possible that this thread merits a change of title since it is now actively discussing a wider area?
Such as ?
How about 'Nuclear fallout, and how to avoid it'
We can have a PSA on where is best to buy Iodine tablets.
"I think Biden is the deciding factor and an Israel-Iran war is clearly not in his interests right now"
An Israel-Gaza war is not in his interests either, but it's still happening, and Netanyahu is not just doing what Biden wants at the moment. I'm worried we have a lot more gloom to go.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/netanyahu-biden-gaza-ceasefire-b2510936.html
However Iran invoking Article 15 of the UN Charter which gives it the legal right to self-defence did cause people, including myself btw, a lot of concern.
I'm not sure their response was proportionate to the "crime" that Israel hasn't owned up to
Is that because we expect more restraint from Iran?
Iran’s response on Saturday was in retaliation to an Israeli strike on its consular compound in Syria, in effect Iranian sovereign territory, and the assassination of half a dozen of its officials.
Yes I would expect Iran to instead organise, arm and control proxy organisations like Hamas & Hezbollah so that they could attack Israel instead. In fact, that was probably what those officials were doing.
Not a fan of Israel, but get a sense of perspective.
I’m not sure their response was proportionate....
I guess it depends whether you believe that Iran had 350 targets in their sights on Saturday or whether you believe that the 170 slow low flying propeller driven drones, for example, were designed to overwhelm air defences so that half a dozen or so ballistic missiles could hit their targets.
Which they did according to Israeli authorities - 5 ballistic missiles struck the Nevatim Airbase, which was where the attack on the Iranian consulate compound was launched from, and another 4 ballistic missiles hit the Ramon Airbase, also in Southern Israel (the Iranians also claim to have hit an intelligence gathering facility in the Golan Heights)
The latter sounds fairly proportionate.
In fact, that was probably what those officials were doing.
If it was both legal and justified Israel would not hesitate to claim responsibility for the attack.
If it was both legal and justified Israel would not hesitate to claim responsibility for the attack.
What have the Iranian's said about what their officials were doing in their consulate? I notice they haven't commented much. Perhaps it wasn't legal & justified according to international law.
There is a bit of a difference between sending shady people as accredited diplomats to a foreign country, and carrying out a surgical strike of a foreign embassy/diplomatic compound in a third, sovereign nation.
Seriously, there is. That latter is all kinds of wrong and it opens a way for escalating a conflict in many ways I would rather not have.
Again: I’m no apologist for Israel, but we know an undeclared war exists between them & Iran. They both get up to all sorts of stuff which doesn’t cross the line they seem to have drawn.. I suspect that October 7th went way beyond that line and Israel presumable feels that they have a right to take out those people they believe planned or instigated those attacks. I certainly don’t support the consulate strike, but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have happened if the Iranians hadn’t upped the ante in October.
I don't think the IDF blowing up any Iranian embassy where-ever it is was a good move whatever the "worth" of the targets may have been*, and nor do I think the lobbing 300 missiles at an entire country is 'limited' in the way that some news organisations has suggested that it was. A few months ago I would've said that the Israelis tend towards being a bit smarter about these sorts of things (in a cynical way) These days, I'm not so sure. I wouldn't trust the Iranian govt as far as I could collectively throw them and never really have. Any administration that has behaved towards its own population as undemocratically as they have, deserves to be over-thrown.
* I think if you're actually at war with another country/organisation, targeting their leadership, where ever they are - totally fine. Not actually declared war, no right to go after its leadership. Maybe I'm just out of touch
I’m not sure their response was proportionate to the “crime” that Israel hasn’t owned up to
This was a serious attempt IMHO
The main point for me is the mix of missiles. Experience in Ukraine is that ballistic missiles are the hardest to intercept and Russia typically launches single-figure numbers of ballistic missiles in a strike. Iran has launched 10x those numbers and the only Iranian missiles to get through the layers of defence were ballistic, although with little significant damage caused. Russia has been adjusting its missile packages through two years of experience, Iran hasn't yet learnt that lesson
Russia typically launches half the total number of Iranian missiles in a single strike on Ukraine. If this rate is repeated by Iran over further attacks then the numbers will be huge
This is balanced by the air defences that Israel has and the assistance that it receives as compared to Ukraine. Israel also has more time due to the distances travelled by missiles from Iran and assistance from countries that Iran overflys, e.g. Jordan, that have intercepted missiles in their airspace
If the attack is repeated then the stakes have been raised
Graphic illustrating numbers... 
