Iran launches attack on Israel

[Doodoo]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/british-mili ... 56588.html

Booms and sirens in Israel after Iran launches over 200 missiles and drones in unprecedented attack

Idiots!!!

[jackspratt]

viewtopic.php?p=687320#p687320

[Doodoo]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/israel-hails ... 10128.html

[Laan Yaa Mo]

It is doubtful if Israel attacked the Iranian Embassy just for the heck of it. Methinks they must have had a reason or two. Also, one should not be surprised at Iran's response. The whole world seemed to know Iran was going to attack Israel judging by the newspapers and TV analysts. Will this be a limited response by Iran or will it be all-out war?

[tamada]

Israel knew exactly who they were targeting. Iran says their recent mission against Israel was a success despite over 98% of drones and rockets being intercepted and destroyed. Being deeply unpopular at home, they had to be seen as doing something. It doesn't matter if the similarly deeply unpopular Netanyahu choses to leave things at that, as some other Iranian proxy or illegal settler will decide to escalate things.

[noosard]

Diplomatic premises, like homes and schools, are considered "civilian objects" under international law, and they are not permissible as targets unless they are used for a military purpose. Diplomatic buildings are entitled to further protections from attack or other interference by the host country under international customary law, codified in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1963 Convention on Consular Relations, but in this case these do not apply to Israel; according to Aurel Sari, a professor of international law at Exeter University in the United Kingdom, "Israel is a third state and is not bound by the law of diplomatic relations with regard to Iran’s Embassy in Syria."[26]

In the Middle East Iran has for many years blurred the lines between its diplomatic missions and its military operations; according to to Yuval Shany, an international law professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, this likely means that the embassy was a legitimate target.[26]

According to Sari, "unless Israel was able to justify the airstrike as an act of self-defense" it would be in violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. Whether self-defense permits a strike on the territory of a third country is an ongoing legal debate.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_b ... n_Damascus

[Drunk Monkey]

I make apoint of not really following all the "conflict" news but idnt realize just how deeply the UK n Usa plus numerous other nations are getting drawn in and involved in the Israel Hamas Gaza conflict which is expanding to the wider middle East.. can see this escalating rapidly along with the UKR Russia war... North Korea also readying its forces and the China Taiwan issue is always bubbling .... IMO the world is in a real bad state.

We remain positive that Thailand ,Udon and CCW should be relatively safe havens then Noos ??

DM

[noosard]

CCW definitely a safe zone

[tamada]

Diplomatic premises, like homes and schools, are considered "civilian objects" under international law, and they are not permissible as targets unless they are used for a military purpose. Diplomatic buildings are entitled to further protections from attack or other interference by the host country under international customary law, codified in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1963 Convention on Consular Relations, but in this case these do not apply to Israel; according to Aurel Sari, a professor of international law at Exeter University in the United Kingdom, "Israel is a third state and is not bound by the law of diplomatic relations with regard to Iran’s Embassy in Syria."[26]

In the Middle East Iran has for many years blurred the lines between its diplomatic missions and its military operations; according to to Yuval Shany, an international law professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, this likely means that the embassy was a legitimate target.[26]

According to Sari, "unless Israel was able to justify the airstrike as an act of self-defense" it would be in violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. Whether self-defense permits a strike on the territory of a third country is an ongoing legal debate.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_b ... n_Damascus

And don't forget how Saudi Arabia's approach to a "blurred line" multi-purpose diplomatic mission saw them running a butcher's shop in Turkey.

[Whistler]

Iran flouts all diplomatic niceties, I doubt that it's outpost was not being used for nefarious purposes.

The question in my mind, was it sensible for Israel to further inflame what was already overloaded with tensions by opening a new front. For me, i think that was really dumb.

[jackspratt]

Iran flouts all diplomatic niceties, I doubt that it's outpost was not being used for nefarious purposes.

The question in my mind, was it sensible for Israel to further inflame what was already overloaded with tensions by opening a new front. For me, i think that was really dumb.

You can bet your bottom dollar that just about every embassy around the world is being used for nefarious purposes of one degree or another.

That is widely understood, and tolerated as part of the international system of diplomacy.

By most anyway.

In this case, the Israeli attack on the Iranian Embassy in Damascus would not have occurred with political sign-off from the highest levels in Israel. A desperate and increasingly unpopular indicted Prime Minister, seeking a diversion, would be my hunch.

[rick]

Israel screamed it had the right to retaliate when Hamas attacked, and.the West backed.them. When Israel attacks an embassy, that was.self defence? And when Iran retaliates, the West says it is disgraceful and helps Israel. DOUBLE STANDARDS. Israel has carried out numerous assassination missions against both Iran and other countries, but criticism is always muted. Israel got what it asked for. Mind you, Netanyahu probably will be happy, another war to keep him in power.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

Israel screamed it had the right to retaliate when Hamas attacked, and.the West backed.them. When Israel attacks an embassy, that was.self defence? And when Iran retaliates, the West says it is disgraceful and helps Israel. DOUBLE STANDARDS. Israel has carried out numerous assassination missions against both Iran and other countries, but criticism is always muted. Israel got what it asked for. Mind you, Netanyahu probably will be happy, another war to keep him in power.

