Israel - Iran and regional players | Please post respectfully and stay on topic

[4bars]

Israel would argue that their actions are lawful self defence. GIven October 7, they would say attacking Gaza is legal. The question then is whether it is proportionate.
They argue that their violence is targeting Hamas who are using civilians as human shields. They argue that Hamas are the terrorists and it is Hamas that has a declared objective of genocide.

Ultimately these words have been degraded of their original meaning in the propaganda battle, along with words like anti-semitism and islamophobia. I'm inclined to treat them as noise. It's much easier to say that the intention is ethnic cleansing, another war crime, because it is a more meaningful accusation and one that is likely true. If i had a narrative in the way you claim I would hardly say that, would I?

I put the definition and fits like a glove, there is no degradation. You argue about 10/7 but you left out conveniently the west bank, before and after 10/7. Terrorizing settlers kuddnaping them, allowing the settlers destroying private property with arms supplied by the goverment and the army accompanying them.

You can argue gaza (and you still wrong, is state terrorism) but not west bank

I like your sentence " israel would argue..." like thry soild call themselves terrorist state


Israel=terrorist state is a flawless definition.

 

[glazed]

Israel doesn't exist (both historically and currently) without the USA. And yet the 56 Suez crisis happened without the knowledge of the USA.

I don't 'want' evidence but if you're going to be making such definitive statements, and linking articles claiming they provide the contrary argument, which turns out to just be some Joe Bloggs talking about how x and y show how Iran was behind it, while listing objectively completely irrelevant facts, then people are going to comment.

Oh people can hold differing opinions. My own view is that the west is already at war with the CRINKs and the Gaza and Ukraine conflicts need to be seen through that prism. It's no coincidence the Houthis gave safe passage through the Red Sea for Chinese and Russian shipping.

I put the definition and fits like a glove, there is no degradation.
Israel=terrorist state is a flawless definition.

The West Bank occupation is certainly illegal and the settler activity is probably a form of terrorism. Presumably you agree that Gaza under Hamas is also a terrorist state? Because if you don't you're simply throwing around the term as a pejorative proxy for 'I hate Israel.' The reality is that both sides have dehumanised the other for 75 years and that is the consequence of an endless war.

 

[Kaos]

Oh people can hold differing opinions. My own view is that the west is already at war with the CRINKs and the Gaza and Ukraine conflicts need to be seen through that prism. It's no coincidence the Houthis gave safe passage through the Red Sea for Chinese and Russian shipping.

This is ridiculous reductionism. The Gaza situation wasn't created by China, Russia, Iran or North Korea. It was created by Israel who felt it necessary to cram almost 2 million people into a sieged open air prison following decades of subjugation, occupation and perpetual land grabs. This has been happening long before Iran has been an Islamic Republic, and the Russians have not been in adversarial stance to Israel. Your whole world view of condensing every conflict into a disney-esque Good vs evil struggle lacks any historical or contextual substance. You can employ all the mental gymnastics you want to absolve Israel of being an aggressor state and shoehorning them into these global forces of good but it doesn't change the reality that they've been the harbingers of suffering for the Palestinians irrespective of the other nations you're implicating.

 

[4bars]

Oh people can hold differing opinions. My own view is that the west is already at war with the CRINKs and the Gaza and Ukraine conflicts need to be seen through that prism. It's no coincidence the Houthis gave safe passage through the Red Sea for Chinese and Russian shipping.




The West Bank occupation is certainly illegal and the settler activity is probably a form of terrorism. Presumably you agree that Gaza under Hamas is also a terrorist state? Because if you don't you're simply throwing around the term as a pejorative proxy for 'I hate Israel.' The reality is that both sides have dehumanised the other for 75 years and that is the consequence of an endless war.

Hamas is definitely a terrorist organization but Palestine is not a state so... and who cares, terrorism is terrorism. And i dont hate israel. I hate the israel goverment anfmd whoever backs its actions

The reality is that 1 side has the power, calls itself a democratic state with the most moral army in the world.

