Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Any excuse for the “preemptive first strike” Israel don’t want any part of a US Iran deal… keeping them both on war ready is in Israel best interest! That’s why they scuppered the JCPOA agreement " There wouldn't be anything preemptive about it. It would be an attack to remove a capability, not in anticipation of an imminent attack. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Any excuse for the “preemptive first strike” Israel don’t want any part of a US Iran deal… keeping them both on war ready is in Israel best interest! That’s why they scuppered the JCPOA agreement There wouldn't be anything preemptive about it. It would be an attack to remove a capability, not in anticipation of an imminent attack." Then you argue any Middle Eastern state would be justified in attacking Israel’s nuclear facilities…. Right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Any excuse for the “preemptive first strike” Israel don’t want any part of a US Iran deal… keeping them both on war ready is in Israel best interest! That’s why they scuppered the JCPOA agreement There wouldn't be anything preemptive about it. It would be an attack to remove a capability, not in anticipation of an imminent attack. Then you argue any Middle Eastern state would be justified in attacking Israel’s nuclear facilities…. Right? " That depends on your point of view, and whom you want to dominate the region. Was there any mention of justification, right or wrong? That gets really subjective and messy. It would be equally understandable for Israel to remove Iran's nuclear capability and for Iran to remove Israel's capability, from the point of view of each country. Perhaps more so if one country declared that the other shouldn't exist, but generally on par. Which view you support depends on many personal factors, or geopolitical factors, in the case of governments. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Any excuse for the “preemptive first strike” Israel don’t want any part of a US Iran deal… keeping them both on war ready is in Israel best interest! That’s why they scuppered the JCPOA agreement There wouldn't be anything preemptive about it. It would be an attack to remove a capability, not in anticipation of an imminent attack. Then you argue any Middle Eastern state would be justified in attacking Israel’s nuclear facilities…. Right? That depends on your point of view, and whom you want to dominate the region. Was there any mention of justification, right or wrong? That gets really subjective and messy. It would be equally understandable for Israel to remove Iran's nuclear capability and for Iran to remove Israel's capability, from the point of view of each country. Perhaps more so if one country declared that the other shouldn't exist, but generally on par. Which view you support depends on many personal factors, or geopolitical factors, in the case of governments." Israel always has some justification for attacking its neighbours in preemptive first strikes case in point… after Syria’s change of regime, where the rest of the world’s response was “how can we help you now” Israel’s response was to attack and take out the Syrian air force! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Israel always has some justification for attacking its neighbours in preemptive first strikes case in point… after Syria’s change of regime, where the rest of the world’s response was “how can we help you now” Israel’s response was to attack and take out the Syrian air force! " You'd hope that there would be some justification for first strikes, right? Otherwise it would just be brutal murder and destruction. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keep in mind the entities telling us about Iran's nuclear testing are the same entities that tried to deflect Covid coming from a Chinese lab." BBC News - Global watchdog finds Iran failing to meet nuclear obligations https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3v6w2qr12o 
The IAEA was giving press releases on COVID? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keep in mind the entities telling us about Iran's nuclear testing are the same entities that tried to deflect Covid coming from a Chinese lab." Anybody else want a tin foil hat, I can knock them up to order no problem, just give us a shout? Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The interesting thing is that the Iranians and the Americans were still having nuclear talks… the 6th round was supposed to happen this weekend! so this is a direct attempt to scupper those Like I said… Israeli self interest " Do you really believe that this was not fully coordinated with the USA, and probably a few other governments? You must know that the talks broke down ages ago and have been a smokescreen while Iran was racing to the finish line, after which talks would be moot. Or at least that would have been the belief or narrative within the corridors of power. It might be the wrong thing to do (or the right thing), but this isn't an attempt to scupper talks. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Are these preparations performative and theatrical, or common sense preparations for something real?" The talks were performative theatre. The preparations were real. 61 days after Trump's 60 day deadline, the threat was carried out, after Iran was lulled into a false sense of complacency. Interesting. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s initial attack on Iran. This is interesting as Trump desires a close relationship with the Saudi’s. Trump’s first officially scheduled international visit was to Saudi Arabia. " Saudi is extremely happy with this. The statement reads like a bland form letter. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The interesting thing is that the Iranians and the Americans were still having nuclear talks… the 6th round was supposed to happen this weekend! so this is a direct attempt to scupper those Like I said… Israeli self interest " Not sure about 'self interest'. Do any of us benefit from a nuclear capable Iran? I think we can ALL sleep more soundly if their nuclear programme is smashed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel’s army said Iran fired around 100 drones towards it in response to Israel’s overnight strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and military sites. Netanyahu said Israel’s attack on Iran would continue on Iran for as many days as it takes. Israel has closed its airpspace and declared a state of emergency. Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s initial attack on Iran. This is interesting as Trump desires a close relationship with the Saudi’s. Trump’s first officially scheduled international visit was to Saudi Arabia. " And both Saudi Arabia and Jordan assisted in shooting down all 100 drones before they got Israel (as well as allowing other allied nations access to airspace). Nobody wants to get involved in a war with Iran, but the whole region (outside of Iranian sphere of influence) is very happy not to have a nuclear-armed Iran. Official statements and actual sentiment/actions are two different things in this game. Much like the "distancing" between the USA and Israel, or the diplomatic schedule between the USA and Iran. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran says it will respond forcefully and that the “end of this story will be written by Iran’s hand”. Laughable, it’s clear to all what happens if you lay the gauntlet to Israel. " Iran are the protagonists and are now paying the price of that meddling and funding of proxies that they thought would keep them one step removed! Israel are going to break the whole proxy supply chain top to bottom and lets be honest, if the Iranian regime falls too, they have done the world a huge favour. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel’s army said Iran fired around 100 drones towards it in response to Israel’s overnight strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and military sites. Netanyahu said Israel’s attack on Iran would continue on Iran for as many days as it takes. Israel has closed its airpspace and declared a state of emergency. Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s initial attack on Iran. This is interesting as Trump desires a close relationship with the Saudi’s. Trump’s first officially scheduled international visit was to Saudi Arabia. And both Saudi Arabia and Jordan assisted in shooting down all 100 drones before they got Israel (as well as allowing other allied nations access to airspace). Nobody wants to get involved in a war with Iran, but the whole region (outside of Iranian sphere of influence) is very happy not to have a nuclear-armed Iran. Official statements and actual sentiment/actions are two different things in this game. Much like the "distancing" between the USA and Israel, or the diplomatic schedule between the USA and Iran." Last time was a combination of the willing when Israel was in a much better global standing… I wonder how many of them that helped shoot them down last time will help this time. For example France and the uk were part of the collation.. I don’t think they will be this time the drones are always sent first.. cause for them it’s a 6 hr journey… the interesting bit is going to be how many ballistic Iran launches to coincide with the drone’s arrival | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel's military actions against Iran and Hezbollah in the last year have been an extraordinary success. Most of the top military leadership of both eliminated 👏. " The pager attack was off the scale. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel’s army said Iran fired around 100 drones towards it in response to Israel’s overnight strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and military sites. Netanyahu said Israel’s attack on Iran would continue on Iran for as many days as it takes. Israel has closed its airpspace and declared a state of emergency. Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s initial attack on Iran. This is interesting as Trump desires a close relationship with the Saudi’s. Trump’s first officially scheduled international visit was to Saudi Arabia. And both Saudi Arabia and Jordan assisted in shooting down all 100 drones before they got Israel (as well as allowing other allied nations access to airspace). Nobody wants to get involved in a war with Iran, but the whole region (outside of Iranian sphere of influence) is very happy not to have a nuclear-armed Iran. Official statements and actual sentiment/actions are two different things in this game. Much like the "distancing" between the USA and Israel, or the diplomatic schedule between the USA and Iran. Last time was a combination of the willing when Israel was in a much better global standing… I wonder how many of them that helped shoot them down last time will help this time. For example France and the uk were part of the collation.. I don’t think they will be this time the drones are always sent first.. cause for them it’s a 6 hr journey… the interesting bit is going to be how many ballistic Iran launches to coincide with the drone’s arrival " I’d more more worried what comes back from Israel | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel's military actions against Iran and Hezbollah in the last year have been an extraordinary success. Most of the top military leadership of both eliminated 👏. The pager attack was off the scale. " Yes. But in my view Entebbe rescue tops everything | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Last time was a combination of the willing when Israel was in a much better global standing… I wonder how many of them that helped shoot them down last time will help this time. For example France and the uk were part of the collation.. I don’t think they will be this time " My enemy's enemy... The UK has mobilised planes from Cyprus. Even Saudi and Jordan got in on the action (whether or not they will officially promote this is another story). Israel is in the diplomatic doghouse, but as an ally. Don't mistake harsh words and sanctions for a real fracture... The IDF are still today undergoing training in the UK, although it took a formal information request for the UK to publicly about it. Israel's values are, at their core, aligned with Western values, however much their actions cause horror and alarm. More so than, say, Jordan or Egypt. " the drones are always sent first.. cause for them it’s a 6 hr journey… the interesting bit is going to be how many ballistic Iran launches to coincide with the drone’s arrival " Many of the Western missile silos were damaged or destroyed. Mostly from Iranian soil, by mossad prepared drones/weapons. And Hezbollah have just announced that they will not attack Israel in this engagement. There will be retaliation, but it won't be the same as last time. And Israel is not giving them time to prepare, they will relentlessly keep hitting Iran until objectives are met. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"it's safe to say that this has been caused in it's entirety by Taco man withdrawing from the nuclear agreement. Now he's left america as a mere husk of it's former self on the world stage .... weak, powerless and corrupt. " And today he’s threatening more attacks | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. " Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used." In the subcontinent both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. I truly believe that has prevented any drawn out serious conflict between the two. I believe the same will happen here if Iran gets them. Pakistan and India regularly engage in the same rhetoric. …also there is one country that is already in the process of wiping a nearby ethnicity off the map here and it isn't Iran. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"it's safe to say that this has been caused in it's entirety by Taco man withdrawing from the nuclear agreement. Now he's left america as a mere husk of it's former self on the world stage .... weak, powerless and corrupt. And today he’s threatening more attacks " and tomorrow .... a return to being a sniveling shit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Apparently Joe Biden has offered to fly to Iraq to negotiate a peace deal." With Saddam Hussein? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used. In the subcontinent both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. I truly believe that has prevented any drawn out serious conflict between the two. I believe the same will happen here if Iran gets them. Pakistan and India regularly engage in the same rhetoric. …also there is one country that is already in the process of wiping a nearby ethnicity off the map here and it isn't Iran." If I'm reading this correctly, you are for Iran having nuclear weapons? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used. In the subcontinent both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. I truly believe that has prevented any drawn out serious conflict between the two. I believe the same will happen here if Iran gets them. Pakistan and India regularly engage in the same rhetoric. …also there is one country that is already in the process of wiping a nearby ethnicity off the map here and it isn't Iran. If I'm reading this correctly, you are for Iran having nuclear weapons? " Am not in favour of more nations having nukes. But Libya was a warning to any nation that giving up a nuke programme doesn't guarantee the west won't come after you. If anything that, and North Korea is a lesson that getting nukes is the best way to stop foreign government trying to impose regime change in your country. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel's military actions against Iran and Hezbollah in the last year have been an extraordinary success. Most of the top military leadership of both eliminated 👏. " This  . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used. In the subcontinent both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. I truly believe that has prevented any drawn out serious conflict between the two. I believe the same will happen here if Iran gets them. Pakistan and India regularly engage in the same rhetoric. …also there is one country that is already in the process of wiping a nearby ethnicity off the map here and it isn't Iran. If I'm reading this correctly, you are for Iran having nuclear weapons? " Not really, but there is a certain inevitability about it anyway isn’t there? The globe doesn’t fight with sticks & stones anymore. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The UK has mobilised planes from Cyprus. " in what capacity are you claiming that the RAF have been 'mobilised' exactly? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not a chance the Iranians haven’t got most of their nuclear stuff in deep underground bunkers. They knew this was in the making for years. Iran removed monitoring in 2024, leaving a feeling they are close. They are not going to be allowed to build a nuclear capability, it would be used. In the subcontinent both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. I truly believe that has prevented any drawn out serious conflict between the two. I believe the same will happen here if Iran gets them. Pakistan and India regularly engage in the same rhetoric. …also there is one country that is already in the process of wiping a nearby ethnicity off the map here and it isn't Iran. If I'm reading this correctly, you are for Iran having nuclear weapons? Not really, but there is a certain inevitability about it anyway isn’t there? The globe doesn’t fight with sticks & stones anymore. " If you consider the position as any leader in the West, Iran having nuclear capabilities is a larger threat than Russia or China. From that perspective the focus would be on bringing down the regime, that hasn't worked yet. Failing that destroy their capabilities. It would never be a decision that is taken lightly or is it a decision that would be ignored. Military leaders and security services would be leaning heavily into these decisions too making it very difficult to ignore. In my opinion, the sooner the facilities are taken out the better. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The UK has mobilised planes from Cyprus. in what capacity are you claiming that the RAF have been 'mobilised' exactly?" That was an incorrect claim, according to the official statement from the UK government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran hasn’t attacked anyone in recent times" They have torn up Yemen and caused more deaths through starvation than Israel has killed in Gaza in total. They have attacked Israel from Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq... Not to mention hundreds of missiles into Israel. You clearly don't believe that proxy attacks are attacks. They are. " however the rabid dog that is Israel has attacked at least four countries this year. " Since you must be counting Lebanon and Yemen, then those were direct retaliation for otherwise unprovoked attacks. But then you say that Iran had not attacked anyone (they did, in retaliation). Make up your mind. " Remind me again who has a large nuclear arsenal" ...and who has never used it, or vowed to wipe any country off the map, unlike Iran? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel is a rogue state at this point. I don't really need pages on Iran and how it's not the best regime in the world (we all know that) but what Israel is doing is unilaterally setting a region on fire. Iran now owes them two responses if you're keeping score." USA supplying all the munitions for this and taco says ‘more to come, a lot more’ | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel has used lawful means against a threat, a pre empetive strike used by every country who have been influenced by or use a common law judicial system, the uk government should be agreeing with Israels lawful action." Laughable Starmer and Lammy calling for de escalation. RAF has run 518 surveillance sortees over Gaza for the IDF to bomb civilian targets. Our taxes paid for this. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As for Iran being a paper tiger incapable of anything like a ‘worthy’ response, I wouldn’t be 100% sure. People forget that they had a missile, ballistic, which missed Mossad HQ by about 20 meters. If they tripled the number of rockets they fired and calibrated them based on the last lot there's not one high profile target in Israel which they cannot, in theory, destroy. " Any Iranian attack of significance and Israel with USA backing will turn Tehran into Gaza. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As for Iran being a paper tiger incapable of anything like a ‘worthy’ response" Who would say that? There's a reason that Israel had cancelled everything from schools to prayer groups and given instructions for missile strikes. The government accepts that there might well be a real price to pay for this. Iran is no Yemen. They are a serious threat to Israel, not a paper tiger. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel has used lawful means against a threat, a pre empetive strike used by every country who have been influenced by or use a common law judicial system, the uk government should be agreeing with Israels lawful action. Laughable Starmer and Lammy calling for de escalation. RAF has run 518 surveillance sortees over Gaza for the IDF to bomb civilian targets. Our taxes paid for this. " The RAF shouldn’t be involved at all. The UK owes Israel nothing. Israel were selling arms to the Argentinians during the Falklands ffs. ‘Ally’ my backside. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel has used lawful means against a threat, a pre empetive strike used by every country who have been influenced by or use a common law judicial system, the uk government should be agreeing with Israels lawful action. Laughable Starmer and Lammy calling for de escalation. RAF has run 518 surveillance sortees over Gaza for the IDF to bomb civilian targets. Our taxes paid for this. The RAF shouldn’t be involved at all. The UK owes Israel nothing. Israel were selling arms to the Argentinians during the Falklands ffs. ‘Ally’ my backside." Declassified UK web and you tube Uk complicit in war crimes ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. Article 39 The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security. Article 41 The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations. Article 42 Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations. Article 51 Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As for Iran being a paper tiger incapable of anything like a ‘worthy’ response, I wouldn’t be 100% sure. People forget that they had a missile, ballistic, which missed Mossad HQ by about 20 meters. If they tripled the number of rockets they fired and calibrated them based on the last lot there's not one high profile target in Israel which they cannot, in theory, destroy. Any Iranian attack of significance and Israel with USA backing will turn Tehran into Gaza. " as long as the raf keep there beaks out this time let iran and israel bomb each other into oblivion for all i care | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isreal go in for round 2…. Iran go ballistic.. literally.. looks like they have gotten at least 1 through in tel aviv " Wasting their time going up against Israel. They will get buried. Sounds like Trump has authorised Israel to use any force required | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isreal go in for round 2…. Iran go ballistic.. literally.. looks like they have gotten at least 1 through in tel aviv Wasting their time going up against Israel. They will get buried. Sounds like Trump has authorised Israel to use any force required " oh i hope Israel come unstuck at some point and suffer mass casualties its only fair and right after allafter all the killing of civillians they have done its long overdue they suffer the same fate | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"oh i hope Israel come unstuck at some point and suffer mass casualties its only fair and right after allafter all the killing of civillians they have done its long overdue they suffer the same fate" And the hatred is real. And ugly. You want the guilty and innocent, the babies, women and men, to all suffer and die. Because you hope and feel hate. And yet you judge. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isreal go in for round 2…. Iran go ballistic.. literally.. looks like they have gotten at least 1 through in tel aviv Wasting their time going up against Israel. They will get buried. Sounds like Trump has authorised Israel to use any force required oh i hope Israel come unstuck at some point and suffer mass casualties its only fair and right after allafter all the killing of civillians they have done its long overdue they suffer the same fate" Have you thought about joining the Labour Party ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Israel has used lawful means against a threat, a pre empetive strike used by every country who have been influenced by or use a common law judicial system, the uk government should be agreeing with Israels lawful action. Laughable Starmer and Lammy calling for de escalation. RAF has run 518 surveillance sortees over Gaza for the IDF to bomb civilian targets. Our taxes paid for this. The RAF shouldn’t be involved at all. The UK owes Israel nothing. Israel were selling arms to the Argentinians during the Falklands ffs. ‘Ally’ my backside." The UK owes Israel nothing? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"oh i hope Israel come unstuck at some point and suffer mass casualties its only fair and right after allafter all the killing of civillians they have done its long overdue they suffer the same fate And the hatred is real. And ugly. You want the guilty and innocent, the babies, women and men, to all suffer and die. Because you hope and feel hate. And yet you judge." i dont give a flying one about people on either side, why would i support in or the other? Im english whats going on in the shithole that is the middle east should be none of our business hopefully both sides wipe each other out, better still turn israel gaza and the west bank to glass and none of them can fight about whos invisible friend gave them the land, yet again a load of god botherers dragging the rest of the world into there shit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isreal go in for round 2…. Iran go ballistic.. literally.. looks like they have gotten at least 1 through in tel aviv Wasting their time going up against Israel. They will get buried. Sounds like Trump has authorised Israel to use any force required oh i hope Israel come unstuck at some point and suffer mass casualties its only fair and right after allafter all the killing of civillians they have done its long overdue they suffer the same fate Have you thought about joining the Labour Party ?" why would i join the labour party? I give a fuck about england that it, isreal gaza iran lebenon and any other backwards religious nut jobs should be none of this countrys concern | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Bombardment of civilian areas crosses red line", Israel tells Iran. Some sublime irony right there." I spilt some perfectly good non alcoholic beer when I heard them say that The Israeli administration owes me one can of Guinness 0.0%  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow?" Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs." Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing." So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran now threatening strikes will target US, UK and French bases in the region if they prevent Iranian attacks on Israel. Not the de escalation Mr Lammy was asking for. " I can see the Iranian point… they aren’t stopping of shooting down missiles the Israelis are lobbing out.. especially since the Israelis are now saying “Tehran will burn!” It’s kinda picking a side… this is one of those where the jets should stay in Cyprus | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked." I think this is one of those times trump’s mouth will get the us in trouble… especially since Rubio was doing such a job of saying “us not involved us is not involved “ Bibi is playing Trump like a fiddle because it’s in Israel’s interest to draw in the us! Why would he not slather over thanking trump so much!!! This is why the UK and the French need to let this play out and stay out | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then." The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked. I think this is one of those times trump’s mouth will get the us in trouble… especially since Rubio was doing such a job of saying “us not involved us is not involved “ Bibi is playing Trump like a fiddle because it’s in Israel’s interest to draw in the us! Why would he not slather over thanking trump so much!!! This is why the UK and the French need to let this play out and stay out " 100% agree. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked." That’s not what Trump said over last couple of days. ‘Expect more, a lot more’ USA has supplied everything to destroy Gaza, over 100,000 tonnes of munitions. USA has given Israel the keys to its Middle East stock piles. And Blinken provided extra military support to aid the Gaza invasion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked. I think this is one of those times trump’s mouth will get the us in trouble… especially since Rubio was doing such a job of saying “us not involved us is not involved “ Bibi is playing Trump like a fiddle because it’s in Israel’s interest to draw in the us! Why would he not slather over thanking trump so much!!! This is why the UK and the French need to let this play out and stay out 100% agree. " Despite Lammy’s disingenuous comments he failed to mention the RAF sortees for Israel, 518 recorded at last count. Our taxes have been used to identify Gazan targets for Israel to bomb. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked. That’s not what Trump said over last couple of days. ‘Expect more, a lot more’ USA has supplied everything to destroy Gaza, over 100,000 tonnes of munitions. USA has given Israel the keys to its Middle East stock piles. And Blinken provided extra military support to aid the Gaza invasion. " Trump campaigned on pulling the US out of foreign wars. That is why his base is so angry now that he is being dragged in. Israel has an amazing hold on the psyche of the US government and they know it. They are like a spoilt child who knows they will get whatever they ask for - because they always do. It’s going to be interesting when Trump has to deal with the Israel lobby and his base who each want fundamentally different things - which one will give? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel." Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think Trump is spoiling for war. Large parts of the MAGA base are vehemently against it. He is being played by Israel. He can’t stop them and they know it - they are basically going to use his weakness/inability to deny them weaponry against him. They are going to push hard and then they know that America is going to be dragged into a war when they are attacked. That’s not what Trump said over last couple of days. ‘Expect more, a lot more’ USA has supplied everything to destroy Gaza, over 100,000 tonnes of munitions. USA has given Israel the keys to its Middle East stock piles. And Blinken provided extra military support to aid the Gaza invasion. Trump campaigned on pulling the US out of foreign wars. That is why his base is so angry now that he is being dragged in. Israel has an amazing hold on the psyche of the US government and they know it. They are like a spoilt child who knows they will get whatever they ask for - because they always do. It’s going to be interesting when Trump has to deal with the Israel lobby and his base who each want fundamentally different things - which one will give? " It would be a short sighted to walk away from the very distinct possibility of bringing down or damaging the Iranian regime, the opportunity may not present itself again for many years to come. Iran funded, trained and supported October 7th attacks. They are the enablers of proxy wars, terror networks, and an unstable Middle East. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. " This, israel is doing what the west dont dare to do, but want to do | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" It would be a short sighted to walk away from the very distinct possibility of bringing down or damaging the Iranian regime, the opportunity may not present itself again for many years to come. Iran funded, trained and supported October 7th attacks. They are the enablers of proxy wars, terror networks, and an unstable Middle East." I don’t disagree with that but it still has the very significant problem that his base don’t want to get involved. Trump has done enough mad things for us to be fairly sure that’s his primary goal is not to lose the adulation of his base. There is also the not insignificant issue of what will replace the regime when it goes? We all know what happens to power vacuums in the Middle East and the US has an abysmal record of managing those secondary effects. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. " Sure, but as I said, it’s up to the Iranians to rise up & do something about it. They have done it once, I’m sure they can do it again. We have plenty of examples of western led regime change & the unsatisfactory outcomes it can lead to. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. Sure, but as I said, it’s up to the Iranians to rise up & do something about it. They have done it once, I’m sure they can do it again. We have plenty of examples of western led regime change & the unsatisfactory outcomes it can lead to. " Do you know what happened the last time there was an uprising? They used live ammunition on the protestors, it was reported that over 500 people were killed. The deliberately blinded 120 people, according to a report by the UN. They closed down all communication channels to prevent news going in, out. They estimated up to 30000 were arrested. The put in place kangaroo courts and executed up to 800 people. A number of the executions being public or televised, according amnesty. This happened 3 years ago! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. " so a bit like the saudis then? Oh thats right the saudis sell us oil so the can execute there own people for minor things, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. so a bit like the saudis then? Oh thats right the saudis sell us oil so the can execute there own people for minor things, " Exactly. Western foreign policy is so full of sh1t. Double standards everywhere. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said." No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Exactly. Western foreign policy is so full of sh1t. Double standards everywhere." Starmer and Reeves just about to sign a trade deal with the middle east headchopping states. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins." Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans " Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x" How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s maybe worth nothing at this point that Israel has refused to acknowledge its own nuclear weapons, never mind agreeing to IAEA inspections (they're not an adherent member), so in the grand scheme of things it’s a little rich to put the burden of blame on Iran regarding its nuclear ambitions when its adversary refuses to humour the very same obligations is it not? Also worth remembering The US/UK arguably helped shaped the current Iranian hardline regime when they tampered with the Iranian government in the 50s. Maybe the only surprise was it took 26 years of the western puppet Shah before the Iranians decided they had enough of him. Good old western interference and regime change again. If not immediately then eventually you reap what you sow? Iran was infinitely better off under the Shah than the Ayatollahs. Maybe they were ‘even better off’ under the previously democratically elected government though eh? It’s almost as if the likes of SAVAK weren’t a thing. So you agree the Ayatollah's should be overthrown then. The Ayatollah’s should be overthrown if that’s what the majority of Iranians want. But it’s up to the Iranians themselves and nobody else to do that. Certainly not The West/Israel. Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world, they kill their own people for simply showing their hair, they carry out executions regularly and nobody is allowed to question them without dire consequences! They cause disruption, wars and fund terrorism that effect us all. The sooner the Iranian religious and ideological driven government is brought to an end the safer the world will be. Sure, but as I said, it’s up to the Iranians to rise up & do something about it. They have done it once, I’m sure they can do it again. We have plenty of examples of western led regime change & the unsatisfactory outcomes it can lead to. Do you know what happened the last time there was an uprising? They used live ammunition on the protestors, it was reported that over 500 people were killed. The deliberately blinded 120 people, according to a report by the UN. They closed down all communication channels to prevent news going in, out. They estimated up to 30000 were arrested. The put in place kangaroo courts and executed up to 800 people. A number of the executions being public or televised, according amnesty. This happened 3 years ago! " Yes, I remember all the protest marches against the Ayatollahs.🤦 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x" They are, but many would prefer to be allies with Iran and obliterate Israel. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. " He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x" Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? " The numbers just dont add up to your narrative in Gaza though. Can't remember the name of the formula but for urban warfare the number of casualties is significantly less than expected in such conflicts. I dont expect you to believe that but that's your issue. Hopefully someone a lot smarter than me will be able to tell you what its called and who came up with the figures for casualties in the different theatres of war. Israel is smart enough to disable a terrorist proxy by blowing up pagers and mobile phones. If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x" Everyone knows the Lavender AI system used by Israel disregards the collateral cost of lives. Including our policy makers and those carrying out the sortees to identify targets. Starmers comments are disingenuous. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? The numbers just dont add up to your narrative in Gaza though. Can't remember the name of the formula but for urban warfare the number of casualties is significantly less than expected in such conflicts. I dont expect you to believe that but that's your issue. Hopefully someone a lot smarter than me will be able to tell you what its called and who came up with the figures for casualties in the different theatres of war. Israel is smart enough to disable a terrorist proxy by blowing up pagers and mobile phones. If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x" Those that escaped the bombing have been near starved. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? " Russia has reportedly killed 13,000 Ukrainian civilians in a country of 41 million hectares Israel has reportedly killed 55,000 civilians in Gazas 15,053 hectares. I’d been keen to see a military actuaries assessment and correlation of these two examples | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? The numbers just dont add up to your narrative in Gaza though. Can't remember the name of the formula but for urban warfare the number of casualties is significantly less than expected in such conflicts. I dont expect you to believe that but that's your issue. Hopefully someone a lot smarter than me will be able to tell you what its called and who came up with the figures for casualties in the different theatres of war. Israel is smart enough to disable a terrorist proxy by blowing up pagers and mobile phones. If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x" Well, they might have the capability (but not their own capabilities of course) to deliberately destroy the population of Gaza, but there would be an obvious problem with that. International opinion outside of Israel would highly likely make them a pariah state. So they opt to sail as close to the wind without actually doing that instead. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keir Starmer and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman have “agreed on the need to de-escalate” the conflict between Iran and Israel, Downing Street has just said. No chance of Netanyahu listening. The fighting ends, then his trial begins. Disingenuous of Starmer Uk government sanctioned 518 RAF surveillance sortees for Israel to identify bombing targets on Gazans Isn't Israel an ally of ours? Mrs x How can he stand there asking for de escalation when he’s directly sanctioned raf to identify targets for IDF to kill Gazan civilians. He's not trying to directly kill Gazan civillians is he though. Think about what you are saying. You keep mentioning the amount of ordinance the US supplied to Israel. In your latest quote it includes 100,000 tonnes of bombs. So if that's correct, assuming that all bombs have been dropped and all those killed were civillians that would mean for every ton of bombs dropped only half of a civilian would be killed. Or for every civillian killed it has taken two of those 2000lb bombs people like to mention to get the job done. If these bombs were used on civillians the casualties would be expected to be much, much higher. Now I know civillians have died in bombings but that is because Hamas hide military infrastructure within civillian infrastructure. But just take one second to think about what you are saying, 100,000 tons of bombs vs 50,000 killed. And when you factor in that the figure for the deaths includes Hamas terrorists as well then its more like 100,000 tonnes of bombs vs 35,000 civillians. If these bombs were targeted at civillians this figure would be close to levels of total annihilation for Gazans but they are not. Why is that? Does that seem an efficient way of killing civillians. It would be the equivalent of firing over 13,000, 50 cal bullets, those humongous bullets, to kill just one person. Because that's how many bullets of this size you get in a ton, over 13,000. So maybe they are using the bombs on infrastructure, rather than civillians. So nobody is helping anyone kill civillians. Mrs x Would you make the same argument about North Korean bombs used by the Russians vs Ukraine then? After all, if Putin was deliberately aiming for Ukrainian civilians, surely their civilian death toll would be a lot higher than it actually is? Or would you say North Korea is helping Russia to kill Ukrainian civilians like most of the western media narrative seems to? Russia has reportedly killed 13,000 Ukrainian civilians in a country of 41 million hectares Israel has reportedly killed 55,000 civilians in Gazas 15,053 hectares. I’d been keen to see a military actuaries assessment and correlation of these two examples " Yes Putin is the devil personified, hanging too good for him etc Bibi, carry on son, fill ya boots & here’s some extra bombs just in case you run out. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x" The Gaza MInistry of Health figures for those killed is approaching 56,000 with about 16,000 of them being children, 8,000 women and 3,800 eldery. These figures are considered conservative by many (a recent study by the Economist for instance estimates that the true number might be about 100,000). So the IDF clearly aren't trying very hard to avoid civilian casualties. However their goai is not to kill as many people as possible because the IDF could probably already have killed over a million if that was their objective. You appear to believe that the aim has been to only destroy Hamas infrastructue but the IDF haven't presented any credible evidence to support this claim and you are in a minority if you actually believe the crude Israeli propaganda that says that Hamas is hiding inside every second home. It's obvious that the goal is not to slaughter two million people, because the world would simply not be able to accept that. The goal is to destroy as many buildings and as much civilian infrastructure as possible so that it becomes impossible to remain in Gaza. The aim is to crush two million people into a tiny area on the border with Egypt and to make the living conditions impossible to survive. Then if/when Netanyahu gives the order, the IDF will open their side of the border. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x The Gaza MInistry of Health figures for those killed is approaching 56,000 with about 16,000 of them being children, 8,000 women and 3,800 eldery. These figures are considered conservative by many (a recent study by the Economist for instance estimates that the true number might be about 100,000). So the IDF clearly aren't trying very hard to avoid civilian casualties. However their goai is not to kill as many people as possible because the IDF could probably already have killed over a million if that was their objective. You appear to believe that the aim has been to only destroy Hamas infrastructue but the IDF haven't presented any credible evidence to support this claim and you are in a minority if you actually believe the crude Israeli propaganda that says that Hamas is hiding inside every second home. It's obvious that the goal is not to slaughter two million people, because the world would simply not be able to accept that. The goal is to destroy as many buildings and as much civilian infrastructure as possible so that it becomes impossible to remain in Gaza. The aim is to crush two million people into a tiny area on the border with Egypt and to make the living conditions impossible to survive. Then if/when Netanyahu gives the order, the IDF will open their side of the border." Alternatively, Hamas could have returned all hostages immediately and none of this would have happened. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel" Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. " For weeks they’ve been vocal about sanctions in the face of violence to Palestinian settlers on West Bank and atrocities in Gaza. Kept quiet about the raf sortees for the IDF. No more white saviours Lammy complaining about Israeli aid blockades. Now we are sending jets. Why weren’t these sent to Ukraine. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. " Why wouldn’t we defend Israel? Because UK public opinion is very much split over their conduct in Gaza. Because UK/Israeli relations have been ‘up & down’ ever since Israel’s creation, having only generally taken a more positive turn since the millennium. Hardly an historical ally of long standing. Because Israel is the architect of a lot of its problems. I’d leave them & the Iranians to slug it out personally, and certainly not jeopardise any British lives defending them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. Why wouldn’t we defend Israel? Because UK public opinion is very much split over their conduct in Gaza. Because UK/Israeli relations have been ‘up & down’ ever since Israel’s creation, having only generally taken a more positive turn since the millennium. Hardly an historical ally of long standing. Because Israel is the architect of a lot of its problems. I’d leave them & the Iranians to slug it out personally, and certainly not jeopardise any British lives defending them. " That is a naive perspective and completely overlooks the wider context. For example Iran is a member of the Authoritarian Alliance and must never be permitted to extend its power. Furthermore, the UK has numerous middle eastern assets which UK nationals support on the ground and need protecting. There is also a strong case for the UK and other EU nations to work together and demonstrate a shared commitment to protecting freedoms and democracy, which means it’s not just Starmer who is sending military assets and personnel to the area. In fact, Israel may be just one cog in a much larger picture, the relevance of it being so could well be complex, historical and political for some watching from afar in western countries, however it is not the single cause or perhaps even the largest factor in determining whether the UK and the west should get involved directly or otherwise. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If they wanted the civillian population of Gaza to be destroyed they'd have done it already. Mrs x The Gaza MInistry of Health figures for those killed is approaching 56,000 with about 16,000 of them being children, 8,000 women and 3,800 eldery. These figures are considered conservative by many (a recent study by the Economist for instance estimates that the true number might be about 100,000). So the IDF clearly aren't trying very hard to avoid civilian casualties. However their goai is not to kill as many people as possible because the IDF could probably already have killed over a million if that was their objective. You appear to believe that the aim has been to only destroy Hamas infrastructue but the IDF haven't presented any credible evidence to support this claim and you are in a minority if you actually believe the crude Israeli propaganda that says that Hamas is hiding inside every second home. It's obvious that the goal is not to slaughter two million people, because the world would simply not be able to accept that. The goal is to destroy as many buildings and as much civilian infrastructure as possible so that it becomes impossible to remain in Gaza. The aim is to crush two million people into a tiny area on the border with Egypt and to make the living conditions impossible to survive. Then if/when Netanyahu gives the order, the IDF will open their side of the border." Lot of big leaps you are making there. But its the last sentence that puzzles me. So you are saying that Israel is corralling Gazans into a specific area and when that's done the IDF will open its border and let them into Israel. Is that correct? Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"That is a naive perspective and completely overlooks the wider context. For example Iran is a member of the Authoritarian Alliance and must never be permitted to extend its power. Furthermore, the UK has numerous middle eastern assets which UK nationals support on the ground and need protecting. There is also a strong case for the UK and other EU nations to work together and demonstrate a shared commitment to protecting freedoms and democracy, which means it’s not just Starmer who is sending military assets and personnel to the area. In fact, Israel may be just one cog in a much larger picture, the relevance of it being so could well be complex, historical and political for some watching from afar in western countries, however it is not the single cause or perhaps even the largest factor in determining whether the UK and the west should get involved directly or otherwise. Don’t give me any nonsense about defending freedom & democracy, as a previous poster pointed out, we wouldn’t be dealing with the likes of Saudi & other authoritarian gulf states if that was our noble collective aim? Iran is hardly likely to extend its power with the military might of The West, primarily the USA, stacked against it is it? I’m all about saving British lives. Joining in on an attack on Iran by backing Israel increases the likelihood of an attack on British bases, as they have already proclaimed. " Also naive as well as further detached from the global reality ….. Truly pointless to bang on about UK attacking Iran or even backing Israel as neither are relevant. Unless of course this thread has a malevolent and insecure theme focused on promoting a warped agenda of back yard nationalism and alignment with the daily spiral into dysfunctionalism typified by the so called ‘united states’ of america. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. For weeks they’ve been vocal about sanctions in the face of violence to Palestinian settlers on West Bank and atrocities in Gaza. Kept quiet about the raf sortees for the IDF. No more white saviours Lammy complaining about Israeli aid blockades. Now we are sending jets. Why weren’t these sent to Ukraine. " Diplomacy and politics. Iran is a dirty warfare threat, on a global level. They fund and train the terrorists that wan't to destroy the West. Why would anyone use excuses or whataboutery to downplay the threat of Iran? Is it a lack of understanding in terms of the threat they pose, or is it anything but Israel? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes." Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. " Why doesn’t Netanyahu trying to save his own neck make sense exactly? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. Why doesn’t Netanyahu trying to save his own neck make sense exactly?" It simply doesn't, the corruption charges are under way and a decision is not expected until 2026. He will appeal it if he it goes against him, prolonging the war serves no purpose in this outcome. The ICC issued an arrest warrant Oct 24, Israel are not signatories so it does not effect him inside Israel. Other countries have also stated they wont be enforcing any arrest warrants. Arrest warrants are a step in the process to enable prosecution, but nothing has been started by the ICC to date, no trial dates nothing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Also, Iran very recently got their hands on Israeli documents/intelligence & interestingly they claim included within those documents there is evidence that IAEA chief Grossi is collaborating with the Israelis. It could have course be coincidence that Grossi made his claims about Iran failing its nuclear obligations the day before Israel launches an attack on Iran…" You are picking who to believe here, you are siding with Iran because you don't trust Israel. I find that worrying when Iran if they had their way, would not be letting you voice any opinion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. Why doesn’t Netanyahu trying to save his own neck make sense exactly? It simply doesn't, the corruption charges are under way and a decision is not expected until 2026. He will appeal it if he it goes against him, prolonging the war serves no purpose in this outcome. The ICC issued an arrest warrant Oct 24, Israel are not signatories so it does not effect him inside Israel. Other countries have also stated they wont be enforcing any arrest warrants. Arrest warrants are a step in the process to enable prosecution, but nothing has been started by the ICC to date, no trial dates nothing. " I disagree. You honestly think any trial against Netanyahu would go ahead whilst Israel is at war? Perpetual fighting is clearly in his own interest. Yes, I know all about the ICC limitations. I was being idealistic & stating what *should* happen. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Also, Iran very recently got their hands on Israeli documents/intelligence & interestingly they claim included within those documents there is evidence that IAEA chief Grossi is collaborating with the Israelis. It could have course be coincidence that Grossi made his claims about Iran failing its nuclear obligations the day before Israel launches an attack on Iran… You are picking who to believe here, you are siding with Iran because you don't trust Israel. I find that worrying when Iran if they had their way, would not be letting you voice any opinion." I’m no fan of the Iranian regime but I’m being even handed, that’s what I’m being. I bet you believed Bush, Blair & Powell going on about WMD didn’t you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. For weeks they’ve been vocal about sanctions in the face of violence to Palestinian settlers on West Bank and atrocities in Gaza. Kept quiet about the raf sortees for the IDF. No more white saviours Lammy complaining about Israeli aid blockades. Now we are sending jets. Why weren’t these sent to Ukraine. Diplomacy and politics. Iran is a dirty warfare threat, on a global level. They fund and train the terrorists that wan't to destroy the West. Why would anyone use excuses or whataboutery to downplay the threat of Iran? Is it a lack of understanding in terms of the threat they pose, or is it anything but Israel? " The only point making was UK siding the easy win. We weren’t this quick to support Ukraine within 48 hours. We’ve ducked the big fight. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes." In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. " Well if you like oil prices going through the roof during what is already a cost of living crisis, yes he’ll certainly be the best man for the job. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. Well if you like oil prices going through the roof during what is already a cost of living crisis, yes he’ll certainly be the best man for the job. " So are you saying terrorism is preferable to higher oil costs? Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems to be indiscriminate Iranian bombing of Israel. Children and old people killed. Will there be protests against the Iranians across the West? Campuses shut down in outrage? Will Greta be setting sail for Israel to offer support?" From another thread: " Didn't see the same protests when Jeffery Donaldson was arrested for similar offences? That's because he looks like them. It's only an outrage and protest-worthy if you're not white and Northern Ireland born and bred. Are you saying that, when a group of people march or protest when DIFFERENT people do something bad, but don't when people SIMILAR (or value aligned) to them do something equally bad, then probably there is racism or other bigotry at play? Absolutely So, to be clear, disproportionate criticism of a specific group, shining a spotlight on them but ignoring the bad (or worse) behaviour by other groups... This is bigotry? No. I agreed that there is probably racism and bigotry at play. " So no, you will only see disproportionate criticism of Israel. Iran, Yemen, Sudan, etc. will get no demonstrations and proportionately less media attention. "Probably because of racism and/or bigotry". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems to be indiscriminate Iranian bombing of Israel. Children and old people killed. Will there be protests against the Iranians across the West? Campuses shut down in outrage? Will Greta be setting sail for Israel to offer support? From another thread: Didn't see the same protests when Jeffery Donaldson was arrested for similar offences? That's because he looks like them. It's only an outrage and protest-worthy if you're not white and Northern Ireland born and bred. Are you saying that, when a group of people march or protest when DIFFERENT people do something bad, but don't when people SIMILAR (or value aligned) to them do something equally bad, then probably there is racism or other bigotry at play? Absolutely So, to be clear, disproportionate criticism of a specific group, shining a spotlight on them but ignoring the bad (or worse) behaviour by other groups... This is bigotry? No. I agreed that there is probably racism and bigotry at play. So no, you will only see disproportionate criticism of Israel. Iran, Yemen, Sudan, etc. will get no demonstrations and proportionately less media attention. "Probably because of racism and/or bigotry"." Shouldn't expect anything less really, its only been going on for thousands of years, Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. Why doesn’t Netanyahu trying to save his own neck make sense exactly? It simply doesn't, the corruption charges are under way and a decision is not expected until 2026. He will appeal it if he it goes against him, prolonging the war serves no purpose in this outcome. The ICC issued an arrest warrant Oct 24, Israel are not signatories so it does not effect him inside Israel. Other countries have also stated they wont be enforcing any arrest warrants. Arrest warrants are a step in the process to enable prosecution, but nothing has been started by the ICC to date, no trial dates nothing. I disagree. You honestly think any trial against Netanyahu would go ahead whilst Israel is at war? Perpetual fighting is clearly in his own interest. Yes, I know all about the ICC limitations. I was being idealistic & stating what *should* happen. " If you look into it the trial is already underway and will conclude in 2026. The idea that Netanyahu is continuing the war to save himself is often used by people opposed to Israels war effort. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. Well if you like oil prices going through the roof during what is already a cost of living crisis, yes he’ll certainly be the best man for the job. So are you saying terrorism is preferable to higher oil costs? Mrs x" Israel have attacked Iran whilst US/Iran negotiations were going on have they not? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. Iran removed all monitoring of nuclear facilities in 2024, the IAEA reported in May that Iran had enriched uranium at 60%, and the time to achieve weapons grade enrichment is close. Putting that to one side, your argument above focuses on Israel and Netanyahu in particular based on the thinking he is worried he will face justice for corruption and war crimes so will continue to rage war to avoid that. That doesn't make sense, it really doesn't. You are ignoring the oppression, wars, terrorist funding and hatred Iran has for the West and Israel specifically. They supported the attacks on October 7th, they trained and armed Hamas, they are complicit in events that have led to this point and will be again if not stopped. Israel are attacking to defend their future, removing as much threat as they can because they know if they don't do that now, they will be facing the same thing again. Why doesn’t Netanyahu trying to save his own neck make sense exactly? It simply doesn't, the corruption charges are under way and a decision is not expected until 2026. He will appeal it if he it goes against him, prolonging the war serves no purpose in this outcome. The ICC issued an arrest warrant Oct 24, Israel are not signatories so it does not effect him inside Israel. Other countries have also stated they wont be enforcing any arrest warrants. Arrest warrants are a step in the process to enable prosecution, but nothing has been started by the ICC to date, no trial dates nothing. I disagree. You honestly think any trial against Netanyahu would go ahead whilst Israel is at war? Perpetual fighting is clearly in his own interest. Yes, I know all about the ICC limitations. I was being idealistic & stating what *should* happen. If you look into it the trial is already underway and will conclude in 2026. The idea that Netanyahu is continuing the war to save himself is often used by people opposed to Israels war effort. " I really don’t think the conclusion of proceedings against the sitting PM will take place if Israel is engaged in a full blooded ongoing conflict. Anyway, you clearly disagree so we’ll leave it there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So you are saying that Israel is corralling Gazans into a specific area and when that's done the IDF will open its border and let them into Israel. Is that correct?" It was blindingly obvious that I was referring to the Gaza/Egypt border (the Gaza side of which is controlled by the IDF) so I can only assume your comment was some weird attempt at sarcasm. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles. Those missiles simply won’t have the accuracy of cutting edge Israeli weaponry, hence Iran lashing out ‘indiscriminately’ Which of course begs the question why then has most of Gaza been laid to waste?" I thought you were even handed? Are you justifying Iran firing missiles indiscriminately into civilian neighbourhoods, with Israel having to take on Hamas who are well known for storing weapons and fighters in civilian buildings. To answer your question, the collateral damage that has been caused is a result of Hamas using human shields. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles." Nobody is actually bemoaning it. They are just pointing out double standards applied to moral outrage. However, Iran is clearly targeting civilian population centres. Had they focused fire on a dozen military bases, then (a) they would likely have hit some, and (b) not have gone near civilian population centres. Israeli military locations (e.g. air bases) are well known and generally not especially near significant civilian infrastructure. Iran's actions are understandable. They are lashing out at anything they can, looking to cause maximum impact. This is mostly because their attack capabilities have been severely degraded. Also because they're just vengeful and (even before any belligerence) hate Israel and Jews (and Sunnis, although they're happy to use them against their enemies). But most importantly, the regime needs to secure a "win" for domestic political reasons, and hitting highly populated areas, such as Tel Aviv, hard could achieve that. They're lashing out at anything that they think that can hit. If you look at a map of Israel and the sites of the strikes, then you'll see that Iran is either incompetent (beyond just lacking "cutting edge" technology), bombing high impact targets, whatever they may be (including civilian), or both. Israel clearly anticipated this and has mandated that everyone gets into bomb shelters. Nobody in any area of Israel is safe (civilian or otherwise), and this was a calculated risk. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles. Those missiles simply won’t have the accuracy of cutting edge Israeli weaponry, hence Iran lashing out ‘indiscriminately’ Which of course begs the question why then has most of Gaza been laid to waste? I thought you were even handed? Are you justifying Iran firing missiles indiscriminately into civilian neighbourhoods, with Israel having to take on Hamas who are well known for storing weapons and fighters in civilian buildings. To answer your question, the collateral damage that has been caused is a result of Hamas using human shields." I’m not justifying Iran firing missiles into civilian areas no. If old, inaccurate ballistic missiles are all you have got, you are going to use them aren’t you? What would you expect Iran to do in the event of an Israeli attack? Sit on its hands? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now the UK moving fighter jets to the Middle East as Starmer refuses to rule out defending Israel Why wouldn't we defend Israel? Iran is a hostile state to the UK and the West. I get a feeling that some people would welcome a UK u-turn on the good relations we have with Israel in favour of better relations with Iran and Hamas. Of course nobody will ever come out and say that directly, and skirt around whataboutery to justify their reasoning. " i definatley would, someone from that tribe killed my brother earlier this year and all of the same tribe tried putying the blame on my brother luckily cctv got the bloke bang to rights, dont think those people view others who dont follow there god as anything other than dogs they aee just as bad as the muslims when it comes to that | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles. Nobody is actually bemoaning it. They are just pointing out double standards applied to moral outrage. However, Iran is clearly targeting civilian population centres. Had they focused fire on a dozen military bases, then (a) they would likely have hit some, and (b) not have gone near civilian population centres. Israeli military locations (e.g. air bases) are well known and generally not especially near significant civilian infrastructure. Iran's actions are understandable. They are lashing out at anything they can, looking to cause maximum impact. This is mostly because their attack capabilities have been severely degraded. Also because they're just vengeful and (even before any belligerence) hate Israel and Jews (and Sunnis, although they're happy to use them against their enemies). But most importantly, the regime needs to secure a "win" for domestic political reasons, and hitting highly populated areas, such as Tel Aviv, hard could achieve that. They're lashing out at anything that they think that can hit. If you look at a map of Israel and the sites of the strikes, then you'll see that Iran is either incompetent (beyond just lacking "cutting edge" technology), bombing high impact targets, whatever they may be (including civilian), or both. Israel clearly anticipated this and has mandated that everyone gets into bomb shelters. Nobody in any area of Israel is safe (civilian or otherwise), and this was a calculated risk." I think they are using what they have the most of first. The old, really inaccurate stuff. This so far has shades of Saddam Hussein firing Scuds at Israel during the first Gulf War. I think Iran do have better, more accurate stuff (eg that hypersonic on Haifa) & they are holding it in reserve, hence their threats to escalate if the Israelis don’t stop. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles. Those missiles simply won’t have the accuracy of cutting edge Israeli weaponry, hence Iran lashing out ‘indiscriminately’ Which of course begs the question why then has most of Gaza been laid to waste? I thought you were even handed? Are you justifying Iran firing missiles indiscriminately into civilian neighbourhoods, with Israel having to take on Hamas who are well known for storing weapons and fighters in civilian buildings. To answer your question, the collateral damage that has been caused is a result of Hamas using human shields. I’m not justifying Iran firing missiles into civilian areas no. If old, inaccurate ballistic missiles are all you have got, you are going to use them aren’t you? What would you expect Iran to do in the event of an Israeli attack? Sit on its hands?" I expected isolated military targets that would take out Israeli capabilities. However as already been suggested, Iran seem not to have the technical capabilities for accuracy so they are firing to cause as much damage as possible regardless of the outcome. I personally think this has shown the world just how vulnerable the ever threatening Iranians are, and justifies the targeting of their nuclear capabilities. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" i definatley would, someone from that tribe killed my brother earlier this year and all of the same tribe tried putying the blame on my brother luckily cctv got the bloke bang to rights, dont think those people view others who dont follow there god as anything other than dogs they aee just as bad as the muslims when it comes to that" Sorry, couldn't quite make out what you said, but it sounded interesting and important. What happened? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I personally think this has shown the world just how vulnerable the ever threatening Iranians are, and justifies the targeting of their nuclear capabilities." This is known as Umberto Eco's 8th property. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"For those bemoaning Iran ‘targeting civilians’ it seems to me, in the main (apart from the odd hypersonic used on Haifa) that they are using older ballistic missiles. Those missiles simply won’t have the accuracy of cutting edge Israeli weaponry, hence Iran lashing out ‘indiscriminately’ Which of course begs the question why then has most of Gaza been laid to waste? I thought you were even handed? Are you justifying Iran firing missiles indiscriminately into civilian neighbourhoods, with Israel having to take on Hamas who are well known for storing weapons and fighters in civilian buildings. To answer your question, the collateral damage that has been caused is a result of Hamas using human shields. I’m not justifying Iran firing missiles into civilian areas no. If old, inaccurate ballistic missiles are all you have got, you are going to use them aren’t you? What would you expect Iran to do in the event of an Israeli attack? Sit on its hands? I expected isolated military targets that would take out Israeli capabilities. However as already been suggested, Iran seem not to have the technical capabilities for accuracy so they are firing to cause as much damage as possible regardless of the outcome. I personally think this has shown the world just how vulnerable the ever threatening Iranians are, and justifies the targeting of their nuclear capabilities. " Well they have been under sanctions for decades, so obviously they cannot match western weaponry as they don’t have the funds to update their inventory as a developed western nation would, so as I said, they are using what they have in the main instead of doing nothing. I would suggest the fact that damage has been reported ‘near’ Tel Aviv shows just how inaccurate some of these older missiles are. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I personally think this has shown the world just how vulnerable the ever threatening Iranians are, and justifies the targeting of their nuclear capabilities. This is known as Umberto Eco's 8th property. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.” " Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems to be indiscriminate Iranian bombing of Israel. Children and old people killed. Will there be protests against the Iranians across the West? Campuses shut down in outrage? Will Greta be setting sail for Israel to offer support?" I imagine that the majority of those protesting against Israel’s latest atrocity are probably doing so due to their other atrocities. Might not be as balanced as you’re hoping for but Israel are unpopular for more than just missile strikes against Iran. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. Well if you like oil prices going through the roof during what is already a cost of living crisis, yes he’ll certainly be the best man for the job. So are you saying terrorism is preferable to higher oil costs? Mrs x Israel have attacked Iran whilst US/Iran negotiations were going on have they not?" They have and your point is? Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable." Which leads to the 3rd property. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Iran must be attacked now because they are both strong and weak. We might worry about the consequences of attacking it later. What do we think the leadership of Iran will do in response? Do we expect the people of Iran to support Israeli action? Do we think when they hear Katz say "Terhan will burn" that they will cheer him on? Do we want to dismantle what little international rules based order we have in preference for a world where all that matters is might? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tulsi Gabbard, March 2025: Speaking before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gabbard stated that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." ….this is primarily about Netanyahu trying to save his own neck. Israel have bombed Egypt, Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Iran this year alone. The fighting ends & he knows he is going on trial for corruption. He obviously doesn’t want that & doesn’t mind how many die as a result of his warmongering. He is a war criminal & he should not only be tried for domestic corruption but he should also be tried by the ICC for war crimes. In the meantime Iran sponsoring hezbollah, Hamas and all the other head chopping Islam militants to kill the Jews. Netanyahu the best man for the current job. Well if you like oil prices going through the roof during what is already a cost of living crisis, yes he’ll certainly be the best man for the job. So are you saying terrorism is preferable to higher oil costs? Mrs x Israel have attacked Iran whilst US/Iran negotiations were going on have they not? They have and your point is? Mrs x" That Israel are causing a rise in oil prices that could possibly have been avoidable if trigger happy Netanyahu had left things to the Americans & Iranians? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable. Which leads to the 3rd property. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Iran must be attacked now because they are both strong and weak. We might worry about the consequences of attacking it later. What do we think the leadership of Iran will do in response? Do we expect the people of Iran to support Israeli action? Do we think when they hear Katz say "Terhan will burn" that they will cheer him on? Do we want to dismantle what little international rules based order we have in preference for a world where all that matters is might?" All that's ever mattered and always will is might. The facade of rules based order was always that, a facade. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable. Which leads to the 3rd property. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Iran must be attacked now because they are both strong and weak. We might worry about the consequences of attacking it later. What do we think the leadership of Iran will do in response? Do we expect the people of Iran to support Israeli action? Do we think when they hear Katz say "Terhan will burn" that they will cheer him on? Do we want to dismantle what little international rules based order we have in preference for a world where all that matters is might? All that's ever mattered and always will is might. The facade of rules based order was always that, a facade." Of course it’s a facade else The West wouldn’t go on and on about ‘defending freedom & democracy’ whilst simultaneously supporting autocrats &/or trading with autocrats that serve their own selfish self interests. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All that's ever mattered and always will is might. The facade of rules based order was always that, a facade. Of course it’s a facade else The West wouldn’t go on and on about ‘defending freedom & democracy’ whilst simultaneously supporting autocrats &/or trading with autocrats that serve their own selfish self interests." Totally agreed on all points. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable. Which leads to the 3rd property. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Iran must be attacked now because they are both strong and weak. We might worry about the consequences of attacking it later. What do we think the leadership of Iran will do in response? Do we expect the people of Iran to support Israeli action? Do we think when they hear Katz say "Terhan will burn" that they will cheer him on? Do we want to dismantle what little international rules based order we have in preference for a world where all that matters is might?" You are going to be constantly conflicted if you use Eco as a guiding light! It is best to use your own judgment based on facts and events rather than a catch all that tries to paint every direction or idea contrary as fascist authoritarian. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Iran is dangerous because of what it could become. Its regime has huge influence through proxies and its nuclear strategy, however the constant war cries against the West and internal governance control through fear make it extremely vulnerable. Which leads to the 3rd property. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Iran must be attacked now because they are both strong and weak. We might worry about the consequences of attacking it later. What do we think the leadership of Iran will do in response? Do we expect the people of Iran to support Israeli action? Do we think when they hear Katz say "Terhan will burn" that they will cheer him on? Do we want to dismantle what little international rules based order we have in preference for a world where all that matters is might? All that's ever mattered and always will is might. The facade of rules based order was always that, a facade. Of course it’s a facade else The West wouldn’t go on and on about ‘defending freedom & democracy’ whilst simultaneously supporting autocrats &/or trading with autocrats that serve their own selfish self interests." Let’s not pretend Iran plays by any different rules. Iran funds proxy militias, dictators in Syria and Yemen, arms terrorist groups, executes prisoners, and crushes dissent all in the name of preserving its regime and expanding influence. It doesn’t allow freedom, it doesn’t respect sovereignty, and it doesn’t care about international law unless it’s useful to do so. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