Missile numbers, defensive layers, etc. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68811273 and https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran%E2%80%99s-attempt-hit-israel-russian-style-strike-package-failedfor-now
I guess it depends whether you believe that Iran had 350 targets in their sights on Saturday or whether you believe that the 170 slow low flying propeller driven drones, for example, were designed to overwhelm air defences so that half a dozen or so ballistic missiles could hit their targets....snip...The latter sounds fairly proportionate.
You missed the other 110-ish ballistic missiles that were launched by Iran ^^
but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have happened if the Iranians hadn’t upped the ante in October.
Aside from last I saw the US and co were saying they didnt have any evidence that Iran was directly involved.
Given the number of other assassinations by Israel I am not sure your argument adds up even without that.
"I don’t think the IDF blowing up any Iranian embassy where-ever it is was a good move whatever the “worth” of the targets may have been*, ...A few months ago I would’ve said that the Israelis tend towards being a bit smarter about these sorts of things"
Interesting article in the Guardian the other day suggesting that, basically, there is no strategic approach to this within Israel. If they see a target and a way to hit it, they might well hit the button. There's no 4D chess going on.
"“Israel went too far in assassinating the Iranian general, probably, in a diplomatic location,” said Yagil Levy, a professor of military sociology at the Open University of Israel.
“Israel is led by the availability of its weapons systems. And whenever the country or the leadership feels that they have a good intelligence, a good opportunity and available weaponry systems that can do the job, Israel strikes,” he added.
“Israel doesn’t have a really strategic approach … the attempt to identify the [connections] between specific military actions and expected benefits is not in the repertoire of the Israeli leadership.”
The Iranian attack was as disproportionate as the Israeli response to Oct 7th. Therein lies the symmetry.
You missed the other 110-ish ballistic missiles that were launched by Iran ^^
No I didn't , it was included in the total when I asked the likelihood of them actually targeting 350 different targets.
Everyone knows that Israeli air defences are excellent (although not so good that they didn't need help the US, the UK, France, and even Jordan) the only way that Iran stood any chance of penetrating them was by overwhelming them, which they apparently did - the at least 9 ballistic missiles which hit their military targets did so because Israel failed to intercept them.
You have to assume that such a strategically important air base as the Nevatim Airbase is defended as well as Israel possibly can. If Iran can hit it with 5 ballistic missiles it is reasonable to assume that Iran can hit Tel Aviv.
but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have happened if the Iranians hadn’t upped the ante in October.
Goodness, do you honestly believe that Hamas don't want a Palestine free from Israeli occupation and what they are actually doing is fighting and dying for Iran?
Hamas and the Islamic State of Iran are not close, for a start Hamas is Sunni and the regime in Tehran is Shia. Until recently Hamas and Iran were supporting totally opposing sides in the Syrian Civil War. Obviously both share a common enemy in Israel but I personally very much doubt that Hamas even warned Iran of its planned attack on Oct 7.
I know that the Western press, especially the tabloids, like to make it all very simple and claim that all Muslims are the same and all have the same goals, but it isn't that simple.
No I didn’t , it was included in the total when I asked the likelihood of them actually targeting 350 different targets.
I'm glad that we've cleared that up, because the other 180 missiles could have been of far lesser importance
If Iran can hit it with 5 ballistic missiles it is reasonable to assume that Iran can hit Tel Aviv.
This will be Israel's worry, along with the overt hand of Iran. Let's hope that doesn't cause an escalation
Hamas and the Islamic State of Iran are not close, for a start Hamas is Sunni and the regime in Tehran is Shia.
Well the reason why Hamas is Sunni is because well over 90% of Palestinians are Sunni. Given that is the case it seems rather strange, according to your rationale, that Iran is such an outspoken & active supporter of the Palestinian cause.
Iran’s response on Saturday was in retaliation to an Israeli strike on its consular compound in Syria, in effect Iranian sovereign territory, and the assassination of half a dozen of its officials. This was in violation of international law – which is why officially Israel will not admit responsibility.
I'd kind of overlooked that aspect, no one seems to have criticised Israel for attacking diplomatic premises, in breach of all sorts of treaties, which is a worrying precedent.
