes but" - Israel's not going to respect you.)
Ethnic supremacist fascist regime.
Very funny.
They seem to be giving your guys an almighty kicking, that said.
Are you trying to out-idiot Bart tonight?
I think the idiots are those who said it was WW3 tonight, don't you?
Whether legal or not, Israel's attack on the consulate was stupid and short-sighted for at least one reason: it allows Iran, or its proxies, to attack Israeli consulates around the world and say: "It's okay now, isn't it?"
And knowing Iran, attacking those of other countries as well.
I can't believe that there wasn't another time or place that Israel could have attacked those people. It also shows what I said ages ago, about a targeted assassination campaign have significant downsides internationally.
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
The most incredible thing is that Israel had all of the good will of the world on its side, including unanimously across PB. The fact they have lost so many people is a testament to how badly they have screwed up.
Goodwill so long as they don't do anything to defend themselves or do anything to destroy Hamas.
I've asked for six months from you an alternative to destroy Hamas. So far . . . crickets.
There's something in the idea that those who agree with the position that an ethnic-supremacist fascist regime "has the right to defend itself" - against its victims whom it will never cease attacking and killing as long as it exists and as long as any of its victims still survive in or near their own country - find themselves tied up in knots when the said regime continues to attack.
"Right to defend itself" is just PR in favour of the twin assumptions that 1. the said ethnic-supremacist regime has the "right" to exist, and 2. its victims don't have the right to defend themselves. That's why Israel and its supporters scream it so loud. They love it when the "debate" is reduced to one between themselves and the idiots whose response to "Israel has the right to defend itself" is "Yes but..."
(And I'll tell you what, you who say "Yes but" - Israel's not going to respect you.)
Ethnic supremacist fascist regime.
Very funny.
They seem to be giving your guys an almighty kicking, that said.
Are you trying to out-idiot Bart tonight?
I think the idiots are those who said it was WW3 tonight, don't you?
Herman Kahn identified potential World Wars up to VIII, IIRC
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being persecuted, prosecuted and maybe even being imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents. Even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won The War.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden wouldn't happen in the first place?
So the Bondi killer was a 40-yeaar old Queenslander with significant mental health issues. Apparently not an immigrant, and a guy whose only religion appeared to be surfing.
I'm not really sure how you can prevent this sort of attack.
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being prosecuted, persecuted and maybe even imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents, even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won the war.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden would never have happened in the first place?
Dresden was the end result of mid WWII technology - a bombing raid was a shotgun blast a mile or more across. So if you aimed it to destroy everything (by fire) in a target a few miles across....
By the end of the war, technology had marched on. Oboe equipped Mosquitos were hitting targets a few yards across. The raids were so accurate that they had to recalibrate the junctions between maps - Germany was hundreds of yards away from where we thought it was.
So the Bondi killer was a 40-yeaar old Queenslander with significant mental health issues. Apparently not an immigrant, and a guy whose only religion appeared to be surfing.
I'm not really sure how you can prevent this sort of attack.
You’re emotional about this, I understand that, but it’s making you very binary in your judgments. Someone not signing up to the Barty full spectrum total warfare and uncritical support for everything Bibi wants doctrine does not make them ambivalent about repressive regimes or Hamas apologists.
You’re talking to a fairly robust liberal interventionist who’s been one of the most supportive of Israel on here and is well aware of the malevolence of the Russia-Iran axis and its destabilising effect on the world. If you’re losing me then you’re going to struggle to bring others along with you.
The most incredible thing is that Israel had all of the good will of the world on its side, including unanimously across PB. The fact they have lost so many people is a testament to how badly they have screwed up.
Goodwill so long as they don't do anything to defend themselves or do anything to destroy Hamas.
I've asked for six months from you an alternative to destroy Hamas. So far . . . crickets.
There's something in the idea that those who agree with the position that an ethnic-supremacist fascist regime "has the right to defend itself" - against its victims whom it will never cease attacking and killing as long as it exists and as long as any of its victims still survive in or near their own country - find themselves tied up in knots when the said regime continues to attack.
"Right to defend itself" is just PR in favour of the twin assumptions that 1. the said ethnic-supremacist regime has the "right" to exist, and 2. its victims don't have the right to defend themselves. That's why Israel and its supporters scream it so loud. They love it when the "debate" is reduced to one between themselves and the idiots whose response to "Israel has the right to defend itself" is "Yes but..."
(And I'll tell you what, you who say "Yes but" - Israel's not going to respect you.)
