But the attack on Israel by Iran scares me. We’re looking at a whole new Middle East.
I'm not particularly worried. Netanyahu and his ultra-right lunatics migth be scary but for now I think Biden is the deciding factor and an Israel-Iran war is clearly not in his interests right now. I suspect that despite their declarations of support the US/UK and other western allies will have made the conditions very clear to Israel.
I’m not particularly worried.
Yup. For example, we had been under close protection by the Iron Dome for the past two weeks since the Iranian generals were eliminated. Our protection disappeared yesterday afternoon though, and that's only 12 hours after being directly targeted by Hamas again, so it seems the powers that be think things are a lot calmer.
@Mark possible that this thread merits a change of title since it is now actively discussing a wider area?
But the attack on Israel by Iran scares me
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. This was in violation of international law - which is why officially Israel will not admit responsibility.
And yet this deliberate act of war by Israel did not seem to concern people very much. 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.
We expect Israel to have a cavalier attitude and contempt towards international law with little consequences because frankly they have always got away with it. We don't however have the same expectations from other countries.
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.
and yet you appear to believe that Jacques Baud is?
Do I? I repeatedly said that he makes "claims", read my post. It is up to you whether you dismiss the claims or not.
Personally I don't believe the Israeli and US claims that the Iranian attack was a complete failure, although obviously they would say that wouldn't they.
Israel actually admits that its two strategically important air bases were hit by "9" ballistic missiles. It is reasonable to assume that the Israelis are not being completely truthful.
And although no independent reporters have been invited to inspect I have seen a photo of one of the craters caused by an Iranian ballistic missile, it is huge.
Obviously they just hit empty storage facilities because top military air bases always have lots of "empty storage facilities", but how come the Iranians managed to do that if the attack was a complete failure as the Israelis, US, and UK, governments claim? Why can't the Israeli defend their air bases which contain extremely expensive and vital hardware?
And the costs which Col Baud refers to are known - the cost of both the Iranian drones and the Israeli air defence missiles, it is widely accepted that the cost to Israel was huge and the cost to Iran relatively small.
Edit: Btw since you make the comparison does Col Baud do something similar to murdering people and chopping up their bodies? Is that why his claims should be dismissed?
Hamas should not be let off the hook with insinuations and suggestions that they are part of some Israeli plot.
It is not letting Hamas off the hook by pointing out that Israel helped to create and fund Hamas. Although the Israelis very obviously did not expect Hamas to pose a serious threat to them.
It is a fact that the United States helped to fund, arm, and trained, Osama bin Laden and his supporters. It doesn't however let Osama bin Laden off the hook for 9/11
Western governments do stupid things which have devastating consequences. There is really no point trying to sweep it under the carpet and pretending that they don't.
Western governments do stupid things which have devastating consequences. There is really no point trying to sweep it under the carpet and pretending that they don’t.
Well said
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!!
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation of how the October incursion by Hamas into Israel was executed with virtually no initial resistance?
I think the best answer is surprise and weight of numbers by the attackers and arrogance and carelessness by the Israelis.
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation of how the October incursion by Hamas into Israel was executed with virtually no initial resistance?
complacency and incompetence
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation of how the October incursion by Hamas into Israel was executed with virtually no initial resistance?
Complacency/hubris played a large part but Oct 7th was also the morning after the last day of Sukkot, a week long religious observance/holiday. Most soldiers were at home with their families.
Personally I don’t believe the Israeli and US claims that the Iranian attack was a complete failure, although obviously they would say that wouldn’t they.
It was a success in some ways, but a failure in others, which is a separate topic.
I think the point is that the escalation must stop because all that's happening is that everyone (governments, media, public, etc.) is focused on the Iran-Israel exchange and possible escalation, with all of the consequences that brings
Before Iran's attack the US and others were moving away from supporting Israel and the US had also abstained from, rather than vetoed, a UN vote for a ceasefire
We're no longer focused on the dire situation for Palestinians and their lack of aid, while Israel's allies once again coalesce to support Israel. Escalation is the worse thing, unless you are Benjamin Netanyahu, who is feeling a reduction in pressure
I hope to be proved wrong
There is some quite strong evidence that there were warnings that Hamas were about to plan something fairly big, the lack of preparation by the Israelis is probably, as mentioned, a combination of complacency and incompetence and arrogance, and the not totally unreasonable lack of expectation that Hamas could execute such a devastating strike - they had never previously carried out any attack which was in anyway remotely comparable.
