Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East

Tel Aviv under attack from at least eight rockets fired from Rafah in Gaza

342 replies

keenforhelp · 27/05/2024 20:54

Hamas's military wing claimed responsibility for the attack on Sunday, according to Press Association.

What happened after by Israeli airstrikes was truly terrible - a real tragedy.

But why are Hamas still firing rockets deliberately at a residential city with no combatants.
As long as Hamas are in power rockets will never stop. Plus all the Aid Britain and America are giving just goes straight to Hamas. They started the war haven’t released the hostages and have no intention of surrendering.
The UN orders Israel to stop fighting.
But Hamas are free to continue their attacks.
Makes sense to someone I guess...........

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13461325/Tel-Aviv-attack-eight-rockets-fired-Rafah-Gaza.html

Tel Aviv under attack from rockets fired from Rafah in Gaza

Tel Aviv has come under attack with at least eight rockets fired towards central Israel on Sunday originating from Gaza 's far-southern city of Rafah, the Israeli military has confirmed.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13461325/Tel-Aviv-attack-eight-rockets-fired-Rafah-Gaza.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
OneGreenPlayer · 14/06/2024 13:50

Vittuunterroristit · 14/06/2024 13:47

So when you said retaliate, what exactly were you referring to?

Specifically to the Palestinians in Gaza being caged in with no way in or out. Israel controlling water, electricity and entry/exit. Palestinians having no future or any decent living standards while Israelis live in luxury. Palestinians and their property being destroyed or stolen constantly

Vittuunterroristit · 14/06/2024 13:49

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Which of these reports said no sexual violence happened?

Vittuunterroristit · 14/06/2024 13:47

OneGreenPlayer · 14/06/2024 13:43

Surely a reference to all the atrocities that have been happening before in Gaza and the West Bank. Also do you condone the awful behaviour of the IOF where they dress up in women’s clothes, take photos with hostages who are blindfolded, steal money and gold from houses after families have been killed. How many illegal settlers have stolen land before oct 7th?

So when you said retaliate, what exactly were you referring to?

WhatTheFudge0 · 14/06/2024 13:45

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

OneGreenPlayer · 14/06/2024 13:43

LordPercyPercy · 14/06/2024 12:36

So people then retaliate against the oppression by Israel and get called terrorists?

Is this a reference to October 7? It sounds like you are condoning it.

Back on topic, I suggest people follow what is happening in northern Israel, I worry that the conflict is going to spread substantially shortly.

Surely a reference to all the atrocities that have been happening before in Gaza and the West Bank. Also do you condone the awful behaviour of the IOF where they dress up in women’s clothes, take photos with hostages who are blindfolded, steal money and gold from houses after families have been killed. How many illegal settlers have stolen land before oct 7th?

showmethegin · 14/06/2024 13:39

If that retaliation involves rape, kidnapping and murder then I'd say terrorist is an accurate description, wouldn't you?

@Vittuunterroristit so by that metric, it appears Israel are terrorists too. Hamas are obviously terrorists, and the actions of 7th October unconscionable, but was Israel is doing is just as bad (they have killed 40 times the amount by now, probably more)

LordPercyPercy · 14/06/2024 12:36

So people then retaliate against the oppression by Israel and get called terrorists?

Is this a reference to October 7? It sounds like you are condoning it.

Back on topic, I suggest people follow what is happening in northern Israel, I worry that the conflict is going to spread substantially shortly.

Vittuunterroristit · 14/06/2024 12:32

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

So people then retaliate against the oppression by Israel and get called terrorists?

If that retaliation involves rape, kidnapping and murder then I'd say terrorist is an accurate description, wouldn't you?

OneGreenPlayer · 14/06/2024 11:43

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

LordPercyPercy · 13/06/2024 20:00

"The situation in northern Israel is getting surprisingly little attention in the West. Here’s some background and an explanation of just how dire it is. World War Three gets closer by the day, and I’m not exaggerating.

UNSC resolution 1701 (2006) is that Hezbollah agree to stay north of the river Litani in Lebanon. This puts Israeli settlements out of anti-tank rocket range. However, Hezbollah have broken this and since 7th October have fired thousands of rockets into Israel, displacing some 60,000 Israelis from their homes.