Ethnic supremacist fascist regime.
Very funny.
They seem to be giving your guys an almighty kicking, that said.
For all their nukes their undisciplined rabble of an army (as Robert Fisk called it) - see some of the photos and video clips they've been posting - hasn't even taken all of Gaza yet and the ICJ ruled against them. What's their plan for when outside support dries up? Will they smash Gaza, Iran, Yemen, Hezbollah, the West Bank, Jerusalem, the Arab population of the 1948 OTs, and Syria all in a single clinically efficient night of attack, polishing their balls of steel when they've finished?
The regime is proudly ethnic-supremacist. There is no point in proving the obvious. It calls itself the Jewish state. But it's not only Jews who live in the territory it claims or occupies, or who did live there before they were terrorised into fleeing, any more than it was only French people who lived in Algeria.
As for fascist, what would you call the pogroms against Arab villages on the West Bank carried out by soldiers in cooperation with the mobhanded civilian thugs who sally out from their strictly Arabfrei towns, geed up by Rabbi Ginsburgh, to vandalise Arab people's means of livelihood and torch and smash up their homes?
Please find attached in the toilets the promised article on how the history of betting illuminates how the UK resolves social issues, with passing reference to the trans issue. If you do want to publish it please let me know. @isam, can you have please have a quick look to see if I've got the history right? @Selebian, you said you wanted a preview, so there it is. I've copied it into a message to which you are all invited
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being persecuted, prosecuted and maybe even being imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents. Even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won The War.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden wouldn't happen in the first place?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Genuine question,
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
Israel is trying to draw the west in and the timing of the consulate attack proves that .
We should not be aiding and abetting Netenyahus attempts to cling to power .
Israel is trying to "draw the west in" because they share the same values as us. Do Iran and Hamas share our values.
I applaud your humanity but you really need to think about what those regimes stand for and have perpetrated in particular against their own citizens.
I know exactly what those regimes stand for . Criticizing Israel for attacking the consulate I think is totally justified . Do you think the west was happy with that action . It was likely to lead to an escalation . So ask yourself why they chose to attack that consulate at that time . Really I don’t understand why the glaringly obvious is being ignored .
Because the strike by Israel was legitimate.
Why do you ignore that?
Bombing a consulate is bombing the actual country itself . It was done to escalate and hope Iran would retaliate which they have done . Netenyahu realized support for his Gaza war was cratering so decided to force the west to have to come back on side. I find it astonishing that this aspect seems to be missed by some in here .
During war, bombing the country itself is entirely legitimate though.
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Consulates are off limits . Can you name another country which has done this ?
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being persecuted, prosecuted and maybe even being imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents. Even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won The War.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden wouldn't happen in the first place?
We'd find our standards slip a bit if we had a war like to contend with. Everyone does. It's just a question if they give up any attempt to avoid indiscriminate strikes etc or retain.
Why so. Should they let themselves be attacked with no retaliation.
Israel attacked Iran first!
Would the fact that Iran is behind Hamas and a high ranking Hamas target was killed in that strike be of any news or relevance to you?
Or is it always the Jews Israel's fault?
You are being a real t*** tonight. Questioning Netanyahu's motives is not an attack on the right of existence for Israel. Bibi is a very bad man.
You need to see the bigger picture here. For all his (many) failings WSC was right in his attitude to the Narzees. Bibi is or may be for sure a bad man but you need to choose a side in this war. And Bibi is on the right one, much as you may dislike that fact.
Bibi is right to defend Israel against Iran backed Hamas. How he executes this defence is the issue.
Choosing good over evil is one thing in war. When good becomes evil picking sides is less straightforward.
Which would have seen you check out of defending the UK after Dresden, presumably.
Of course not. That is wholly different. What about Coventry?
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being persecuted, prosecuted and maybe even being imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents. Even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won The War.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden wouldn't happen in the first place?
I would hope most would agree that Dresden not happening (and Coventry not happening) would be an extremely good thing.
Comments
https://www.flightradar24.com/QTR43C/34c2827d
Why do you ignore that?
As for Netanyahu I have no idea how he compares to those other leaders. But he is in charge of a war cabinet and I'm not sure the others are.
It has also been waging undeclared war against Iran on Iranian soil for many years.
Perhaps you think they are kind shy nice boys for allowing Iran to have any embassies anywhere, or for allowing friends of Palestine to talk to each other on the phone in Germany even if the German police do Israel's bidding by breaking up their meetings. And some Palestinian women have even successfully given birth in refugee camps in Gaza.
