Israel - Palestine discussion thread

inCloud
It shouldn't stop everything, it counter only missiles that could hit something viable. So far, it working pretty well - there is only one report of one dead in Jericho, Palestine Autonomy. Few Israeli were injured while heading to vaults, more dead after shooting in Jaffa.
Click to expand...
Iron Dome does that - does Arrow?
 
Reports that some Israeli airbases were hit.

Yeah, Netanyahu is going to be seeing blood if legitimate targets were hit by Iran. It will also kind of break the spell of Israeli invincibility.

No idea the provenance of this, but if this is an Israeli airbase, it's getting hammered
 
Last edited:
Liquid
Because we don't like the other religious idiots.
Click to expand...
That's not a good enough reason to intervene. It's like the West is under some spell.

------------

Iran had a rich and ancient history long before the adoption of Islam after the Arabs defeated their Zoroastrian rulers 1,350 years ago. There were positive links between the ancient Hebrews and the first Persian emperor, Cyrus, who liberated them from their captivity in Babylon. Israel hopes to weaponise Iranians’ non-Arabic identity as a way of emphasising the Ayatollahs’ putting Arab issues like Palestine ahead of Iranians’ national interest since the fall of the Shah in 1979.
A potent mix of foreign setbacks and economic hardships could produce a variant of the Arab Spring popular uprisings in Iran – a Persian Autumn, if you will.
But we should remember the souring of the Arab Spring following the early optimism in 2011. Political infighting and sectarian splits emerged producing new authoritarian regimes in Tunisia and Egypt and civil war in Libya, Syria and Yemen. It would be naive to presume that regime change from below in Iran would necessarily produce harmony, democracy and prosperity there.
Understandably, people will hope anything must be better than the regime which produced such a dystopian mix of fundamentalism and cynicism.
Regime change would end sanctions and give a new government access to oil and gas revenues plus foreign investment which could revive the Iranian economy. But the Iranian state could face disintegration if its ethnic minorities – Kurds and Arabs in the west, and Baluchis in the southeast – see a collapse of the Ayatollahs’ regime as the moment to break away from the country. That could destabilise neighbouring states.
Iran’s biggest minority, Azeris, a third of the population, straddle the border with ex-Soviet Azerbaijan. They have so far aligned with Iran, and the Islamic Republic’s leaders, including Khamenei, have Azeri family links. But if Shiism ceases to be an integrating factor and family ties to a fallen regime no longer pull strings in Tehran, then Azeris might seek separation.
An independent, ex-Iranian Azerbaijan would be dangerous for Israel’s regional ally, ex-Soviet Azerbaijan, since its population would be five times greater and its capital, Tabriz, a more ancient centre of Azeri culture than Baku.
The danger that militant Iranian nationalism itself would rise out of the ruins of the Islamic Republic shouldn’t be ruled out.
What made the Ayatollahs’ regime formidable was its ability to synthesise Shiite fundamentalism with Iranian imperial patriotism. If the Islamic pillar collapses out of popular disillusion with the mullahs’ incompetence, corruption and external failure, Iranians might turn to nationalism, even if consecrated at the ballot box. They wouldn’t be the first nation to liberate themselves from one oppressive ideology only to fall for another.

But at least it is high time for Iranians to make their own mistakes freely. This autumn could be their chance.
Click to expand...

www.independent.co.uk

Will the Iranian people finally rise up in a ‘Persian autumn’?

With Israel’s ground invasion of southern Lebanon, the Islamic regime’s invincibility has been shattered – but Benjamin Netanyahu’s video appeal encouraging ordinary Iranians to liberate themselves may fall on deaf ears, says Mark Almond
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
HenrySwanson
That's not a good enough reason to intervene. It's like the West is under some spell.

------------



www.independent.co.uk

Will the Iranian people finally rise up in a ‘Persian autumn’?

With Israel’s ground invasion of southern Lebanon, the Islamic regime’s invincibility has been shattered – but Benjamin Netanyahu’s video appeal encouraging ordinary Iranians to liberate themselves may fall on deaf ears, says Mark Almond
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
Click to expand...
Israel is one of Britain's longest running pet projects - they can't give it up.
 
While Israel claims "this isn't normal" in reference to images of missiles falling on Tel Aviv, it's important to recognize that yesterday and today, Israel has conducted air strikes and artillery shelling on residential homes and tents in Khan Yunis, killing civilians including children, as well as air strikes on Beirut, forcing people to evacuate and set up encampments on the beach as temporary shelter.

I know many people here are generally aware of Israel's actions, but I think it's important to keep track of some of the things happening on a day to day basis, especially when world leaders and news media talk about Iran's attack as if it's unlike anything that's happened so far.
 
dylansan
While Israel claims "this isn't normal" in reference to images of missiles falling on Tel Aviv, it's important to recognize that yesterday and today, Israel has conducted air strikes and artillery shelling on residential homes and tents in Khan Yunis, killing civilians including children, as well as air strikes on Beirut, forcing people to evacuate and set up encampments on the beach as temporary shelter.