Can you imagine the outrage if a "western " embassy was attacked? (US embassy in Nairobi being a similar parallel I guess)
Yeah I was aware that Palestinians are predominantly Sunni imnotverygood, which is obviously why I made that point.
However I wasn't aware that the regime in Tehran was such an 'outspoken and active supporter of the Palestinian cause', which was the other point I made.
Both Tehran and Hamas intensely dislike the Israeli regime (as the Israelis intensely dislike them) but not necessarily for identical reasons.
I don't know why anyone would automatically assume that the Iranians and Palestinians are very close just because they both have a common enemy.
Can you imagine the outrage if a “western ” embassy was attacked? (US embassy in Nairobi being a similar parallel I guess)
I think the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aries is a much better parallel. In terms of outrage, at least. Certainly not in terms of who was killed though because in that one it was only civilians.
nickc
Full MemberI don’t think the IDF blowing up any Iranian embassy where-ever it is was a good move whatever the “worth” of the targets may have been*, and nor do I think the lobbing 300 missiles at an entire country is ‘limited’ in the way that some news organisations has suggested that it was.
It's all relative isn't it? Firing 300 missiles at Israel which has probably the best missile defence in the world and is already on high alert, knowing that most of them are going to get knocked down, is different to firing 300 missiles at an unprepared location. It's quite akin to firing 6 missiles at something with no missile defence at all, frinstance.
I’ve seen several reports that General Zahedi, the most senior official killed in the airstrike, was involved in the planning and executing the 7/10 attacks.
The reports are based on statements made by the Coalition Council of Islamic Revolution Forces the in Iran and the Hamas Al-Qassam brigades.
I’ve seen several reports that General Zahedi, the most senior official killed in the airstrike, was involved in the planning and executing the 7/10 attacks.
The reports are based on statements made by the Coalition Council of Islamic Revolution Forces the in Iran and the Hamas Al-Qassam brigades.
And if I was the IDF I would be making statements and releasing "evidence" stating exactly that too.
Whether it's true or not is entirely a secondary consideration in all this
Not the IDF
https://www.saba.ye/en/news3318069.htm
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202404043146
https://www.almanar.com.lb/11817775
Not that it made the strike a good idea, as the potential for escalation was (is) huge.
Now is a good time to invest in the arms trade... business is always good, but with recent developments, it should soon be even better!!
Now is a good time to invest in the arms trade… business is always good, but with recent developments, it should soon be even better!!
Not forgetting of course that the majority of the big players have had a vast amount of low cost R&D suppressing the Palestinian population with full backing of western counterparts
It could have been the Saudis?
Not the IDF
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202404043146
/blockquote>
No not the IDF but the Saudi royal family which doesn't support the people of Palestine, hates the Iranians, and despite everything that has happened in the last six months still wants to normalise relations with a regime that has killed thousands of innocent civilians.And which of course murders its own citizens and chops their bodies up if they don't agree with them.
The source claimed Saud al-Qahtani, the crown prince’s information tsar, who was among two senior officials removed in connection with the Khashoggi affair, was involved in the funding behind Iran International TV.
And which of course murders its own citizens and chops their bodies up if they don’t agree with them.
This one is clearly the most infamous, I doubt they've stopped altogether. I doubt there's a regime in the entire region that doesn't have blood on its hands.
No not the IDF but the Saudi royal family...
I gave three links. Two were anti-Iran, Iran Intl. and Saba, but the 3rd was the Hezbollah-owned Al-Manar. It's also been reported by the pro-Iran Al Mayadeen, citing the same statement credited to (and not contradicted by) Hamas's military wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades.
It doesn't mean I think the Damascus consulate attack was a good idea, but it does explain some of the wider context of provocation and escalation.
Like Iran does?
Yeah I guess so. Do you think that a regime which murders its own citizens and chops their bodies up if they don’t agree with them is a reliable source of information?
Hamas and Tehran are not close. They are religiously different (and religion is extremely important to both of them) and they are culturally/racially different - Iranians are not Arab. Which goes some way in explaining why they previously strongly disagreed with each other over support for the Syrian regime.
It serves Iran's interests to arm Hamas in a similar way that it serves the United States to arm Israel. But Hamas still acts independently in the same way as Israel does. Hamas is fighting to free Palestine of Israeli occupation, they aren't fighting and dying for Iran.