To be clear, Hezbollah is a direct Iranian proxy, who live like a virus inside the almost-dead body of the Lebanese state. Their fighters are far superior to Hamas, having gained serious experience in the Syrian civil war. They have no real ground manoeuvre or air power, but their tunnels in the chalk rock of southern Lebanon are better than Hamas’ and they have an estimated 150,000 rockets.

There are UN Peacekeepers in Lebanon, but (shockingly for the UN, I know) they’re as much use as a bacon sandwich at a Bar Mitzvah. One very senior Israeli source described them to me as “an umbrella that folds when it rains”.

So Israel has a real, very serious problem. They do not have the manpower to assault into Lebanon for any kind of sustained campaign, especially whilst Gaza is ongoing. So, in polite terms, they are kicking the shit out of it from the air (over which they have total superiority) and relying on missile defences. Thousands of targets have been struck in the last 9 months but Hezbollah retain very significant missile capability.

This is why Israel are beholden to the USA to offer obscenely generous ceasefire terms to Hamas (that Hamas appear to be declining). They cannot afford to lose American military aid with this threat on their northern border.

In the videos below, in the first vid you see the war zone northern Israel has become. The second one is the settlement of Katzrin in the Golan Heights. Surrounded on all sides by fires.

In a statement to Qatari-funded Muslim Brotherhood mouthpiece Al Jazeera, yesterday Hezbollah said, “We simultaneously attacked 15 bases in the Golan and the Galilee using 150 rockets and 30 drones. This is the most extensive attack carried out by the organization since October 8, this attack came in response to the assassination in Joya and in order to deter Israel from carrying out further assassinations of this type.”

On top of that, Iranian proxies in Iraq took responsibility last night for the joint operation they carried out together with the Houthis (Iranian proxies in Yemen), which launched these ballistic missiles and UAVs towards the Israeli cities of Ashdod and Haifa (third video).

Iran is besieging Israel on all sides, and Israel is bending, not breaking. This situation is genuinely dire. It explains why Hamas will not sign a ceasefire deal, and why other non-Iran aligned Gulf states are meeting with IDF commanders. The entire region is teetering on the edge of a much more widespread conflict with Iran, and Israel is taking the brunt of it.

If this situation deteriorates, our allies in the Gulf may call for aid. As a second front in the war against the Iran-Russia-China-Qatar axis of malign global actors, this could not be more serious or worrying. And all the while we see subversive Iranian proxy organisations organising protests about Gaza on Western streets. Hopefully the West is not defeated domestically before the war even starts in earnest."

https://x.com/Mr_Andrew_Fox/status/1801323700295209255

x.com

https://x.com/Mr_Andrew_Fox/status/1801323700295209255

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 23:14

DownNative · 10/06/2024 22:39

Are YOU still going on?

"As an Irish person, it's not a massive deal to think that first minister is head of state. The monarchy is foreign to us, so it's an easy mistake to make."

Absolute rubbish! Most adult citizens of the Republic of Ireland are well aware the Monarch is Head Of State in the UK.

Certainly nobody thinks Northern Ireland is itself an independent Sovereign State so why would anyone think the First Minster would be...Head Of State?! 🤦‍♂️

You're clutching at straws.

"He was still Deputy First Minister..."

Provisional Sinn Féin and their newspaper refused to use that title. They spent years styling him as "joint First Minister" - a title we don't even have! 🙈

Ah God, ya know I'll just leave you to it 🙊

Please don't speak on behalf of adults from the Republic of Ireland.

Anyway Mandela WAS correct 😊

tp4645 · 10/06/2024 22:50

This threads appear to only allow one sided opinion. Only the threat to Tel Aviv. Only 7th Oct. Only celebrating rescuing 4 people, with no mention of the 'collateral damage'.
Because it all happens in a vacuum, no context, or history.

DownNative · 10/06/2024 22:39

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 21:02

Are you still going on? As an Irish person, it's not a massive deal to think that first minister is head of state. The monarchy is foreign to us, so it's an easy mistake to make.

Why does them being an Irish citizen have any relevance to their understanding of the British setup? He was still Deputy First Minister, which is very impressive whatever way you want to look at it.

