Different political factions, though the articles I read on the bombing didn't say ISIS took credit. Not disagreeing with you on this, but we don't read the same news....lol This fits right in with ISIS's M.O.
closed Thread
- Thread starter ll74
- Start date
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
We'll see if this ends up being true, but it's promising.
Gallant: Palestinians — not Israel — will run civilian affairs in post-war Gaza
Gallant: Palestinians — not Israel — will run civilian affairs in post-war Gaza
butters
High on a Hill
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2009
- Posts
- 85,794
yes, isis has claimed credit; they say there were 2 suicide bombers though intel believes one of the devices was a suitcase bomb blown up by remote control.
the reason they would target Iran? they don't like Sunni Muslims and they were the target group this time, celebrating the hamas high official killed 4 years ago by an American drone in Iraq. Overall, i'd say it's about exploiting the times in order to push the middle east into full-blown conflict
https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...gest-attack-since-1979-revolution-2024-01-04/
see Lazaran's post below for putting that (my post here) straight ^^^ i got things a might twisted there
Last edited:
I read that it was a suitcase bomb too, just at that point there was no one taking credit. That's going to make it hard for Iran to take action on Israel, and from what I read, Iran has promised Israel will pay. So I wonder if they eat their words now,or what?
Thanks for the link.
Well, ISIS are Sunnis, so an attack on Iran, which is Shia, makes perfect sense, and that is why I suspected it was ISIS all along.
The bombing happened during a remembrance for the Revolutionary Guard leader (not hamas) who the corrupt orange traitor had assassinated as that leader visited Iraq.
*nods*
butters
High on a Hill
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2009
- Posts
- 85,794
thanks for straightening that out for me; my mind's all over the place the past couple of days... interrupted sleep
thanks for straightening that out for me; my mind's all over the place the past couple of days... interrupted sleep
Dealt with food poisoning recently, and I couldn’t sleep or focus for a couple days.
Food poisoning is no fucking joke.
*nods*
LLCox
fu247365.org
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2019
- Posts
- 9,474
I had it bad one time. I thought I was going to die... then I was wishing I would.
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,816
Joint French/Jordanian C130 aircraft successfully airdrops 7.7 tons of medical supplies directly to Gazan hospital.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...dates-rcna132421/rcrd29273?canonicalCard=true
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...dates-rcna132421/rcrd29273?canonicalCard=true
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
Looks like a Hezbollah leader killed in Lebanon by Israeli drone. Are they expanding their objectives to include Hezbollah now?
Israel war on Gaza: Israel kills senior Hezbollah commander in air strike
It would seem a logical approach. Hezbollah has been supporting Hamas, and launching attacks against Israel in support of Hamas. Best way to get them to "see the light" is to also be targeting them.
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
It really depends on your goal. The goals as stated, has been the destruction of Hamas. If you expand that goal, you would split the battlefield and extend the war.
They're skating that line though.
I do think they will limit there effort against Hezbollah to drone strikes etc. I don't see them actually moving into Lebanon. I don't think Bene has any goals other than to wipe Hamas off the face of the earth, and he doesn't care who gets killed in the process.
policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,188
I think that the dynamics here can get incredibly complex. It is easy enough to see that attacking Hezbollah runs the risk of opening up a 2nd front. But that also presupposes that if they don't attack that Hezbollah will stay out of it. Hezbollah and Iran are on record as openly calling for the destruction of Israel and are constantly itching to open up another war front. Arguably those fronts are all already opened up. They are just dormant right now, but only for so long as it serves their enemy's purpose. That being the case, deterrence might be the only thing that keeps things somewhat in check - yes it is dicey but not as dicey as giving them a chance to get organized for an attack.