And it is also likely that Netanyahu thought any action by Hamas would not only be ineffectual but would also give him a good excuse to carry out military operations in Gaza, something which the IDF had done on half dozen occasions in the previous 20 years.
We’re no longer focused on the dire situation for Palestinians and their lack of aid, while Israel’s allies once again coalesce to support Israel. Escalation is the worse thing, unless you are Benjamin Netanyahu, who is feeling a reduction in pressure
That is the Socialist Workers position which it is trying to push on the pro Palestinian movement - that the Iranian attack was a win for Netanyahu.
I don't agree, I think their assessment is coloured by their strongly anti Iranian stance. The Iranians proved firstly that they are prepared to strike directly at Israel, secondly that if correctly planned their ballistic missiles can penetrate Israel's air defences, thirdly that they can hit specific targets, and fourthly this is still possible even with several other very powerful countries giving the Israelis vital help and support.
The 170 cheap one-way drones which overwhelmed Israeli air defences were nothing, Iran undoubtedly has thousands of them, and they certainly have plenty of ballistic missiles which are seen hitting their target one after the other.
For those reasons despite pledging to respond I very much doubt that Israel will strike directly at Iran again, and any strikes they carry out will be against Hezbollah, with which they are already engaging on a daily basis.
"Israel didn’t fund Hamas, but they did allow funds to reach Hamas, which is a subtle but important difference."
It's also a difference that's explicitly detailed in the various sources cited above by the people claiming that "Israel funded Hamas"!
Dyna-ti: more like 70 years old. At the time, of course, the Soviet Union was spending double what the US was on the military as a proportion of GDP, it was occupying the other half of Europe, and was engaged in genocide and transportation of entire national populations within its borders: the Chechens, the Koreans, the Volga Germans, the Jews. (And was wildly anti-Semitic, to bring us full circle).
https://www.lambiek.net/artists/g/ganf_yuliy.htm
For those reasons despite pledging to respond I very much doubt that Israel will strike directly at Iran again, and any strikes they carry out will be against Hezbollah, with which they are already engaging on a daily basis.
Not forgetting the ongoing Israeli strategy of intercepting aid convoys sent in to alleviate the situation Israel's policy has created in Gaza
The intercept article also doesn't point out that the strategy is failing miserably :
"After narrowly backing Israel’s military action in Gaza in November, Americans now oppose the campaign by a solid margin. Fifty-five percent currently disapprove of Israel’s actions, while 36% approve."
https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx
36% support for Israeli military action in Gaza is an astonishingly low figure from the United States public, especially when you consider the level of anti-Hamas and anti-Muslim rhetoric they are exposed to on a daily basis.
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation of how the October incursion by Hamas into Israel was executed with virtually no initial resistance?
Complacency/hubris played a large part but Oct 7th was also the morning after the last day of Sukkot, a week long religious observance/holiday. Most soldiers were at home with their families.
Posted 5 hours ago
The Times of Israel reported that two Commando Divisions of troops were removed from the border days before the attack, and the Lookout towers manned by the female Troops were reporting that there was increased activity around the border fence for weeks leading up to the attack but were ignored.
Times Of Israel - Removal of Troops days before Oct 7th attack
Another Times of Israel report that I finally found in my reading list
For years Netanyahu propped up Hamas - Now its blown up in our face
@somafunk article about withdrawal of troops reads to me like journalists really fishing for a story. I think it's trying to post-facto link routine (re)deployments with - if not outright dereliction, then something close to it when it looks like just co-incidence. That the top brass were briefed about possible incursions and that intelligence didn't reach the operational level comes as zero surprise to me.
I will say though the levels of really interesting stuff (articles, you tubes, blogs and substacks) from all sorts of sources that folks on the thread have bought to the table have genuinely had an influence on my thinking about this conflict.
Thanks all.
it was more to highlight the fact that the Israeli government/IDF redeployed the units to back up and provide cover for the settlers in the West Bank, it was a rather unusual move to redeploy the border troops as there were a number of reports filed from the troops themselves that there was increased activity around the area and the unit commander was uneasy at the redeployment, I’ll have a hunt through my reading list and find the article
Latest UN report on the situation in Gaza has just been published, a long but detailed and sobering 48 page report on what is urgently needed.
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs report on Gaza
I have absolutely no issues with that, as long as Netanyahu does not expect the bigger boys to back him up in his schoolyard fight
…reads to me like journalists really fishing for a story
The same looks true of the ‘Hamas is Israel’s “creation”’ article.