However Mandela was also a former 'terrorist' who DID go on to become head of state... like they said... correctly!

Are YOU still going on?

"As an Irish person, it's not a massive deal to think that first minister is head of state. The monarchy is foreign to us, so it's an easy mistake to make."

Absolute rubbish! Most adult citizens of the Republic of Ireland are well aware the Monarch is Head Of State in the UK.

Certainly nobody thinks Northern Ireland is itself an independent Sovereign State so why would anyone think the First Minster would be...Head Of State?! 🤦‍♂️

You're clutching at straws.

"He was still Deputy First Minister..."

Provisional Sinn Féin and their newspaper refused to use that title. They spent years styling him as "joint First Minister" - a title we don't even have! 🙈

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 21:02

DownNative · 10/06/2024 20:41

There is no technically about it!

As an Irish citizen, they would have known that McGuinness never became HoS in the ROI and that a FM in the UK is not a HoS.

Oh, and then Captaine tried to counter it by saying McGuinness was elected MP and Adams TD. Neither of which are close to HoS status! 🙈

Hence two pages of that.

So, what are YOU hoping to get out of this? 🤔

Edited

Are you still going on? As an Irish person, it's not a massive deal to think that first minister is head of state. The monarchy is foreign to us, so it's an easy mistake to make.

Why does them being an Irish citizen have any relevance to their understanding of the British setup? He was still Deputy First Minister, which is very impressive whatever way you want to look at it.

However Mandela was also a former 'terrorist' who DID go on to become head of state... like they said... correctly!

DownNative · 10/06/2024 20:41

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 20:20

They said:

"No substance?

Nelson Mandela
Martin McGuinness (albeit Deputy)"

so what if McGuinness wasn't technically correct.

Mandela WAS.

But you're still going on about McGuinness 3 pages later?

What are you hoping to get out of this?

There is no technically about it!

As an Irish citizen, they would have known that McGuinness never became HoS in the ROI and that a FM in the UK is not a HoS.

Oh, and then Captaine tried to counter it by saying McGuinness was elected MP and Adams TD. Neither of which are close to HoS status! 🙈

Hence two pages of that.

So, what are YOU hoping to get out of this? 🤔

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 20:20

DownNative · 10/06/2024 20:11

Except it was as the poster Ah Ted cited McGuinness as supporting evidence of their own slogan! 🤦‍♂️

So, that was false of them as McGuinness was never HoS.

You might want to ignore it, but no dice.

They said:

"No substance?

Nelson Mandela
Martin McGuinness (albeit Deputy)"

so what if McGuinness wasn't technically correct.

Mandela WAS.

But you're still going on about McGuinness 3 pages later?

What are you hoping to get out of this?

DownNative · 10/06/2024 20:11

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 19:58

But that wasn't the argument. The argument was that they CAN and sometimes DO become head of state... which we all agree on. So let's move it along now

Except it was as the poster Ah Ted cited McGuinness as supporting evidence of their own slogan! 🤦‍♂️

So, that was false of them as McGuinness was never HoS.

You might want to ignore it, but no dice.

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 19:58

DownNative · 10/06/2024 19:53

Nope, McGuinness wasn't a divergence and it was a false statement that needed addressing all the same.

Which it was. 🤷‍♂️

Like I argue, a terrorist becoming a Head Of State does not legitimise their crimes and atrocities.

But that wasn't the argument. The argument was that they CAN and sometimes DO become head of state... which we all agree on. So let's move it along now

DownNative · 10/06/2024 19:53

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 19:27

Either way you were generally agreeing with each other, so the McGuinness divergence was a bit pointless really 😂

Nope, McGuinness wasn't a divergence and it was a false statement that needed addressing all the same.

Which it was. 🤷‍♂️

Like I argue, a terrorist becoming a Head Of State does not legitimise their crimes and atrocities.

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 19:27

DownNative · 10/06/2024 19:21

You're not quite correct because the poster cited Martin McGuinness as an example of a terrorist who became a Head Of State.

Except McGuinness never did become a Head Of State which was impossible in the UK anyway.

And he was rejected in the Republic of Ireland in his efforts to run for President.