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
I think the true issue here that is insurmountable, imo, is that leadership is amorphous for Hamas and Hezbollah. Kill one leader and there's another without pause.
silky52
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2019
- Posts
- 449
Pretty good assessment, but if you ask the people whose houses have been destroyed in the north, and the people who have been displaced (100,000) for the last three months from their homes and their businesses, farms and moshavim, I don't think they would agree with you. They are very, very well organised have no doubt of that. IMHO they are wary of the US, since they would be forced to help Israel should Hezbollah begin attacking further afield. But be assured that this is definitely a War of Attrition at the very least being fought on our border!
policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,188
Yes, I think that you are correct. It isn't like assassinating any one leader is going to bring about the defeat of any of these groups. But I expect that Israel isn't just thinking in terms of conventional "victory". These groups represent an existential threat to their existence. If an assassination slows them down for a while or spooks them a bit then that may be reason enough.
policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,188
What would they disagree with? All I said was that Israel's reasons for attacking Hezbollah are part of a complex set of strategic considerations that go beyond simply killing one dude in the hopes that will lead to victory. I didn't comment on whether the actions of any of the parties in this war are justified.
That said I will offer up a point of view.
I think that in the (liberal) west we tend to have a default support for the underdog. If we see a fight where one strong man is beating up a less strong man and restraining him we instinctively favour the man who appears to be losing and call for the cessation of fighting. On the surface that makes sense, but it isn't the whole picture. Suppose we zoom in and realize that the man who appears to be losing has a knife and is saying "let me up so that I can kill you." We still don't know how they got to this place but now we know why the stronger man continues to restrain the other man.
Regardless of how this fight started and who is at fault, common sense tells us that the stronger man isn't going to let the other man free so that he can try to kill him. Even if we think the stronger man is at fault we wouldn't rationally expect him to simple turn himself over to be murdered by the other man. Those who call blindly for cessation of hostilities without addressing the weaker man's murderous intent are naive to the point of stupidity. The stronger man has two practical options. If he is strong enough he can restrain the other man without hurting him. If he is not strong enough he has no choice but to incapacitate the other man. The stronger the other man is or becomes, the greater the chances that the stronger man will be left with no choice but to harm him so that he incapacitated.
From Israel's point of view the (metaphorical) man they have been trying to subdue has now become too strong to restrain without causing harm. Their only choice is to incapacitate him. The metaphor starts to fall apart when we try to factor in the killing of innocent civilians....or does it? Obviously the killing of innocent civilians is horrific and it is grossly unfair to them. But the choice here for Israel isn't between accepting the collateral damage to innocent civilians or doing nothing with no consequences. Doing nothing means an ongoing and growing threat to their own innocent civilians. As in all wars both sides will take the view that if it comes down to their own innocent civilians being killed or their opponent's innocent civilians being killed either party will prioritize their own innocent civilians even if that means disproportionate harm to their opponent's innocent civilians.
It sucks that Hamas is using their own innocent civilians as human shields, but the government of Israel has to prioritize its own.
Recast it as family. Suppose I am the matriarch of my family and the matriarch of another family is dedicated to the destruction of me and my family. I am going to kill that bitch - that's it, that's all. What if she hides behind her family? Well if it is them or my babies then I will kill them too. What if she has 10 children and I have one? I don't care, I will prioritize my family. Even if I empathize with her point of view. Even if I am partially at fault for our animosity. There is no scenario in which I am going to offer up my life and my family's life.
No nation on earth would be expected to behave any differently when their enemy intentionally targets their civilians..
Personally I think that both sides have much to answer for their conduct over the last 75 years. I do not hold Israel innocent. But until both sides desire peace and are willing to make concessions to achieve it that is a moot point. One cannot make peace with someone who does not want to make peace. And as long as someone is dedicated to the destruction of you and yours you must protect your own even if you are partially at fault for the dispute.
silky52
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2019
- Posts
- 449
They would disagree with what you said about Hezbollah being unorganised! Hezbollah are very well organised, and indeed are a worse threat than Hamas-ISIS is to Israel. However, since the last Lebanese war they have kept to their side of the border and Israel to hers.
The other point that I and the people in the north would disagree with is the fact that Israel did NOT attack Hezbollah. They attacked Israel on October 7th, we simply moved troops to the border due to the threats that Nasrallah, and his ilk (Iran etc) are always mouthing off about! I think that anyone would guard their door after what HI did that day!