I know many people here are generally aware of Israel's actions, but I think it's important to keep track of some of the things happening on a day to day basis, especially when world leaders and news media talk about Iran's attack as if it's unlike anything that's happened so far.
Click to expand...
There was a segment on LBC radio where they had a very knowledgeable speaker on and the host's final point was sobering. They had spent all that time speaking and there was all this coverage about Iran launching rockets that had 1(?) fatality but overnight there had been over 20 (iirc) deaths in Gaza
 
There is something deeply troubling about how Iran can launch 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, kill one person (by accident) and get condemned by the entire west, while Israel is killing hundreds of people a week with just token calls for restraint. I suspect that those missiles were rather precisely aimed not to kill anyone (how else would they not with multiple striking all around Tel Aviv) as a show of force - yes, we really can hit you which Israel is yet again writing off as Iran's attack was ineffective! Whether or not the military / political leadership in Israel (and the US) holds the same position in private is another story.

Anyways, it seems that Iranian leadership is currently terrified of the current mole situation (Khamenei has been deep in some bunker for days now) and I think this is probably the most asymmetrical part of this whole conflict. Whatever you say about the leadership of Israel, the people of Israel are still firmly committed to that government, even if there are reservations or protest against Netanyahu's administration specifically. This is wholly not true in Iran - huge portions of Iranian society hate the form of their government and want it removed. What this means in practice is that Iran is far, far more vulnerable to leaks, infilitration and espionage across all aspects of Iranian society whether that's regular military, IRGC or civilian contractors in a way that Israel's just isn't. In this conflict, I think this is Israel's decisive advantage even if you ignore their superior technology. I'm fairly confident that Netanyahu could take out the Ayatollah if he wished, but that could deprive him of the ongoing conflict that he needs to remain in power - he needs a perpetual boogy man. This is also true of Khamenei and his antagonism of Israel and the West.

So at the end of the day, they're all assholes and I 100% promise you they would figure out reasons to kill each other even if you removed religion from the picture. You can't tell me that Netanyahu or Khamenei are acting on religious principals - they want power, full stop. The middle east right now is like 1910s Europe.
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
There is something deeply troubling about how Iran can launch 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, kill one person (by accident) and get condemned by the entire west, while Israel is killing hundreds of people a week with just token calls for restraint
Click to expand...
On global scale, no one cares about Israeli or Gazans or Lebanes. Everyone care about Israel nukes Iran or visa versa. Because refugees and economics.
 
inCloud
On global scale, no one cares about Israeli or Gazans or Lebanes. Everyone care about Israel nukes Iran or visa versa. Because refugees and economics.
Click to expand...
No. The west cares about Israel because it has a vested interest in that project not failing, regardless of refugees and/or economics and so they will give a long, long leash to Israel but fail to see the perspective of anyone else.

edit: Man with the twin conflicts over there, I bet Egypt really really wishes it could charge a toll for civilian aircraft using their airspace.

egypt.JPG
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
I bet Egypt really really wishes it could charge a toll for civilian aircraft using their airspace.
Click to expand...
They do. It's called an overflight fee. It's some complicated formula that includes like a base rate, a navigation fee, distance travelled, and takeoff weight of the aircraft.

In the US, we charge $61.75 per 100nm over land or $26.51 per 100nm over the ocean.
 
Joey D
They do. It's called an overflight fee. It's some complicated formula that includes like a base rate, a navigation fee, distance travelled, and takeoff weight of the aircraft.

In the US, we charge $61.75 per 100nm over land or $26.51 per 100nm over the ocean.
Click to expand...
Conspiracy confirmed. Both conflicts are now Egypt's fault.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
There is something deeply troubling about how Iran can launch 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, kill one person (by accident) and get condemned by the entire west, while Israel is killing hundreds of people a week with just token calls for restraint. I suspect that those missiles were rather precisely aimed not to kill anyone (how else would they not with multiple striking all around Tel Aviv) as a show of force - yes, we really can hit you which Israel is yet again writing off as Iran's attack was ineffective! Whether or not the military / political leadership in Israel (and the US) holds the same position in private is another story.

Anyways, it seems that Iranian leadership is currently terrified of the current mole situation (Khamenei has been deep in some bunker for days now) and I think this is probably the most asymmetrical part of this whole conflict. Whatever you say about the leadership of Israel, the people of Israel are still firmly committed to that government, even if there are reservations or protest against Netanyahu's administration specifically. This is wholly not true in Iran - huge portions of Iranian society hate the form of their government and want it removed.
Click to expand...
That is why Netanyahu appealed to the Iranian population directly. He wants a revolution, so he addresses them as the "noble Persian people".