That's what I responded to which was why I had to underline it as Captaine tried to shift the goalposts to election as MP and TD.

Neither of which are Heads of State!

🙈

Either way you were generally agreeing with each other, so the McGuinness divergence was a bit pointless really 😂

DownNative · 10/06/2024 19:21

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 16:58

The argument you were responding to was that they "CAN" become heads of state... which you then don't deny at the bottom of your post.

Seems to me you're both on the same page here... martin mcguinness divergence aside.

You're not quite correct because the poster cited Martin McGuinness as an example of a terrorist who became a Head Of State.

Except McGuinness never did become a Head Of State which was impossible in the UK anyway.

And he was rejected in the Republic of Ireland in his efforts to run for President.

That's what I responded to which was why I had to underline it as Captaine tried to shift the goalposts to election as MP and TD.

Neither of which are Heads of State!

🙈

HelenHen · 10/06/2024 16:58

DownNative · 10/06/2024 15:43

What was the argument of the poster I was responding to?

Simple: "Yesterday’s terrorists can be tomorrow’s heads of state!"

The fact and reality is that neither McGuinness or Adams ever became Heads of State!

The fact and reality is that McGuinness tried AND failed in his bid to become Head of State!

The fact and reality is that the positions of MP and TD are nowhere near to being Heads Of State!

So, let's not try the Shifting The Goalposts Fallacy....eh?

Additionally, I haven't argued that terrorists can't become Heads Of State either. Hence, I don't need to spend time dealing with Strawman Arguments.

Edited

The argument you were responding to was that they "CAN" become heads of state... which you then don't deny at the bottom of your post.

Seems to me you're both on the same page here... martin mcguinness divergence aside.

DownNative · 10/06/2024 15:43

Captaine · 10/06/2024 15:32

Martin McGuinness was an elected Parliamentarian though, and Gerry Adams (in two jurisdictions!). and they are just two in a succession of Irish “terrorists”/heroes that became political leaders.

Where do you place Kurt Waldheim: literally a signed up Nazi, then Head of UN, President of Austria. Or does his nazism not qualify as terrorism?

So even if we agree with you that HAMAS leaders are terrorists today. History would teach us that that doesn’t preclude them from being future Statesmen.

What was the argument of the poster I was responding to?

Simple: "Yesterday’s terrorists can be tomorrow’s heads of state!"

The fact and reality is that neither McGuinness or Adams ever became Heads of State!

The fact and reality is that McGuinness tried AND failed in his bid to become Head of State!

The fact and reality is that the positions of MP and TD are nowhere near to being Heads Of State!

So, let's not try the Shifting The Goalposts Fallacy....eh?

Additionally, I haven't argued that terrorists can't become Heads Of State either. Hence, I don't need to spend time dealing with Strawman Arguments.

anotherlevel · 10/06/2024 15:41

@keenforhelp you're not on a timer but seeing as you've been active a lot across other thread over the past few days I would have thought you also had the time to answer the question that another poster asked you. It's rude to ignore a question unless there's nothing that Israel (government/IDF) could do that you condemn and agree with their genocidal behaviour.

Captaine · 10/06/2024 15:32

DownNative · 10/06/2024 15:10

Whilst Mandela became the Head Of State in South Africa, I'm afraid you're blatantly incorrect regarding Martin McGuinness!

In the United Kingdom, the Head Of State is the Monarch - in 2024, that's King Charles III.

First Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are NOT anything close to Heads Of State. Foreign policy is also outside their remit.

Indeed, you might remember that in your State (Republic of Ireland) Martin McGuinness tried AND failed to become President in, what, 2013?

As I'm sure you're well aware of, the President is the Head Of State there.

Now, don't go shifting the goalposts with that point having been made!

Martin McGuinness was an elected Parliamentarian though, and Gerry Adams (in two jurisdictions!). and they are just two in a succession of Irish “terrorists”/heroes that became political leaders.

Where do you place Kurt Waldheim: literally a signed up Nazi, then Head of UN, President of Austria. Or does his nazism not qualify as terrorism?

So even if we agree with you that HAMAS leaders are terrorists today. History would teach us that that doesn’t preclude them from being future Statesmen.