If the situation would be the other way around, i would be criticizing palestine and backing israel, as i condemned 10/7 or i find despicable the persecution of jews in nazi germany and in all europe for centuries, but the solution to a persecuted ethnoreligious group is not giving land from another ethnoreligious group and this later group become a prrsecuted group themselves, basically transferring the feck up situation to others converting israel founders in the monsters that caused the holocaust

 

[Buster15]

Was the UN in post WWII mostly dominated by europeans, USSR (half europe) the US and china and being UK protectorate probsbly had the most to say

It was a land grab.by the end of the XIX century they were 5% jews with 2% were born and raised there and 3% born in europe. By the 20-30s they bought land because the plans of having a israel country started to form and it increase to +30% which 90% were from europe-US. So all this people had 0 connection with the land, and it is fine, you buy as private citizen, form a state, and vote consequently. But not go around burn and kill people and because you are not from that religion, you cant go back and they size your land and give it to foreigners.

It is baffling that you are telling me because the jews were persecute and killed they had the right to persecute and kill arabs.

If the holocaust happened in germany, give them german land, not palestinian people that were not involved in politics and minding their lifes

It is baffling that you are telling me because the Jews were.....
You have made that up my friend because I neither said it or infured it.

 

[Buster15]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about Iran as well.
But has turned into a let's bash Israel..

 

[nickm]

A goid chance, yes. The organisation of Islamic cooperation (which Iran is part of) said there would be peace but only if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders.

I am sceptical that Iran being signatory to a fairly standard boilerplate statement is necessarily a full reflection of their foreign policy goals.

 

[nickm]

This is ridiculous reductionism. The Gaza situation wasn't created by China, Russia, Iran or North Korea. It was created by Israel who felt it necessary to cram almost 2 million people into a sieged open air prison following decades of subjugation, occupation and perpetual land grabs. This has been happening long before Iran has been an Islamic Republic, and the Russians have not been in adversarial stance to Israel. Your whole world view of condensing every conflict into a disney-esque Good vs evil struggle lacks any historical or contextual substance. You can employ all the mental gymnastics you want to absolve Israel of being an aggressor state and shoehorning them into these global forces of good but it doesn't change the reality that they've been the harbingers of suffering for the Palestinians irrespective of the other nations you're implicating.

I don't think it is impossible or wrong to say that there is an informal grouping of states whose members might see a tactical advantage in various local upsets and who provide a degree of loose backing to each other.

 

[Kaos]

I don't think it is impossible or wrong to say that there is an informal grouping of states whose members might see a tactical advantage in various local upsets and who provide a degree of loose backing to each other.

Of course you'd expect as such. However the poster I was quoting was suggesting this absurd dichotomy of struggle, insinuating that if you weren't fully behind Israel you might as well throw your lot in with the likes of Russia and China which I find to be a ridiculously reductionist take. I happen to believe a world does exist where you can be opposed to the state of Israel's colonial aggression and oppression of the Palestinians while not pitching in the Russian/Chinese/Iranian camp.

 

[nickm]

Under article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran had every right to retaliate after the bombing of its consulate, which was a flagrant violation of the Vienna Convention, no matter how much spin the Western media and some posters here want to put on it. The retaliation was carried out in a manner that wouldn't give any excuse to the US or its allies to launch a strike against Iran.

You keep making it sound so simple. Yes Iran had a "right" to retaliiate but your argument only stacks up because the air defences, previously untested at this level, worked amazingly well. And that Arab states unprecedentedly acted together as part of that. This idea that Iran worked it all out in advance as a PR move and that is the end of it, only plays out because of the success of an untested set of systems. 300 missiles is arguably a.mass attack designed to overwhelm untested defences. Fecking risky if you ask me.

 

[Tibs]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about Iran as well.
But has turned into a let's bash Israel..

Yes, always the victim.

 

[Revan]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about Iran as well.
But has turned into a let's bash Israel..

@Raven incoming

 

[The Corinthian]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about Iran as well.
But has turned into a let's bash Israel..

Israel literally bombed the Iranian consulate on foreign soil and killed 10(?) people, which caused the most recent round of hostility. What point are you trying to make?

 

[Revan]

For people who take the upmost respect about the international law (despite that the security council members don’t give a feck about it), how do you feel about Iran passing on Jordan’s airspace with 300 or so projectiles. I assume Jordan has the right to retaliate?