The thrust of it seems to be that Israel didn’t crack down on Hamas’ founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, and Islamists in general, in the late 70s.
But in the 70s Yassin was running a charity proving things like medical care and youth clubs and didn’t form Hamas until the late 80s. As the article acknowledges later, there was no reason to go after someone who at the time was ‘100% peaceful towards Israel.’
The article just doesn’t support the headline.
didn’t form Hamas until the late 80s
Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was arrested in 1984 and sentenced to 13 years imprisonment for illegal possession of arms, the establishment of a military organization and calling for the annihilation of Israel.
As the article acknowledges later, there was no reason to go after someone who at the time was ‘100% peaceful towards Israel.’
So why on earth are you disputing that Israel helped the rise of Hamas then?
When the United States armed Osama bin Laden and the CIA established his training camps they had no reason to believe that he would eventually turn against them**
Does this prove that the United States did not help Osama bin Laden??
Western strategies (obviously I include Israel) of the last 40 years in the Middle East have generally backfired. Which suggests that huge blunders have been made!
** Actually if they had looked beyond short-term gain all the evidence was actually there. Greed and immediate gain is what drives the United States/West. Look also at the sub-prime crisis for an insight into that typical mindset and how ringing bells are ignored.
"The thrust of it seems to be that Israel didn’t crack down on Hamas’ founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, and Islamists in general, in the late 70s"
No, I think that is too much of a stretch. It's clear that Israel pursued a short time, divide and conquer approach where they were happy to see Hamas grow in influence and challenge Fatah in the earlier years.
It's also clear that Israel tried an approach of "once they have the boring burdens of being in government, they'll be more restrained" with Hamas, and allowed them to be funded by Qatar with the approval of Hamas leaders in Doha. Hamas spending years spending those funds on weapons and tunnels instead of social welfare, and the pursuit of an apocalyptic "bring it on" military strategy against Israel, seems to have come as a surprise to Israel, Hamas's formal leadership and Qatar alike.
Meanwhile - weird to see Saudi complaining that Iran is precipitating all this because they want to frustrate Saudi-Israel normalisation. You wouldn't have expected to hear that 15 years ago!
Engagement through back channels, and allowing other states to support them in non-military ways, is how governments attempt to deal with groups with both political and terrorist intentions, in the hope that they then favour the political in a peaceful process. Israel did not “create” Hamas, it had to deal with it. There are parallels in all attempts (successful or otherwise) to deal with terrorism through peaceful means. The alternative is going after them militarily, and the senseless deaths that come along with that. Something that needs avoiding (as the last six months make all to clear).
Reassuring to know governments are so warm and cuddly...
On that basis, I'm happy to forget the long history of covert arms supply to some very iffy causes, invasion and attrocities committed by Israel's main supporters!
At this rate, perhaps we could come to appreciate the positive benefits brought to society by apartheid and Israel's secret nuclear weapons programme, not to mention Israel's brave stance on keeping do-gooders at bay:
Israel is not party to:
The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR)
Biological & Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC)
Intl Criminal Court (ICC)
Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM)
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)
But despite being a heavily armed colonial apartheid nation who continue to violently remove families from their homeland they are thankfully a democracy, promoting freedom
So why on earth are you disputing that Israel helped the rise of Hamas then?
I’m disputing the far-fetched claim that ‘Hamas is Israel’s “creation”’, which isn’t borne out by the article.
Here’s part of the section you quoted:
“Israel cooperated with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas.”
As you say, Israel imprisoned Yassin in 1984 when he was found with weapons (still before he founded Hamas) so they clearly weren’t cooperating with him then. What the article is talking about is before then, when Yassin was running a charity recognised by Israel.
Not arresting people running charities is a good thing, right? It hardly implies responsibility for creating what Yassin went on to do a decade later after he was released from prison.
To PCMA’s point
“It’s clear that Israel pursued a short time, divide and conquer approach…”
More like this, rather than claims of creating or funding them. There’s enough to discuss without inventing things.
Meanwhile – weird to see Saudi complaining that Iran is precipitating all this because they want to frustrate Saudi-Israel normalisation. You wouldn’t have expected to hear that 15 years ago!
Truly!
So when it comes to Israel funding Hamas, we're clear that Israel never funded Hamas then...
OK, got it
https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1711329340804186619
Netanyahu will say and do anything to stay in power.
The record clearly shows that.
His 'loyalty' is to himself - not Israel, not middle Eastern peace; he is egotistical and power mad.