Are you surprised that double standards exist? What do you suppose allies do? They support their partner...sometimes. It would be a naive person indeed who would expect Israel's partners to switch their support to Iran in this instance. Who do you think North Korea, China and Russia support? Are you shocked?

[tamada]

Iran flouts all diplomatic niceties, I doubt that it's outpost was not being used for nefarious purposes.

The question in my mind, was it sensible for Israel to further inflame what was already overloaded with tensions by opening a new front. For me, i think that was really dumb.

You can bet your bottom dollar that just about every embassy around the world is being used for nefarious purposes of one degree or another.

That is widely understood, and tolerated as part of the international system of diplomacy.

By most anyway.

In this case, the Israeli attack on the Iranian Embassy in Damascus would not have occurred with political sign-off from the highest levels in Israel. A desperate and increasingly unpopular indicted Prime Minister, seeking a diversion, would be my hunch.

Yes, diplomatic missions have always had their military attachés and been part of the counterintelligence and espionage business. But that was back in the simpler times of 007, George Smiley, wars (hot and cold), colonialism and empire where it was all "tolerated as part of the international system of diplomacy."

Then along came ISIS, Daesh, Hamas, Hezbollah, Quds, etc.. Kudos to Bibi for rewriting the rule book to facilitate dealing with the new enemy such as senior Iranian military advisers sent to reinforce more blind hate within their proxies.

[Doodoo]

"With Iran’s Strikes, Arab Countries Fear an Expanding Conflict"
https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-strikes ... 44048.html

With the Arabs kicking up a suggestion would be for the USA< UK, etc to keep their noses out. It has long been known that the Tribes want to solve their own issues. Only problem is that other countries wont allow them

Other countries without intervention from outside that seem to be surviving, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc

[rick]

Unfortunately the West has a habit of trying to impose THEIR versuon of democracy and human rights on others. May have worked in the past, but not anymore. Take Niger for example; USA official arrives at short notice (hours) and proceeds to tell the new mikitary regime what to do - kick out Wagner, hold elections etc. Result - they tell USA to leave their military base and have gone to the Russians for help. France and USA have lost the influence they had in the Sahel fir treating African leaders like naughty schoolboys.

[jackspratt]

Yes, diplomatic missions have always had their military attachés and been part of the counterintelligence and espionage business. But that was back in the simpler times of 007, George Smiley, wars (hot and cold), colonialism and empire where it was all "tolerated as part of the international system of diplomacy."

Then along came ISIS, Daesh, Hamas, Hezbollah, Quds, etc..

Let's not forget that there were terrorists around in the days of 007 and George Smiley.

In fact I started quite a lengthy thread about them about 3 years ago viewtopic.php?f=37&t=52892&hilit=terrorism

[tamada]

"With Iran’s Strikes, Arab Countries Fear an Expanding Conflict"
https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-strikes ... 44048.html

With the Arabs kicking up a suggestion would be for the USA< UK, etc to keep their noses out. It has long been known that the Tribes want to solve their own issues. Only problem is that other countries wont allow them

Other countries without intervention from outside that seem to be surviving, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc

The "Tribes" may have created and joined entities such as the Gulf Cooperative Council... but that's about it. Collectively, there's a reticence in embracing any home-grown solution to the Palestinian issue.

So, what is stopping them from resolving this shameful inhumanity in their own back yard? The US's enduring support for Israel's right to exist is NOT the correct answer.

[tamada]

Yes, diplomatic missions have always had their military attachés and been part of the counterintelligence and espionage business. But that was back in the simpler times of 007, George Smiley, wars (hot and cold), colonialism and empire where it was all "tolerated as part of the international system of diplomacy."

Then along came ISIS, Daesh, Hamas, Hezbollah, Quds, etc..

Let's not forget that there were terrorists around in the days of 007 and George Smiley.

In fact I started quite a lengthy thread about them about 3 years ago viewtopic.php?f=37&t=52892&hilit=terrorism

Which middle eastern nation has a vision of peaceful and mutually beneficial coexistence in the middle east?

Iran is NOT the correct answer.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

As the writer notes, Israel will retaliate against Iran at a time of its own choosing.

As far as Israel's attack on the Iranian Embassy: 'The monstrous Mohamed Reza Zahedi, the senior Quds Force brigadier-general overseeing Tehran’s arming of Hezbollah in collaboration with Syrian mass-murderer Bashar Assad, was removed from the world of living things, along with seven other Quds Force monsters, in one fell swoop.

The world did not come to an end. What’s done is done. Israel will do what it must, when it must.'

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/terry- ... s-choosing