Death toll from Israeli strikes rises to nearly 400, Lebanon says
Death toll from Israeli strikes rises to nearly 400, Lebanon says
Lebanese health ministry says more than 1,245 people injured; Israel says military moving into next stage of targeting Hezbollah combat structure
You're viewing a single thread.
I just want to point out something really important about this whole conflict.
Despite the fact that Iran is heavily funding and arming multiple terrorist groups to attack Israel, both in the Palestinian territories and surrounding countries, Iran has no Palestinian refugees according to the UN groups that report on such things.
Why would a country which purposes to be just involved to "help Palestinians" be acting in such a way?
Maybe they're helping Palestine because they don't want tons of refugees? Israel is determined to ethnically cleanse millions of citizens and it makes sense that none of the surrounding countries want to deal with that. The best thing for their self-interest, and luckily ethics in general, is to stop Israel's continuous genocidal campaign.
A) They don't have ANY refugees. Despite there being almost 7 million Palestinians living outside of Palestine, which is more people than live IN Palestinian territories.
B) If you think the best way for Iran to ethically "help" is to continue sending weapons to Palestine that justify the Israeli invasion, you may want to go take an ethics class. At this point their "help" has got more Palestinians killed than doing nothing would have.
Doing nothing has gotten them killed, too. Look at the West Bank. Look at the March of Return. Doesn't Palestine have a right to defend themselves?
Also, there are tons of Palestinians refugees. 1.9 million have already been forced to flee their homes in this conflict, and there are 2.4-5.6 million from previous ones. They mostly go to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt.
My point about refugees is that Iran is taking literally 0 of them, despite being a major funding and arms source for Hamas and Hezbollah. I was pointing out that Iran doesn't give a shit about the Palestinian people, other than to use them as fodder to hurt Israel.
If two groups claim a territory at the same time, and both have lived there on and off for a few thousand years depending on the activity of dozens of wars. Who exactly has the right to it?
Oh ya, for sure. I get that and not taking refugees isn't great and sucks. Still, they may be doing it for selfish reasons, but opposing the genocidal state of Israel materially is still better than arming them, like the US is doing, or doing nothing but stern words, like most of the rest of the world is doing.
If two groups claim a territory at the same time, and both have lived there on and off for a few thousand years depending on the activity of dozens of wars. Who exactly has the right to it?
That's why I support a one-state solution. They can coexist peacefully and have in the past before the more aggressive revisionist Zionist movement started popping up. Jewish people were better off in the Ottoman Empire than the rest of antisemitic Europe for large periods of time. Plus, they're doing fine in the US. That's proof enough that ethnostates aren't needed. It's just an excuse for Europe to not deal with their own antisemitism.
Power projection and spite.
Iran cares to fuck with the US, Isreal, and other western powers, likely a ripple effect of this, and Isreal has demonstrated Iran cannot control its own airspace.
Palestinians have been seeking outside support since the 1948 UN resolution to create the 2 nations / the nakba, even going so far as getting support from the right wing Israeli government .
It’s a business deal not a moral one.
Israel’s actions have also put them, and the US, in a (demonstrably) bad light on the world stage, so any support to Palestinians is a PR win for Iran and everyone who’s competing with the US for influence so Russia and China love it too.
Are you addressing this comment to people who think Iran is.... good? You're right that they are not nice.
I think I understand your point: Iran is just in it to hurt Israel and doesn't actually care about Palestinians.
But then isn't the enemy Iran? How is killing some Lebanese child alongside a "terrorist" going to stop the next attack? Iran will just continue funding, surely? Probably with more willing recruits.
Obviously nobody wants war with Iran, I get that. So, and I know this is crazy, but maybe this is a problem you can't murder your way out of? Just an idea.
The blame needs to lie with the aggressors, which in this case is Iran. People see Palestinians dying and assume that Israel is just beating them up because they're bullies, when it's Iran that's doing the bullying via terrorist groups and Israel is just fighting back.
Diplomacy won't solve the issue, because Iran doesn't want a diplomatic solution and is happy to keep handing out guns and rockets to disillusioned young men just to weaken Israel for as long as they want.
So do you think Israel should go to war with Iran? Or are you happy with innocent Palestinians and Lebanese paying the price instead?
But I will say, when Israel does something, the blame lies with Israel. The blood of the dead is on Israel's hands and it will never wash off.
I think Iran should stop funding terrorists.