 

[Revan]

Israel literally bombed the Iranian consulate on foreign soil and killed 10(?) people, which caused the most recent round of hostility. What point are you trying to make?

7 of those people were IGRC, 2 of which high commanders there, 1 of which was decorated on Iran as the guy who architected and implemented the attack on October.

It was not just a consulate.

 

[The Corinthian]

For people who take the upmost respect about the international law (despite that the security council members don’t give a feck about it), how do you feel about Iran passing on Jordan’s airspace with 300 or so projectiles. I assume Jordan has the right to retaliate?

They did retaliate. They shot them down.

 

[Revan]

They did retaliate. They shot them down.

Nah, that is not retaliation, that is defense.

Retaliation would be attacking Iran. Which I assume you folks would be completely fine right?

 

[hellhunter]

For people who take the upmost respect about the international law (despite that the security council members don’t give a feck about it), how do you feel about Iran passing on Jordan’s airspace with 300 or so projectiles. I assume Jordan has the right to retaliate?

You retaliate after being attacked, not flown over

 

[Revan]

You retaliate after being attacked, not flown over

Wait, since when it was ok within international law to fly attacking drones and cruise missiles over another sovereign country? I thought you need permission for that. Maybe the international law experts here need to refresh their international law knowledge.

 

[hellhunter]

Wait, since when it was ok within international law to fly attacking drones and cruise missiles over another sovereign country? I thought you need permission for that. Maybe the international law experts here need to refresh their international law knowledge.

You do, and I'm sure you could call in their ambassador or escalate in other ways, but there's nothing to retaliate to

 

[The Corinthian]

Nah, that is not retaliation, that is defense.

Retaliation would be attacking Iran. Which I assume you folks would be completely fine right?

Defense from what? They weren't the ones being attacked.

 

[The Corinthian]

7 of those people were IGRC, 2 of which high commanders there, 1 of which was decorated on Iran as the guy who architected and implemented the attack on October.

It was not just a consulate.

And 2 civilians.

Irrespective of who was there, you can't go around bombing consulates (reminder that consulates and embassies are meant to be protected from warfare) on foreign soil and expect no blowback.

 

[Revan]

Defense from what? They weren't the ones being attacked.

Their airspace was being violated. No country does that with 300 projectiles at the same time. Russia at times sends one to Western countries to annoy them, and in case of Turkey that plane still got shot. US and China also do that occasionally, North Korea sends at times missiles above Japan. But not 300.

 

[The Corinthian]

Their airspace was being violated. No country does that with 300 projectiles at the same time. Russia at times sends one to Western countries to annoy them, and in case of Turkey that plane still got shot. US and China also do that occasionally, North Korea sends at times missiles above Japan. But not 300.

The 300 all didn't come from a single location flying over the same trajectory. I don't know what proportion came via Jordan's airspace, but they were fired from multiple locations. Some from Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

In any case, it was all theatre with the 'attack' taking several hours to occur with full warnings given to Israel and the US.

Edit: forgot to add, Israel has broken international law after international law. I'd be happy to hold Iran to account if Israel were, but they've proven that the rules don't apply to them, so why should any other nation care?

 

[Revan]

And 2 civilians.

Irrespective of who was there, you can't go around bombing consulates (reminder that consulates and embassies are meant to be protected from warfare) on foreign soil and expect no blowback.

And irrespective of how much you hate a country, you do not prepare a massacre of 1100 people and expect to not get attacked in return, as IGRC commanders found out.

Seriously, what do people want Israel to do? I thought that attacking Gaza is not going to be good, and hoped that Israel will not do so, or at least not be as trigger happy. Unfortunately, they were even more ruthless than anyone come, and I do not mind calling it a crime, maybe even a genocide.

The alternative approach that I hoped to see (and many urged) was to go for the high value targets of Hamas, and their backers (Iran and Hezbollah leaders) wherever they are. But apparently that is a no-go too, cause international law something. Where was the international law when Iran trained and prepared Hamas terrorists to make the terror attack in Israel? Or it is okay to violate the international law if it is to punish Israel (as you and @hellhunter basically admitted with the Jordan case).?