Your points about the defence of innocent civilians is well taken. However, there are those here in Israel that would disagree with that too, and say that there are in fact no innocent civilians. Are you aware that on October 7th when Hamas-ISIS invaded Israeli territory it was with so-called innocent civilians in-toe. Those innocent civilians, raided, raped and carried out all the atrocities that the HI did on that day together with them. I don't actually agree with the assessment that there are none. I believe, or I want to believe that that is not true, and that many of those Gazans were forced by HI into submitting to their will.
The question of disproportion is not taken into account in any other war. Only Israel is held accountable for these things, regardless of the fact that HI invaded Israel, and committed the worst kind of criminal genocide that one can imagine. Israel therefore has every right to fight for her survival, and yes it is indeed survival. At the moment, there are almost 200,000 displaced persons from the south of the country, and approximately 100,000 from the north! If one looks at the map of Israel it is so small that a person could miss it, if you didn't know what you were looking for. Disproportion is the Arab countries that surround Israel. In 1948 when Israel was founded, the Arabs were offered a State of their own alongside Israel, but they refused!! They are still refusing and that has indeed been 75 years!! So, what do people think Israel will do, as you said, just come here and murder everyone, they won't mind!
A few last things; no one talks of the hostages still held in Gaza by HI. Is Israel simply supposed to say to HI, "Oh, don't worry we don't need those hostages they are only women, children and old people," and believe me they are all innocent civilians, except for the soldiers defending Israel, that were kidnapped on October 7th.
The other point is the rockets that they fire daily into Israel from both the Gaza Strip and from Lebanon, I guess that's all okay with the world. Israel can take it because they have the Iron Dome, and there is only damage to their property, and very few casualties!!
What is disproportionate is that the world is allowing this to happen!!
What is disproportionate is that the UN women, and the world's women did not protest at the rape and mutilation of Israeli women, don't worry about it, they are only Jews! Only Israeli women, Jewish women that's all, it doesn't matter about them, good riddance!
Have a good day!
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,816
Referring to Hamas as "Hamas-ISIS" shows your inherent bias.
And I notice once again you resort to primitive "appeals to emotion"
"rape and mutilation of Israeli women!"
Anything to deflect from the collective punishment Israel is doling out on Gaza.
We used to hang Nazis for that, y'know.
And I notice once again you resort to primitive "appeals to emotion"
"rape and mutilation of Israeli women!"
Anything to deflect from the collective punishment Israel is doling out on Gaza.
We used to hang Nazis for that, y'know.
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
Interesting development. I'm not sure that this will result in anything concrete, but good to see movement towards scaling down the violence.
Blinken announces deal to launch UN assessment mission in northern Gaza
policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,188
Oh I see what you mean. I didn't mean to suggest that Hezbollah is unorganized. Quite the opposite. They are very well organized and are a real and immediate threat to Israel.
I didn't state it very well but I was addressing comments about the merits of engaging in hostilities with Hezbollah, especially the recent assassination of a Hezbollah leader. While it is true that if you kill one of their leaders another pops up to take his place, that doesn't mean that the operation didn't serve a useful purpose, even if it is only to throw a wrench into their organization for a very brief period of time.
I think that those of us at a distance from this conflict tend to make broad assumptions about the dynamics of war and apply them without really knowing the circumstance. The war "fronts" with Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are always open. If there is no shooting going on that doesn't mean they are content to keep it that way. It means they are preparing for their next opportunity to try to wipe Israel off of the map. Therefore, Israel has to constantly manage those fronts and be ready for incoming hostilities at all times and that might include taking pre-emptive action.
In conventional war terms the idea of opening up another front implies that one is starting hostilities in a new location, perhaps with a new enemy that would not have engaged in hostilities if you hadn't opened up that front. But I don't think that is the case with Hezbollah. They are not content to refrain from hostilities as long as they aren't attacked. Quite the opposite, they are very keen to attack. The only thing that is stopping them is deterrence.