Eunos_Cosmo
So at the end of the day, they're all assholes and I 100% promise you they would figure out reasons to kill each other even if you removed religion from the picture. You can't tell me that Netanyahu or Khamenei are acting on religious principals - they want power, full stop.
Click to expand...
From my reading so far, I've concluded it's tribal/nationalist.

Religion is a modifiable factor both at a macro level (i.e. the religions should change/the states should be more secular) and an individual one (that is, people are free to leave/not let it control them as much). If we ignore religion's influence we risk missing the chance of reformation/secularisation equivalent to what happened over the centuries in the West. And then we're stuck at the beginning again where irreconcilable differences lead to tribal mentality, othering, hatred and skirmishes/war.

It doesn't help that they are both religions that are extremely supremacist (although one could argue all are), and so it's kinda like trying to fight white nationalism or something similar.

Eunos_Cosmo
The middle east right now is like 1910s Europe.
Click to expand...
This is a good read:
www.theguardian.com

Gulf leaders support Palestine – but many would not mind seeing Israel challenge Iran

The escalating Middle East conflict could create a dangerous vacuum – or an opportunity – for several states
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

If we want the region to elevate itself out of a tribal mentality we're going to have to look at other successful examples from history or come up with some innovative solutions.
 
Last edited:
Tribalism is a part of it - but I'd argue that the tribalism is more isolated to the various Arab groups that have been fighting for territory with each other on the Arabian peninsula since forever. Iran is much different and has been a fairly stable and cohesive society for a few thousand years. The middle east was notably more stable before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Iran and Israel had normal to good relations before that. I'd argue the instability right now is almost entirely down for a fight for regional hegemony right now between Iran and Israel...both arguably in their current form & alignment due to western interventionism. Israel is the obvious one, but Iran too - I don't think we'd see the militant Iran we have today if not for the CIA-backed 1953 coup d'état that ultimately destabilized Iran and turned it against the west in subsequent political movements. All the blood and money we've spent in the middle east since desert storm (not to mention all the blood spilled in terrorist attacks since then) would very likely not have needed to happen if we had not brought down Mohammad Mosaddegh (who I should remind everyone was a democratically elected Prime Minister and who maintained good relations with Israel) in 1953. Very likely Israel and Iran would have normal relations with each other and with the west and would be the dominant powers in the regions. Very likely Sunni militant groups like Al-Queda, ISIS and others would never have sprung up because Saudi Arabia would not have had the influence that they do - because Iran would be the chief economic center on that side of the region. It was probably the stupidest thing we did in the entire 20th century.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
Tribalism is a part of it - but I'd argue that the tribalism is more isolated to the various Arab groups that have been fighting for territory with each other on the Arabian peninsula since forever. Iran is much different and has been a fairly stable and cohesive society for a few thousand years. The middle east was notably more stable before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Iran and Israel had normal to good relations before that. I'd argue the instability right now is almost entirely down for a fight for regional hegemony right now between Iran and Israel...both arguably in their current form & alignment due to western interventionism. Israel is the obvious one, but Iran too - I don't think we'd see the militant Iran we have today if not for the CIA-backed 1953 coup d'état that ultimately destabilized Iran and turned it against the west in subsequent political movements. All the blood and money we've spent in the middle east since desert storm (not to mention all the blood spilled in terrorist attacks since then) would very likely not have needed to happen if we had not brought down Mohammad Mosaddegh (who I should remind everyone was a democratically elected Prime Minister and who maintained good relations with Israel) in 1953. Very likely Israel and Iran would have normal relations with each other and with the west and would be the dominant powers in the regions. Very likely Sunni militant groups like Al-Queda, ISIS and others would never have sprung up because Saudi Arabia would not have had the influence that they do - because Iran would be the chief economic center on that side of the region. It was probably the stupidest thing we did in the entire 20th century.
Click to expand...
The UK was also stupid enough to help the CIA in that.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
Tribalism is a part of it - but I'd argue that the tribalism is more isolated to the various Arab groups that have been fighting for territory with each other on the Arabian peninsula since forever. Iran is much different and has been a fairly stable and cohesive society for a few thousand years. The middle east was notably more stable before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Iran and Israel had normal to good relations before that. I'd argue the instability right now is almost entirely down for a fight for regional hegemony right now between Iran and Israel...both arguably in their current form & alignment due to western interventionism. Israel is the obvious one, but Iran too - I don't think we'd see the militant Iran we have today if not for the CIA-backed 1953 coup d'état that ultimately destabilized Iran and turned it against the west in subsequent political movements. All the blood and money we've spent in the middle east since desert storm (not to mention all the blood spilled in terrorist attacks since then) would very likely not have needed to happen if we had not brought down Mohammad Mosaddegh (who I should remind everyone was a democratically elected Prime Minister and who maintained good relations with Israel) in 1953. Very likely Israel and Iran would have normal relations with each other and with the west and would be the dominant powers in the regions. Very likely Sunni militant groups like Al-Queda, ISIS and others would never have sprung up because Saudi Arabia would not have had the influence that they do - because Iran would be the chief economic center on that side of the region. It was probably the stupidest thing we did in the entire 20th century.
Click to expand...
Western intervention was bad but it didn't mean it would have turned out rosy in an alternate timeline. In the past, it led to good things considering how crappy certain populations could be treated under Ottoman rule before Western principles spread in the region. There's this weird disconnect where we can be rightly critical of the West's history of discrimination and slavery but overlook the oppression dished out by other cultures.