 

[Revan]

The 300 all didn't come from a single location flying over the same trajectory. I don't know what proportion came via Jordan's airspace, but they were fired from multiple locations. Some from Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

In any case, it was all theatre with the 'attack' taking several hours to occur with full warnings given to Israel and the US.

Edit: forgot to add, Israel has broken international law after international law. I'd be happy to hold Iran to account if Israel were, but they've proven that the rules don't apply to them, so why should any other nation care?

Were there 100? 50? It would still be quite unprecedented.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

For people who take the upmost respect about the international law (despite that the security council members don’t give a feck about it), how do you feel about Iran passing on Jordan’s airspace with 300 or so projectiles. I assume Jordan has the right to retaliate?

Jordan are well within their rights to pass drones through Iran's airspace. But I don't see the point of Jordan doing that.

 

[The Corinthian]

And irrespective of how much you hate a country, you do not prepare a massacre of 1100 people and expect to not get attacked in return, as IGRC commanders found out.

Seriously, what do people want Israel to do? I thought that attacking Gaza is not going to be good, and hoped that Israel will not do so, or at least not be as trigger happy. Unfortunately, they were even more ruthless than anyone come, and I do not mind calling it a crime, maybe even a genocide.

The alternative approach that I hoped to see (and many urged) was to go for the high value targets of Hamas, and their backers (Iran and Hezbollah leaders) wherever they are. But apparently that is a no-go too, cause international law something. Where was the international law when Iran trained and prepared Hamas terrorists to make the terror attack in Israel? Or it is okay to violate the international law if it is to punish Israel (as you and @hellhuntet basically admitted with the Jordan case).?

We know that Iran had very little to do with October 7th, and they've taken a non-interventionist stance recently.

The attack in return of 1,100 people has been meted out already with 30,000+ dead with the vast vast majority of them being women and children and non combatants, on top of that many more are still unaccounted for, and many more will die due to famine and poisoning.

But on top of that, you still think it's fair for Israel to attack Iran consulates on foreign soil.

I've a question for you - Iran is providing weapons to Hamas, just as the West is providing weapons to Israel. Should Iran start bombing UK/US consulates in Europe?

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

And irrespective of how much you hate a country, you do not prepare a massacre of 1100 people and expect to not get attacked in return, as IGRC commanders found out.

Seriously, what do people want Israel to do? I thought that attacking Gaza is not going to be good, and hoped that Israel will not do so, or at least not be as trigger happy. Unfortunately, they were even more ruthless than anyone come, and I do not mind calling it a crime, maybe even a genocide.

The alternative approach that I hoped to see (and many urged) was to go for the high value targets of Hamas, and their backers (Iran and Hezbollah leaders) wherever they are. But apparently that is a no-go too, cause international law something. Where was the international law when Iran trained and prepared Hamas terrorists to make the terror attack in Israel? Or it is okay to violate the international law if it is to punish Israel (as you and @hellhunter basically admitted with the Jordan case).?

Israel has now massacred 32k people, among them 15k children. Should Israel expect to be answered in kind and will you be supportive of Palestinians doing that? This is all supposing the story started on 7th of October.

I think your approach in last paragraph makes more sense and would have been accepted by most if Israel wasn't committing genocide. To be clear it is targeting individuals involved, not ordinary citizens and not consulates and embassies.

 

[The Boy]

The reality is that both sides have dehumanised the other for 75 years and that is the consequence of an endless war.

This is absolutely true but with a huge imbalance of power.

 

[The Corinthian]

Were there 100? 50? It would still be quite unprecedented.

I have no idea, but it's a moot point. Jordan 'did their bit', and to be honest I'd say they 'did their bit' even if they did nothing.

 

[nickm]

In any case, it was all theatre with the 'attack' taking several hours to occur with full warnings given to Israel and the US.

"All theatre". Thank goodness the theatrical impresarios in the Iranian regime could count on Israeli defences taking out 99% of the missiles, and not say 80 or 90%?

 

[Revan]

We know that Iran had very little to do with October 7th, and they've taken a non-interventionist stance recently.

