5 ms·

This is in retaliation for Israel bombing the Iranian embassy in Damascus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_bombing_of_the_Iranian_embassy_in_Damascus htt

This is in retaliation for Israel bombing the Iranian embassy in Damascus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_bombing_of_the_Iranian_embassy_in_Damascus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_bombing_of_the_Iranian...

wslh 2y ago
[flagged]
mhb 2y ago
And what was that in retaliation for?
- halflife 2y ago
  The military commander occupied the building with his subordinates was in charge of weapons transfer from Iran to hezbollah, which has been bombing northern Israel with thousands of rockets in the past 6 months.
- belter 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - belter 2y ago
    "Iranian support for Hamas" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas
    - hnfong 2y ago
      Thanks for the link, I read every source cited by the wikipedia page, and so far it's been a bunch of uncorroborated claims, and in particular no official confirmation -- https://archive.is/2aWzN https://archive.is/2aWzN - > U.S. and Israeli officials said they have no firm evidence so far that Iran authorized or directly coordinated the attack that killed more than 900 Israelis and wounded thousands. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-trained-in-iran-before-oct-7-attacks-e2a8dbb9 https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-trained... > U.S. officials said Iran has regularly trained militants in Iran and elsewhere, but they have no indications of a mass training right before the attack. U.S. officials and the people familiar with the intelligence said they had no information to suggest Iran conducted training specifically to prepare for the events of Oct. 7. I'm sure this reserved stance from officials might have something to do with the US not wanting to get dragged into opposition with yet another potential nuclear power, but still. (In case you're wondering, I suspect your choice of word "Orc" might have something to do with the downvote as well...)
      - belter 2y ago
        [flagged]
- wootland 2y ago
  Nothing, Israel is trying to broaden the war and drag the US and western countries further into it.
  - HDThoreaun 2y ago
    The attack was against Hezbollah leaders who have been launching missiles into Israel.
  - mhb 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - wootland 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - mhb 2y ago
        [flagged]
        wootland 2y ago
        It simple actually, Iran has no impact on my life where Israel has a very negative impact on my life. I barely want to remain in the tech industry because all of the VCs are pro-genocide. My tax dollars, military and political capital all go to cover Israel. I do not think Israel should have ever been created. It does not benefit me, only harms and endangers.
        mhb 2y ago
        A broader perspective might suggest that in order to continue your life without adverse impacts, it is in your interest that Iran be prevented from developing nuclear weapons. Israel is doing a lot of work on your behalf in retarding that outcome. So, even if you are not sympathetic to the plight of our ideological fellow travelers, from a purely utilitarian view, it is in your interest to support Israel.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Decades of Iranian proxies killing Israelis?
klipt 2y ago
That's an impressively effective strike, took out 14 Iranian/Hezbollah commanders and only 2 unfortunate civilian casualties.
- bluefishinit 2y ago
  It was an illegal strike: > An Israeli airstrike carried out within Syria without its consent would be in contravention of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits a state from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state... Unless Israel were able to justify any airstrike as an act of self-defense, it would be in violation of international law.
  - wslh 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - mhb 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - hnfong 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - mhb 2y ago
        [flagged]
  - klipt 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - protomolecule 2y ago
      [flagged]
belter 2y ago
From the link that you posted... "destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy..."
mupuff1234 2y ago
Which is a retaliation for Iran providing weapons, training, funding and guidance to multiple proxies attacking Israel (Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc) Not saying the retaliation is a smart move (honestly have no idea), but this didn't come out of the blue.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
sfmz 2y ago
Warning bells are going off in the international community about an imminent attack by Iran on Israel. If it comes, it won’t come be because Iran was unprovoked, as Israel has been provoking Iran into an attack for the last three years by its regular bombing of Iranian bases in Syria, which so far has not worked. Seemingly to increase the provocation, In the first week of April, Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity and which no nation does including in wartime out of respect to other nation’s diplomatic missions. This bombing provocation went even further than violating embassy sovereignty by Israel killing several of Iran’s high ranking military officers which were meeting in an embassy annex at the time. Israel could not have known about this meeting without high level penetration of Iranian and Syrian governments by Israeli spies. So, just as the war on Hamas was started by inviting the attack by the IDF pulling out most of its soldiers from Southern Israel and leaving it wide open and vulnerable, Israel is apparently itching for a fight with Iran by provoking it. In short, if war comes, Israel will be just as responsible for it as Iran. https://worldaffairsbrief.com/ https://worldaffairsbrief.com/
- tzs 2y ago
  > Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity That is not correct. Protection of embassies only applies against the host country.
  - tzs 2y ago
    Here's an article that goes into more detail on what international law says about embassies [1]. I'm not sure if the NYT enforces their paywall on that article--it works for me and I'm not a subscriber, but I am signed up for one of their email lists and it is possible that's why I can see it. For those who get stopped by the paywall TL;DR would be that the international law for embassies and other diplomatic facilities is all about what the "receiving state" can and cannot do. The "receiving state" is the state that the embassy is in. As far as other states go there is nothing legally special about embassies. So if country X attacks country Y's embassy that is located in country Z as far as international law goes it is pretty much the same as attacking any other random building in Z that happens to have people and stuff from country Y inside. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/world/europe/interpreter-israel-syria-embassy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/world/europe/interpreter-...
snird 2y ago
[flagged]

wslh 2y ago

[flagged]

mhb 2y ago

And what was that in retaliation for?