If you want to get into who has who's blood on their hands, you've got a very large history book to read. I don't think there is a single non-island country (and even some of those have it) that doesn't have a history steeped in humans killing other humans over the land.
I think Iran should stop funding terrorists.
They won't. So yet again, do you think Israel should go to war with Iran? Why waste time fighting proxies?
Because Nukes are a thing, that's why all big countries fight proxy wars now. Ukraine, Israel, Afghanistan... All proxies.
So because Iran and Israel have nukes, Israel can't directly fight their enemy, and that means they have to keep playing whack a mole with proxies, like, forever? All while the "collateral damage" and "accidents" are mounting and more and more innocent people die?
There will always be new "moles" popping up, eliminating Hamas creates Hamas 2 and even if you somehow eliminate Hezbollah there will be Hezbollah 2: maximum bollah. Then you will have to fight them and there will be more whoopsies and more kids end up in bodybags. And then I hope you're ready because since we're not fighting the actual enemy but we successfully stopped Hamas 2, guess what we have now?
Seriously. The only result of this is death and the most likely people to die are innocent Palestinian, Lebanese and Israeli citizens.
You realize that the US, Russia, and China have been fighting this way and killing millions of civilians for like 60+ years now right?
Ukraine for example is the US vs Russia/China.
Afghanistan was the US vs Russia a few times.
The whole point of fighting somewhere else is that fewer of your own civilians die.
Uh huh. So no defense of what's happening, just "that's the way it is." Well great. No problem then
The blame needs to lie with the aggressors, which in this case is Iran.
This is a matter of perspective. If you were to ask Iran, they'd argue they're supporting Palestinian freedom fighters who Israel aggressively removed from their homeland in 1948, and has been treating with aggression ever since. Back then, there were zionist groups that were labelled as terrorists. Iran has no strategic reason to oppose Israel, they have ideological and historical reasons to do so. Stopping the train of thought at "they want to weaken Israel" is not good enough, you need to grab a history book and ask yourself why they want to weaken specifically Israel so much.
For us, it might seem that there is a conflict that started on october 7th. To them, the conflict never stopped since 48.
Yes, but "aggressively removed from their homeland in 1948" also means "was voted on and approved by the UN as a direct result of what happened to the Jewish people in the world wars, and the collapse of the Ottoman empire for supporting the axis in WW1."
Their country tried to win a war, and failed. Why shouldn't there be consequences for that, like getting broken up and given in pieces to various more friendly groups.
Germany lost territory after the world wars too, but you don't see them shooting rockets at their neighbors to get it back.
Yes, but "aggressively removed from their homeland in 1948" also means "was voted on and approved by the UN as a direct result of what happened to the Jewish people in the world wars, and the collapse of the Ottoman empire for supporting the axis in WW1."
You're pretending that Israels independence followed the book as outlined by the UN, but that's not entirely the case. They declared their independence earlier than was planned, and they tried to take control over more areas that the UN agreed upon. And then there's the matter where it's perhaps ethically dubious to let the UN divide the land with little regard to the people already living there, and them perhaps being wary (to put it lightly) of now being under the governance by a group of people who are supported by people who were part of zionist terrorist cells (the history of the Likud party is quite... colourful. I urge you to look it up in order to better understand why the Arab nations weren't so keen on Israel).
Their country tried to win a war, and failed. Why shouldn't there be consequences for that, like getting broken up and given in pieces to various more friendly groups.
Because the consequence is that Israel has treated these people as lesser than their own civilian population, leading to a lot of hardship and strife, even for those who didn't actively participate in the war. And revanchism is a powerful and dangerous force as well. It rarely ends well. And after the war Israel took more land in violation of the UN plans. Even today Israel builds settlements in areas that don't belong to them and which have been declared illegal by the UN.
Germany lost territory after the world wars too, but you don't see them shooting rockets at their neighbors to get it back.
After Germany lost land in WW1 they famously invented rockets that they then shot at their neighbours, whilst being led by a man with a funny moustache. Revanchism from WW1 drove a lot of Germans into the grubby hands of the Nazi party.
And after WW2 the Allies were not particularly keen on taking more land, specifically to avoid another war, instead opting for temporary occupational zones led mostly by Germans, and an effort was taken to sway the German population to the Allied side. There was land in the east that was swapped over to Poland, but this was also in part because the Soviets intended to keep former eastern Poland and wanted to move people to eastern Prussia, now owned by Poland. They also moved a lot of Germans away from that region.
There's an imperialistic war going on over there between scummy governments
Hitler used the same reasoning for the Jews in Germany.