The attack in return of 1,100 people has been meted out already with 30,000+ dead with the vast vast majority of them being women and children and non combatants, on top of that many more are still unaccounted for, and many more will die due to famine and poisoning.

But on top of that, you still think it's fair for Israel to attack Iran consulates on foreign soil.

I've a question for you - Iran is providing weapons to Hamas, just as the West is providing weapons to Israel. Should Iran start bombing UK/US consulates in Europe?

If they want to get obliterated, sure. But, Iran is not in war with Israel to attack Western backers of Israel. If they start a war with Israel, then yeah, I think embassies are fair game. And let’s be real here, the last time Iran fought a war with another country that the West was helping, they were sinking ships for fun. Not military ships, too hard to do that, but merchant ships.

For what is worth, if the question is should Hamas attack Western embassies, I think yes, if they can. They are in a war where Israel is trying to destroy them, and Israel is being backed by Western countries, which means that the Western countries are explicitly trying to destroy Hamas, and are partaking in crimes against humanity in Gaza by the blind support for Israel.

With regards to your first point that is not true. Iran was training Hamas fighters in the weeks before the attack, Iran was sending weapons to Hamas, Iran decorated that commander who was killed as the architect and the guy who implemented the October attack. While Hamas is not Hezbollah to be completely directed by Iran, it is still heavily backed by Iran in all aspects. Iran regime and IRGC has Israeli blood in their hands.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

If they want to get obliterated, sure. But, Iran is not in war with Israel to attack Western backers of Israel. If they start a war with Israel, then yeah, I think embassies are fair game. And let’s be real here, the last time Iran fought a war with another country that the West was helping, they were sinking ships for fun. Not military ships, too hard to do that, but merchant ships.

For what is worth, if the question is should Hamas attack Western embassies, I think yes, if they can. They are in a war where Israel is trying to destroy them, and Israel is being backed by Western countries, which means that the Western countries are explicitly trying to destroy Hamas, and are partaking in crimes against humanity in Gaza by the blind support for Israel.

With regards to your first point that is not true. Iran was training Hamas fighters in the weeks before the attack, Iran was sending weapons to Hamas, Iran decorated that commander who was killed as the architect and the guy who implemented the October attack. While Hamas is not Hezbollah to be completely directed by Iran, it is still heavily backed by Iran in all aspects. Iran regime and IRGC has Israeli blood in their hands.

Most people present in embassies would have nothing to do with the war and would just be innocents. Targeting people like the US did with Osama is the way but not attacking embassies.

 

[Revan]

Israel has now massacred 32k people, among them 15k children. Should Israel expect to be answered in kind and will you be supportive of Palestinians doing that? This is all supposing the story started on 7th of October.

I think your approach in last paragraph makes more sense and would have been accepted by most if Israel wasn't committing genocide.

After almost a century of humiliation, killing, raping, getting beaten by Israel (with the help of the West), I wouldn’t blame them if they do whatever they can to hit back. I mean, if I was a Palestinian in Gaza, I would probably be a Hamas member.

Now, would I support this? Of course not. I haven’t been very shy that I am (to some degree) in the site of Israel in this conflict. At the same time, I also have no problems to mention that what Israel is doing in Gaza IMO is completely wrong, and even if it is not genocide, it is very very close to it.

Now of course, in the reality of geopolitics, power matters, actions have consequences, so if Hamas/Palestinians do so, they would lose even that little support they have in the West and Israel would be even more free to do worse there (and yes, it can do far worse).

 

[Revan]

Most people present in embassies would have nothing to do with the war and would just be innocents. Targeting people like the US did with Osama is the way but not attacking embassies.

There were 2-3 civilians, 7 IGRC, 5 other Iranian militia, and 1 Hezbollah. So this is not a thought experiment where Israel attacked civilians in the embassy, it was a real attack perfectly executed to kill Zahedi, which Israel and Iran both agree was responsible for October attacks. And in turn killed another dozen Iranian soldiers and unfortunately 2-3 civilians.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

After almost a century of humiliation, killing, raping, getting beaten by Israel (with the help of the West), I wouldn’t blame them if they do whatever they can to hit back. I mean, if I was a Palestinian in Gaza, I would probably be a Hamas member.