Yes, good point @ernielynch, we'd do well to remember that while they may share a common goal and indulge in similar rhetoric, they're separate "actors" with their own policies, decisions and preferred outcomes. They may use each other (like Israel secretly funding Hamas) to further their own interests, but only if those align, and in ways we (on a bike forum and reading selected events in the news) can only guess at.
“(like Israel secretly funding Hamas)” This didn’t happen. Been discussed ad nauseum above.
JHJ, from what I can see Israel didn't fund Hamas, but they did allow funds to reach Hamas, which is a subtle but important difference.
Benjamin Netanyahu didn't want a Palestinian State and he divided the West Bank and Gaza so that they weren't strong enough to form a single state.
He did this by "promoting" the least likely contender, Hamas in Gaza, to an organisation that Israel negotiated with and "demoted" the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank.
Qatar funded Hamas, which maintained the ceasefire, while Israel granted work permits to people in Gaza which put more money into their economy. This effectively weakened PA by under-funding the West Bank government
The problem was that Hamas were able to train, build military infrastructure and became strong enough to launch the Oct 7th attack
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
It goes way before Netanyahu, Hamas is Israel's "creation":
https://archive.li/2023.11.06-031512/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123275572295011847
"Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," says Mr. Cohen, a Tunisian-born Jew who worked in Gaza for more than two decades. Responsible for religious affairs in the region until 1994, Mr. Cohen watched the Islamist movement take shape, muscle aside secular Palestinian rivals and then morph into what is today Hamas, a militant group that is sworn to Israel's destruction.
Instead of trying to curb Gaza's Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat's Fatah. Israel cooperated with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas. Sheikh Yassin continues to inspire militants today; during the recent war in Gaza, Hamas fighters confronted Israeli troops with "Yassins," primitive rocket-propelled grenades named in honor of the cleric.
To be fair to Israel this was happening at a time when the United States, the UK, France, etc, were helping Islamic fundamentalists such as Osama bin Laden to fight the secular left wing government in Afghanistan.
The Israelis simply used the same tactics.
Edit: It's worth remembering that during this time Israel was also Iran's main arms supplier. Although in this case Israel was helping the Islamic Republic of Iran fight a secular Middle East government.
Recent history of the Middle East is the history of hypocrisy and double standards.
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation of how the October incursion by Hamas into Israel was executed with virtually no initial resistance? I cycled through Israel in 2019 and have never seen anything like it – it's basically a militarised state. From Tel Aviv to the south, there wasn't a day that passed without a strong reminder of military presence in the country. Squadrons of fighter jets would be roaring overhead daily, military vehicles were always present on the ground, and transport hubs were always full of 18-year-olds armed with M16s, presumably returning home from military service.
Some nights I was terrified I would be crushed to death by some reckless squaddie in an APC or armoured vehicle, as you could hear them buzzing around at night, especially near the border with the West Bank. One night I remember they were so close I could see the red glowing ends of their cigarettes (whether they saw me or not I have no idea). In the area to the south of Tel Aviv, I cycled through regions where I feared there was an actual war going on (sounds of heavy artillery and gunfire at night, dogs barking, etc., it was terrifying). I met the IDF daily. It seemed impossible to avoid them. When I heard that hundreds of men had invaded in motorised paragliders, golf buggies, bicycles, etc., I initially thought it was a joke (sadly not).
It's very long but I watched 15 minutes in for ten minutes and it is very interesting. Col Jacques Baud claims that Iran achieved all its objectives. He also claims that by the time the ballistic missiles arrived Israel had no more anti missile capabilities and that if Iran decided to launch a full scale missile attack Israel would be overwhelmed. Something which he claims Israel is aware of now after what happened a couple of nights ago.
He also says that an intelligence facility in Tel Aviv was hit, which I hadn't heard before. He says that every target the Iranians had were hit.
Hamas was not created, funded, or instructed by Israel to attack it.
The conditions that led to a Muslim Brotherhood off shoot being the main power in Palestine can be laid at a succession of governments, both in Israel and neighbouring states (but not the USA in this instance). So, yes, Israeli governments have been complicit in allowing Hamas to operate and grow politically. But they have not armed it. Not funded it. Not instigated an attack on Israeli citizens. Not deliberately allowed an attack on Israeli citizens.
Hamas should not be let off the hook with insinuations and suggestions that they are part of some Israeli plot.
