Iran - Israel - Gaza Conflict

[73 Reds]

15 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Who is cutting off the supplies to the Palestinians in Gaza??

 

It's Hamas. 

 

And you believe UNRWA??  

 

The same guys that had several UNRWA members that participated in the Oct 7th massacre.

The same guys that had hordes of weapons stored in their facilities for Hamas.

@cubsfan, I give you credit for at least trying; I don't engage wanton ignorance.  But I'll renew my request to have his original comment removed by a moderator; it went well beyond "offensive".

[mcliu]

1 hour ago, ourkid8 said:

 

I cannot even dignify a response when it comes to cutting off food, electricity, medical supplies on innocent ppl especially children - if you do not mind me asking what is the child death toll at?  I would recommend you look internally at yourself to see if you truly believe in what you wrote. 

 

a) Let me try to simplify it in terms you may understand - When Israel "pulled out" they kept control of Gaza's land boarders, sea waters, air and maintained population registry.  If you are born in Gaza, you need to register with Israel. Do you really really believe there was no Israeli occupation? Come on, let's stop insulting ppl's intelligence.       

All those kids would be alive if your boy Sinwar didn't launch his idiotic attack to rape/murder/kidnap thousands of Israeli civilians including women and children and then hide his whole army and military infrastructure underneath Palestinian civilians.

 

All your Hamas talking points have been refuted by various members on this message board and you have yet to provide a shred of evidence to the contrary.

 

Seems pretty pointless to continue this conversation.

[cubsfan]

In regards to schools, hospitals, charities (UNWRA), churches, mosques...

 

For the "uninformed" this is worth the read about war crimes (Geneva Convention):

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/17/can-hospitals-be-military-targets-international-law-israel-gaza-al-shifa

 

Philip-Gay said that “if a civilian hospital is used for acts harmful to the enemy, that is the legal term used”, the hospital can lose its protected status under international law and be considered a legitimate target. Nevertheless, if there is doubt as to whether a hospital is a military objective or being used for acts harmful to the enemy, the presumption, under international humanitarian law, is that it is not.

[Dinar]

1 hour ago, ourkid8 said:

 

Simple example, if you were born in NY and had to register with a foreign country would you say you are occupied or not occupied? ICJ says gaza is occupied, this should be the end of the discussion. 

 

https://www.gov.il/en/Departments/units/population_registrar_unit

 

You just lie.  a) You stated that Israel controlled Gaza's borders, when challenged on showing proof that Israel controlled Gaza's border with Egypt say on October 6th 2023, you provided none and ignored the question. b) You stated that Israel required all people born in Gaza to register with Israeli authorities.  When challenged you provided the link that does contradicts your assertion.  It requires registry if someone wants to enter Israel.  It does not require someone who wants to stay in Gaza strip or go anywhere but Israel to register!  Every country requires you to register before you can enter it, and each country can and does set whatever requirements it wants.  For instance, a Jew cannot enter Saudi Arabia.   

[Xerxes]

8 minutes ago, Dinar said:

 Every country requires you to register before you can enter it, and each country can and does set whatever requirements it wants.  For instance, a Jew cannot enter Saudi Arabia.   

yes. Correct. 
 

but on your example, I don’t think a Saudi Visa is issued based on religion but based on nationality.  
 

Neither Egypt, Israel or say Iran make the eligible e-visa list for tourism for KSA. 
 

And i fact, there was no tourism just a few years ago for almost all pf these countries in Saudi Arabia. 
 

[Xerxes]

3 hours ago, cubsfan said:

Israel is the ONLY country in the world where the army (IDF) issues WARNINGS to civilians to evacuate BEFORE they take out a building. I have never seen this done - and of course - it's much to their military disadvantage to do so. The IDF has take great pains to limit civilian casualties.

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/truman-leaflets/

 

See link. If it actually helps or not, I wouldn’t know.

 

[cubsfan]

8 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/truman-leaflets/

 

See link. If it actually helps or not, I wouldn’t know.

 

 

I knew you would fact-check me!

 

Have a nice weekend @Xerxes!

[Xerxes]

3 hours ago, cubsfan said:

And a terrorist government (Hamas) has NO regard for the life the Palestinian civilians.

Who in the world would DELIBERATELY place military targets beneath civilian hospitals and

suppose the Eastern part of Ukraine is wholly occupied by Russia post-armistice in 2025. And the war formally is paused for several years. 
 

do you think the Ukrainian partisans and terrorists whatever you might want to call them that disagree with the armistice and the new status quo, and just want to get after Russians (civilian and military) would put an “X” on their military equipment in open view … or would they try to hide those like cowards in populated area ?

 

what would you do ?

 

 

PS:  this is not a far fetched scenario. This could happen if Trump does get elected. War may actually get paused and parties retrenched. 

Edited October 24 by Xerxes

[Xerxes]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

 

I knew you would fact-check me!