Now, would I support this? Of course not. I haven’t been very shy that I am (to some degree) in the site of Israel in this conflict. At the same time, I also have no problems to mention that what Israel is doing in Gaza IMO is completely wrong, and even if it is not genocide, it is very very close to it.

Now of course, in the reality of geopolitics, power matters, actions have consequences, so if Hamas/Palestinians do so, they would lose even that little support they have in the West and Israel would be even more free to do worse there (and yes, it can do far worse).

This is the part I don't understand, and I have seen this in talking to my colleagues as well. They accept Israel is an apartheid state committing regular atrocities for a long time, yet people are still on the side of Israeli's. They are committing genocide now and still people are on their side. Being on the side of Israel against Hamas and Iran is one thing, but being on the side of Israel in general is not something I understand as they are no better than Hamas or Iran.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

There were 2-3 civilians, 7 IGRC, 5 other Iranian militia, and 1 Hezbollah. So this is not a thought experiment where Israel attacked civilians in the embassy, it was a real attack perfectly executed to kill Zahedi, which Israel and Iran both agree was responsible for October attacks. And in turn killed another dozen Iranian soldiers and unfortunately 2-3 civilians.

I am more specifically talking about the western embassies you think are fair game; they would have a lot of civilians. Israel attacked a consulate and it got retaliated against, as expected, case closed I hope.

 

[Revan]

This is the part I don't understand, and I have seen this in talking to my colleagues as well. They accept Israel is an apartheid state committing regular atrocities for a long time, yet people are still on the side of Israeli's. They are committing genocide now and still people are on their side. Being on the side of Israel against Hamas and Iran is one thing, but being on the side of Israel in general is not something I understand as they are no better than Hamas or Iran.

At the contrary, I think they are far better than Iran and Hamas. Infinitely better. I mean, they can completely destroy Iran, but have no plans to do so. I do not think they particularly want a war, for example they evacuated the northern Israel, and for most part have been doing a tit-for-tat with Hezbollah instead of going with overwhelming force there. Iran cannot destroy Israel, but want to do so. And let’s not even start with Hamas, as a terrorist organization as it can be, in many ways, what they did in October was what ISIS has been doing.

But in any case, there is this thing in geopolitics called ally. Israel is an ally of both my country and my adopted country. I might disagree with them, and think that what they are doing is completely wrong and despicable, but still in a general setting support Israel. Obviously, there is some threshold, and obviously if the October attacks didn’t happen, I guess people would have been far less in Israel’s side.

In any case, I think this is a very complex conflict that has been going for a century. I do not think there are good and bad sides here.

* For similar reasons, I am in the side of the US in any conflict they enter, I actually love the US, despite that I think what they did in Iraq was absolutely criminal.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

At the contrary, I think they are far better than Iran and Hamas. Infinitely better. I mean, they can completely destroy Iran, but have no plans to do so. I do not think they particularly want a war, for example they evacuated the northern Israel, and for most part have been doing a tit-for-tat with Hezbollah instead of going with overwhelming force there. Iran cannot destroy Israel, but want to do so. And let’s not even start with Hamas, as a terrorist organization as it can be, in many ways, what they did in October was what ISIS has been doing.

But in any case, there is this thing in geopolitics called ally. Israel is an ally of both my country and my adopted country. I might disagree with them, and think that what they are doing is completely wrong and despicable, but still in a general setting support Israel. Obviously, there is some threshold, and obviously if the October attacks didn’t happen, I guess people would have been far less in Israel’s side.

In any case, I think this is a very complex conflict that has been going for a century. I do not think there are good and bad sides here.

* For similar reasons, I am in the side of the US in any conflict they enter, I actually love the US, despite that I think what they did in Iraq was absolutely criminal.

You yourself say if you were in Gaza, you would probably be part of Hamas, I think some Israelis have even said this. This is because of the atrocities that Israel has committed over a long period of time.

Israel is committing genocide as we speak and it is mainly to get rid of the Palestinians, it is an apartheid state, where most of the country supports this genocide. What would they have to do to actually lose your support?

Edit: As others have mentioned, I understand tribalism plays a part in all of this.