When a guy like Nasrallah comes out and says that there will be retribution for the assassination the west tends to fall right into the trap of believing that if Israel hadn't carried out the assassination Hezbollah would be staying out of the fight. That is bullshit. He might fire a few more rockets or engage in some other performative acts of retribution to play to his base. He may change his approach to killing Israeli's. But he didn't become anymore committed to killing Israeli's than he was before the assassination, because he was already fully committed to that cause.
policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,188
Collective punishment involves intentionally punishing the whole population for the offences of a few people. That isn't what is happening. If Hamas would stop hiding behind civilians Israel would not need to turn Gaza to rubble. It sucks and it is unfair to innocents. But for Israel to not protect its own citizens because of Hamas's tactics is silly.
No doubt it has been said elsewhere in this chain but the reality is that all wars involve innocent civilians. Was the west inflicting collective punishment on Germany or Japan in WW2 when it was bombing civilian areas? No, at least not in my opinion. It was taking the necessary measures to protect its own citizens by defeating the enemy. The fact that necessitated the deaths of civilians sucks. But that necessity came about because of the acts of the aggressor.
As I noted above, think of it like family. If someone is threatening to kill my family then hiding behind their own children/innocents to try to deter me from attacking them to protect my family they are the ones creating the binary option of my innocents die or their innocents die. If they would just come out and face me the innocents could be left out of it. But as long as it is my innocents or yours, well I'm sorry but your innocents are going to die. That is no collective punishment. That is me protecting my own from a hideous enemy that is bent on my destruction and putting their loved ones in harm's way. I feel horrible for those people, but I can't be expected to sacrifice my own children/innocents.
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 61,974
There are valid concerns when Israel drops 300lb dumb bombs in densely populated areas.
I'll admit, I expected that Israel would go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties and was disappointed with that effort to say the least.
Additionally, comparisons to world war 2 are truly shortsighted - technology in weaponry has had 80+ years to advance....why shouldn't we expect those who use it to use that tech to target more appropriately? In addition, diplomacy has also had 80+ years to evolve.
Yes, war sucks and kills people. That is oversimplified and truly holds no one accountable.
And to restate my positions - I favor the dismantling of Hamas and their complete surrender of leadership in Gaza. I also favor the resignation of all leadership in Israel due to their abdication of duties in protecting Israeli citizens.
RobDownSouth
No Kings
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 77,816
We have an early leader in the January "Let's rationalize teh genocide" contest!
You seem to be positing that if only Hamas would come out and fight mano-a-mano against the Israeli Genocide Force, this whole business could be wrapped up nice and quickly.
war isn't like that, sadly. Gazan fertilizer/sugar/C4 rockets are no match for the finest laser guided bombs gifted to the Israelis by indulgent big brother America. So we have guerilla war basically. Soooo unfair!
So let's address your concerns. Let's see....yes, the allies did attack strategic populated areas in WW2. (Churchill famously firebombed Dresden). By most accounts, the allies took care to concentrate their efforts against military units, not civilians populace.
Given the densely populated nature of Gaza due to geographic concerns, this isn't very easy in Gaza. Rather than make any effort to distinguish between combatant and civilian, the Israel Genocide Force seems to shrug their collective shoulders, kill anything that moves, and rely upon their crack propaganda team to make excuses for the more wretched excesses of their behavior. This is why we see footage of razed hospitals, day care center and refugee camps.
Perhaps my analogy that Israelis are no better than Nazis is a bit overblown....after some thought, they seem to be more akin to the Russian Red Army outside of Berlin in 1945. Content to reduce the enemy to rubble, block by block. After the fighting is done, I wonder if the Israeli Genocide Force will mass rape the surviving female populace before returning to a hero's welcome in Israel?
The biggest casualty in my opinion is that Israel has permanently forfeited the "perpetual victim" status it has taken such great care to cultivate since 1945 or so.
Similar threads