 

Have a nice weekend @Xerxes!

likewise sir. 
one more quiz question for you above :

Edited October 24 by Xerxes

[cubsfan]

48 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

suppose the Eastern part of Ukraine is wholly occupied by Russia post-armistice in 2025. And the war formally is paused for several years. 
 

do you think the Ukrainian partisans and terrorists whatever you might want to call them that disagree with the armistice and the new status quo, and just want to get after Russians (civilian and military) would put an “X” on their military equipment in open view … or would they try to hide those like cowards in populated area ?

 

what would you do ?

 

 

PS:  this is not a far fetched scenario. This could happen if Trump does get elected. War may actually get paused and parties retrenched. 

 

It's a perfectly reasonable scenario. IF I understand you - there is going to be a penalty extracted from the Ukrainian partisans that forcibly use Ukrainian human shields, once they start attacking Russians.

 

If you use human shields you are committing a war crime.

[Xerxes]

2 hours ago, cubsfan said:

 

It's a perfectly reasonable scenario. IF I understand you - there is going to be a penalty extracted from the Ukrainian partisans that forcibly use Ukrainian human shields, once they start attacking Russians.

 

If you use human shields you are committing a war crime.

100% correct on war crimes.
 

And what is more that would also constitute conducting terrorism against the occupying state in eastern Ukraine, whether or not the (partisans) use human shield. And supporting powers of those partisans would be states sponsoring terrorism.

 

I bet French resistance hid weapons in civilian areas. No partisan is ever going to put an “X” on their assets for a far more powerful adversary to simply take them out.  

 

I am not trying to trap you with arguments. Just that will be the next chapter in eastern Ukraine when the formal hostilities ends through an armistice. 
 

—- 

 

Hamas and Hizbollah mistake was not their tactics in of itself. Those tactics were sealed the moment they chose to continue to be “resistance” entity for whatever ideological / nationalist reasons and go toe to toe with a far more powerful adversary. 

 

Their (Hamas and Hizbollah) mistake was their hubris in 2006 or whenever Israel withdraw, to continue  with their “resistance” paths. 

 

Let’s hope the same hubris is not going to take the Israeli leadership too far 
 

 
 

 

[mcliu]

39 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

100% correct on war crimes.
 

And what is more that would also constitute conducting terrorism against the occupying state in eastern Ukraine, whether or not the (partisans) use human shield. And supporting powers of those partisans would be states sponsoring terrorism.

 

I bet French resistance hid weapons in civilian areas. No partisan is ever going to put an “X” on their assets for a far more powerful adversary to simply take them out.  

 

I am not trying to trap you with arguments. Just that will be the next chapter in eastern Ukraine when the formal hostilities ends through an armistice. 
 

—- 

 

Hamas and Hizbollah mistake was not their tactics in of itself. Those tactics were sealed the moment they chose to continue to be “resistance” entity for whatever ideological / nationalist reasons and go toe to toe with a far more powerful adversary. 

 

Their (Hamas and Hizbollah) mistake was their hubris in 2006 or whenever Israel withdraw, to continue  with their “resistance” paths. 

 

Let’s hope the same hubris is not going to take the Israeli leadership too far 
 

 
 

 

Hamas’ tactics is even more sinister than your examples because they’re trying to maximize Palestinian casualties amongst the weak and vulnerable in order to garner global outrage against Israel.

[Xerxes]

25 minutes ago, mcliu said:

Hamas’ tactics is even more sinister than your examples because they’re trying to maximize Palestinian casualties amongst the weak and vulnerable in order to garner global outrage against Israel.

 

Yes. They are not exactly noble rebels nor awe-inspiring in their dark deeds. 
 

Though if I had to guess the 2024 global outrage has been a “bonus” for Hamas. But not the original intent.
 

The original intent would have been to derail the Saudi-Israeli normalization that was so close … for now the extremists in Tel Aviv have been unleashed as well as the moderate pro-Abraham leaders in Arab countries shamed …., that means no normalization with the Kingdom for the time being. 

[cubsfan]

I'm not feeling trapped at all. And I totally agree.

These are all perfectly legitimate questions.

 

After all, war should always be a last resort - the very last.  

 

But a terrorist group or resistance is responsible for it's actions. 

 

Which gets you to the major point: IF the resistance group is heads and tails weaker than the opponent - then they have no business taking action or employing violence. Everyone knows they were predestined to lose. They simply could not win. So you are entering into loss of life for nothing. You are committing suicide for your group or followers. In this case, the total destruction of Gaza.

 

The difference with Israel vs Hamas (or Hezbollah) is that the terrorists never counted on Israel to

crush them with overwhelming force. There is NO way they could EVER win this war. But they rolled the dice.

 

They gambled with the lives of their people, for whom they had no regard if Israel finally said "enough, never again". 

 

Edited October 25 by cubsfan

[Spekulatius]

Partisans always use human shields, that’s their modus operandi. That is also why they are generally treated differently than regular soldiers. Hamas and Hezbollah even less so are not Partisans. They have embedded themselves into the population prior to the open outbreak of hostilities.