Dunno who blacked out Tel Aviv today. Someone did. Who do you reckon?
PS And as for this shit about Israel wanting to protect all the Jews, Israel has no right to speak for all Jews. Many Jews do not support the existence of Israel.
In your view, was the king David hotel bombing legitimate?
The REALLY big debate is surely whether you're Team Sharon or Team Amanda?
https://twitter.com/MrsSOsbourne/status/1779026707514855877/photo/2
You're acting like this happened in a vacuum. There was a military target there that was sought to be killed, and Iran was a party to the conflict that had attacked Israel supporting the target who was killed.
Well done for Israel for killing the high ranking military target, without killing a single innocent Palestinian. You should be applauding that, yet still Israel are in the wrong, even when not one innocent Palestinian died.
Also many on PB: how dare Israel conduct surgical strikes on those responsible.
I get the desire to uphold international norms and the discombobulation when countries don't conform to them but you must understand that those norms are fluid to say the least.
(Because tomorrow we rise at dawn...)
This is uncharted territory fraught with risk and unpredictability.
Iran and Israel have fought shadow wars for decades, but for the first time Iran is now targeting Israel directly from Iranian soil.
This is no longer a confrontation led by Iran’s array of powerful proxies across the region against an enemy which has long kept silent about its own attacks on Iranian assets and targeted assassinations.
Israel describes Iran as the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism; for Iran, hostility towards Israel, what it calls the “Zionist regime” is a core tenet of its 1979 revolutionary doctrine.
The risk of confrontation had risen with every month the Gaza war has ground on.
Iran has long prided itself on playing a long game, on exercising “strategic patience".
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has avoided all-out war ever since he came to power in 1989 in the shadow of the destructive Iran-Iraq war.
Now the world waits to see the impact of this unprecedented strike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-middle-east-68737710
You object when Israel kills its targets without innocent Palestinian deaths.
You object when Israel kills its targets with Palestinian deaths.
Just what will be good enough for you!
The IRGC is a big player, but haven’t got absolute power. Though they exercise quite a lot of autonomy in doing what they want.
So when Israel killed a bunch of their brass, the other players on the Iranian system had to give them some kind of action.
A one off, pre announced strike is quite possibly performative dance - it gives the IRGC a show of force, doesn’t trigger an all out war with Israel (probably) and doesn’t bring in the Americans.
If the attack had happened in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, it might have violated international law, but it didn't. It happened in Damascus. The Vienna Convention didn't apply to Israel. The attack happening in an embassy in Damascus is no different for Israel than if they'd bombed a Starbucks in Damascus that had a legitimate military target in it.
Actually the Starbucks would have had more innocents.
And knowing Iran, attacking those of other countries as well.
I can't believe that there wasn't another time or place that Israel could have attacked those people. It also shows what I said ages ago, about a targeted assassination campaign have significant downsides internationally.
If Sir Winston sanctioned Dresden now, in 2024, chances are he'd spend his final 20 years being persecuted, prosecuted and maybe even being imprisoned by human rights activists, lawyers and his political opponents. Even though he was the PM that defended Britain from Nazi oppression and won The War.
Infact, if WWII happened now, Dresden wouldn't happen in the first place?
I'm not really sure how you can prevent this sort of attack.
By the end of the war, technology had marched on. Oboe equipped Mosquitos were hitting targets a few yards across. The raids were so accurate that they had to recalibrate the junctions between maps - Germany was hundreds of yards away from where we thought it was.
The regime is proudly ethnic-supremacist. There is no point in proving the obvious. It calls itself the Jewish state. But it's not only Jews who live in the territory it claims or occupies, or who did live there before they were terrorised into fleeing, any more than it was only French people who lived in Algeria.
As for fascist, what would you call the pogroms against Arab villages on the West Bank carried out by soldiers in cooperation with the mobhanded civilian thugs who sally out from their strictly Arabfrei towns, geed up by Rabbi Ginsburgh, to vandalise Arab people's means of livelihood and torch and smash up their homes?
Please find attached in the toilets the promised article on how the history of betting illuminates how the UK resolves social issues, with passing reference to the trans issue. If you do want to publish it please let me know. @isam, can you have please have a quick look to see if I've got the history right? @Selebian, you said you wanted a preview, so there it is. I've copied it into a message to which you are all invited
Morning all, how’s things?
Oh. S***!!!
*goes back to sleep*.
https://x.com/ianbremmer/status/1779274337998029163?s=61