I doubt the clergy of Iran would have disappeared if there was no Western-backed coup, and it's entirely plausible an Islamic takeover could have occurred sans Western involvement. At the very least it could have led to a Turkey-like situation post Ataturk whereby secular policies were rolled back. There'd almost definitely be less resentment of the West, and possibly Israel, and it would be interesting to see where the Middle East would be now and which extremist groups would have materialised. I don't agree with your final point that they wouldn't have existed if there had been no Western interference. The region has to take some (most?) of the blame.
 
Last edited:
HenrySwanson
Western intervention was bad but it didn't mean it would have turned out rosy in an alternate timeline. In the past, it led to good things considering how crappy certain populations could be treated under Ottoman rule before Western principles spread in the region. There's this weird disconnect where we can be rightly critical of the West's history of discrimination and slavery but overlook the oppression dished out by other cultures.

I doubt the clergy of Iran would have disappeared if there was no Western-backed coup, and it's entirely plausible an Islamic takeover could have occurred sans Western involvement. At the very least it could have led to a Turkey-like situation post Ataturk whereby secular policies were rolled back. There'd almost definitely be less resentment of the West, and possibly Israel, and it would be interesting to see where the Middle East would be now and which extremist groups would have materialised. I don't agree with your final point that they wouldn't have existed if there had been no Western interference. The region has to take some (most?) of the blame.
Click to expand...
I frequently think about Turkey when I think of a far-from-perfect yet mostly stable majority-Islamic nation built around some form of secular democracy that has fairly normal relations with the world. In my opinion, pre-1953 Iran might have evolved into something resembling present day Turkey except with a far larger economy by this point. I've been to Turkey - it largely feels like Europe but with more spinning meat.

ISIS - If the Iraq war never happened, the power vacuum that created ISIS would have never occurred. The Iraq war occurred because, loosely, of September 11th. September 11th happened because Osama Bin Laden was a fundamentalist who hated the idea of American troops "defiling" Arabian territory during the Gulf War and was he was significantly influential due to his close ties with the US during the Soviet-Afghan war, so he created Al-Qaeda. The Gulf War happened because Iraq was in crushing debt to the US for weapons it purchased during the Iran-Iraq war and had run out of options and so invaded Kuwait for a variety of almost entirely economic reasons. The Iran-Iraq war happened because Saddam Hussein wanted to become a regional superpower and was concerned about the pan-Islamic movement happening in Iran would supersede the Arab-nationalist movement happening on the Arabian peninsula. The pan-Islamic movement came about because of the Iranian revolution which was the direct result of popular anger against the western-propped and brutal Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi who was installed after the CIA deposed Mohammad Mossadegh. There is a flavour of Islam in all of this, but most all of the critical events in the region since 1950 were basically cause & effect from the previous event(s), and they can basically be traced back to the 1953 Coup. Who can say what would have really happened, but I can almost promise you that ISIS, Al-Queda, and Hezbollah would have never existed without the Coup. Hamas is a different story and less interrelated with the Iranian side of things, but I think Israel would have been far less militant in it's own development had the Iranian revolution never happened. Maybe they would have figured out a 2-state solution in the 80s? None of this is meant to say that the regime in Iran is not directly responsible for most of if not all of this...they absolutely are. But we effectively created that monster.
 
Largest massacre in West Bank in 24 years.

This asymmetrical treatment of the belligerents needs to stop for the good of the whole planet.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

KSaiyu
Gaza round 189
3 4 5
Replies
135
Views
8K
Solid Fro
Solid Fro
Poverty
How do you feel about Israel?
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
3K
KSaiyu
KSaiyu
KSaiyu
The New Cold War?
Replies
10
Views
1K
YSSMAN
YSSMAN
JMoney
Just War Theory
2 3 4
Replies
100
Views
5K
JMoney
JMoney
Duke
Arafat's... legacy?
Replies
21
Views
869
Carl.
Carl.

Latest Posts

Back