 

I am not sure why the population in Lebanon and the government let this subversion be. If Hezbollah creates their own command bunker beneath the hospital, if you work there, you know what his happening and what may happen if that goes sideways. So Hezbollah clearly subverted the Lebanon state since I assume that not everyone living in Lebanon sides with Hezbollah unlike Gaza, where the vast majority of people sides with Hamas.

 

Israel may do Lebanon and the people there a favor in the long run, if they can break that de facto control that Hezbollah has but maybe I just drink my own cool aid here. Thats the only way for Israel to win this engagement but thats easier said than done. Foreign occupiers generally have a poor track record of fixing things.

Edited October 25 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

5 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Partisans always use human shields, that’s their modus operandi. That is also why they are generally treated differently than regular soldiers. Hamas and Hezbollah even less so are not Partisans. They have embedded themselves into the population prior to the open outbreak of hostilities.

There are no rules to these things …. as outbreak of hostilities is a matter of perspective. The enemy gets a vote too … 

 

Vichy France signed the instrument of surrender in 1940. So as far as the French were concerned the war has ended. To your point …. But DeGaullle felt differently, so did the hostility ceased or not ..
 

That said I think the closer analogy is probably Viet Cong, which were the rebranded Viet Minh, … and the resistance in south east Asia was probably building its hidden infrastructure assets for decades prior to the Tonkin gulf incident etc etc 

 

PS:  we in the West may think Tonkin gulf incident as the beginning of the “flare up”, but for the adversary we were there for decades 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 25 by Xerxes

[Dinar]

57 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

There are no rules to these things …. as outbreak of hostilities is a matter of perspective. The enemy gets a vote too … 

 

Vichy France signed the instrument of surrender in 1940. So as far as the French were concerned the war has ended. To your point …. But DeGaullle felt differently, so did the hostility ceased or not ..
 

That said I think the closer analogy is probably Viet Cong, which were the rebranded Viet Minh, … and the resistance in south east Asia was probably building its hidden infrastructure assets for decades prior to the Tonkin gulf incident etc etc 

 

PS:  we in the West may think Tonkin gulf incident as the beginning of the “flare up”, but for the adversary we were there for decades 

 

 

 

 

 

Common, you know that it was all directed, financed, advised  supplied from Moscow and Peking.  Soviet air force pilots fought in Vietnam.  It is such a pity that Truman did not let MacArthur nuke Chinese army crossing the Yalu river.  There would be no North Korea today, with its constant threats to the West globally.  

[Xerxes]

1 hour ago, Dinar said:

Common, you know that it was all directed, financed, advised  supplied from Moscow and Peking.  Soviet air force pilots fought in Vietnam.  It is such a pity that Truman did not let MacArthur nuke Chinese army crossing the Yalu river.  There would be no North Korea today, with its constant threats to the West globally.  

Different things:

 

Korea was a communist project. Korean War was largely Mao’ war after Nov 1950 … the communist block had hand-picked the Kim Dynasty. 

 

Not so with Vietnam. It is Ho Chi Minh that found communism (in Paris) as a vehicle to throw off European colonial yoke off his people. He was above all a nationalist. He was no Soviet project and definitely not a Mao’ protege, with whose regime he fought two bloody wars in the 1980s. 
 

The Soviet didn’t direct the war in Hanoi no more than Washington DC is not directing Israel War in Gaza. 

 

 

 

Edited October 25 by Xerxes

[adesigar]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-military-human-shields.html

[Eng12345]

8 hours ago, Dinar said:

Common, you know that it was all directed, financed, advised  supplied from Moscow and Peking.  Soviet air force pilots fought in Vietnam.  It is such a pity that Truman did not let MacArthur nuke Chinese army crossing the Yalu river.  There would be no North Korea today, with its constant threats to the West globally.  

This is a crazy take. Restraint has a purpose. 
 

Think about how so many later Soviet us conflicts would have ended had Truman not taken the stance he had taken. We would be in a nuclear hell scape.

[Sweet]

Users on Twitter are reporting air strikes on Iran - reports were up 20 mins ago.

No major news out letting reporting it yet.

[Sweet]

Checking trending.  Multitude of sources.  Sorry, I don’t really know who is reputable otherwise I’d link.  Lot of reports though giving some substance to it.

 

Edited October 25 by Sweet

[Sweet]

 

CNN 

 

NYT too, think they broke it first of the major outlets.

Edited October 25 by Sweet

[Dinar]

1 hour ago, Eng12345 said:

This is a crazy take. Restraint has a purpose. 
 

Think about how so many later Soviet us conflicts would have ended had Truman not taken the stance he had taken. We would be in a nuclear hell scape.

None.  Soviet leaders liked their perks.  Communists only understand force.

[Xerxes]

17 minutes ago, Dinar said:

None.  Soviet leaders liked their perks.  Communists only understand force.

I would take a troublesome little Kim over normalization of using nuclear weapons. 
 

The post-1945 nuclear taboo has been a blessing.
 

And that blessing is compounded by the longevity since last it was used in war.