halflife 2y ago
The military commander occupied the building with his subordinates was in charge of weapons transfer from Iran to hezbollah, which has been bombing northern Israel with thousands of rockets in the past 6 months.
belter 2y ago
[flagged]
- belter 2y ago
  "Iranian support for Hamas" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas
  - hnfong 2y ago
    Thanks for the link, I read every source cited by the wikipedia page, and so far it's been a bunch of uncorroborated claims, and in particular no official confirmation -- https://archive.is/2aWzN https://archive.is/2aWzN - > U.S. and Israeli officials said they have no firm evidence so far that Iran authorized or directly coordinated the attack that killed more than 900 Israelis and wounded thousands. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-trained-in-iran-before-oct-7-attacks-e2a8dbb9 https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-trained... > U.S. officials said Iran has regularly trained militants in Iran and elsewhere, but they have no indications of a mass training right before the attack. U.S. officials and the people familiar with the intelligence said they had no information to suggest Iran conducted training specifically to prepare for the events of Oct. 7. I'm sure this reserved stance from officials might have something to do with the US not wanting to get dragged into opposition with yet another potential nuclear power, but still. (In case you're wondering, I suspect your choice of word "Orc" might have something to do with the downvote as well...)
    - belter 2y ago
      [flagged]
wootland 2y ago
Nothing, Israel is trying to broaden the war and drag the US and western countries further into it.
- HDThoreaun 2y ago
  The attack was against Hezbollah leaders who have been launching missiles into Israel.
- mhb 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - wootland 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - mhb 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - wootland 2y ago
        It simple actually, Iran has no impact on my life where Israel has a very negative impact on my life. I barely want to remain in the tech industry because all of the VCs are pro-genocide. My tax dollars, military and political capital all go to cover Israel. I do not think Israel should have ever been created. It does not benefit me, only harms and endangers.
        mhb 2y ago
        A broader perspective might suggest that in order to continue your life without adverse impacts, it is in your interest that Iran be prevented from developing nuclear weapons. Israel is doing a lot of work on your behalf in retarding that outcome. So, even if you are not sympathetic to the plight of our ideological fellow travelers, from a purely utilitarian view, it is in your interest to support Israel.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Decades of Iranian proxies killing Israelis?

klipt 2y ago

That's an impressively effective strike, took out 14 Iranian/Hezbollah commanders and only 2 unfortunate civilian casualties.

bluefishinit 2y ago
It was an illegal strike: > An Israeli airstrike carried out within Syria without its consent would be in contravention of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits a state from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state... Unless Israel were able to justify any airstrike as an act of self-defense, it would be in violation of international law.
- wslh 2y ago
  [flagged]
- mhb 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - hnfong 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - mhb 2y ago
      [flagged]
- klipt 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - protomolecule 2y ago
    [flagged]

belter 2y ago

From the link that you posted... "destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy..."

mupuff1234 2y ago

Which is a retaliation for Iran providing weapons, training, funding and guidance to multiple proxies attacking Israel (Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc) Not saying the retaliation is a smart move (honestly have no idea), but this didn't come out of the blue.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

sfmz 2y ago

Warning bells are going off in the international community about an imminent attack by Iran on Israel. If it comes, it won’t come be because Iran was unprovoked, as Israel has been provoking Iran into an attack for the last three years by its regular bombing of Iranian bases in Syria, which so far has not worked. Seemingly to increase the provocation, In the first week of April, Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity and which no nation does including in wartime out of respect to other nation’s diplomatic missions. This bombing provocation went even further than violating embassy sovereignty by Israel killing several of Iran’s high ranking military officers which were meeting in an embassy annex at the time. Israel could not have known about this meeting without high level penetration of Iranian and Syrian governments by Israeli spies. So, just as the war on Hamas was started by inviting the attack by the IDF pulling out most of its soldiers from Southern Israel and leaving it wide open and vulnerable, Israel is apparently itching for a fight with Iran by provoking it. In short, if war comes, Israel will be just as responsible for it as Iran. https://worldaffairsbrief.com/ https://worldaffairsbrief.com/

tzs 2y ago
> Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity That is not correct. Protection of embassies only applies against the host country.
- tzs 2y ago
  Here's an article that goes into more detail on what international law says about embassies [1]. I'm not sure if the NYT enforces their paywall on that article--it works for me and I'm not a subscriber, but I am signed up for one of their email lists and it is possible that's why I can see it. For those who get stopped by the paywall TL;DR would be that the international law for embassies and other diplomatic facilities is all about what the "receiving state" can and cannot do. The "receiving state" is the state that the embassy is in. As far as other states go there is nothing legally special about embassies. So if country X attacks country Y's embassy that is located in country Z as far as international law goes it is pretty much the same as attacking any other random building in Z that happens to have people and stuff from country Y inside. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/world/europe/interpreter-israel-syria-embassy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/world/europe/interpreter-...

snird 2y ago

[flagged]