Currently Israel are fighting Hanas in Gaza, The Houthis in Yeman and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

[YoYoYoYo12345]

One country taking on so many terrorist organisations.

Or is it so many terrorist organisations constantly attacking Israel.

So many hate filled terrorists. Why don't they ever focus on their own people and a better life for them. Are they all raving mad.

I feel like for some people the fact that Israel is defending itself at all, and specially when it’s successful, is somehow proof of their evil.
So many people criticised the pager strikes on Hizbollah, despite their being quite precise.
I just saw footage of a pro-Palestine rally in London where the speaker said: “They believed that successfully targeting members of our resistance would mean that they are winning, but what they failed to realise was that our resistance will only grow stronger.”, and the crowd cheered.
So apparently Hizbollah are just “resistance” and “how dare Israel attack them”, after being targeted by Hizbollah rockets for nearly a year.

Yes its quite clear. Israel not supposed to defend itself with anything more robust than a party popper.

I think anyone is so ignorant as to support Israel is raving mad.

How do you feel about hamas, hezbollah, houthis and hizb ut_tahrir?

You’re entitled to your opinion. Mine is that anyone who thinks any country in the world wouldn’t try to eliminate terrorists who come onto their territory to commit mass rape, murder and abduction of their citizens, or those who fire 8000 rockets into their country in the course of a year in support of the first group of terrorists, is raving mad.

What facts do you think supporters of Israel's right to exist and defend itself are "ignorant" of?

And yet when Israel carried out, through "covert operations", what was arguably the most targeted mass attack ever, using the exploding pagers carried by terrorists committed to eradicating Israel, some people were quick to criticise and deplore that too. (Presumably you applauded it though?)

Why, it’s almost as if in the eyes of some people Israel can never win, never be allowed to successfully defend itself…

Oh give over... killing tens of thousands of people... destroying entire cities and leaving countless people displaced is hardly comparable to a party popper.

Can we stop this narrative please

Of course it isnt. But its clear from the conversation that nothing Israel does is considered justifiable by some on these threads.

@SharonEllis What part of this is justifiable in your opinion?

Because blowing up pagers is not targeted. What if a Hezbollah member had a child on his knee, or was driving, or was standing beside someone? It's not targeted as Israel had no idea where these people were going to be when they set them off.

If Israel just kept to legal means of "defending itself", people would have a lot less to complain about. They simply cannot behave within the law though. This is a long-running problem for them.

What legal means are you thinking of? What do you propose would be more targeted than targeting personal devices which are known to be in the possession of the targets?

Legal means - it's not complicated. Within the laws of armed conflict.

And I've already just explained why the pagers might not be as targeted as you like to make them out to be. That's why a child and other civilians died.

What "legal means"? Do they have to wait for someone to dress in a uniform with I AM A MEMBER OF HAMAS OR HEZBOLLAH printed on it to come and stand alone in the middle of a large open space and say "Ok, you can shoot me now" before you’d be satisfied?

I'm also rather curious about this.

Who are the darker people exactly? Are you implying that palestinians are darker than israelis and hence the conflict? Any evidence to back up this view point?
What about Druze and Bedouin Israelis? What about Israeli Jews of Ethoipian, Yemenite and Indian origin ? imean, they're darker than your average Palestinian. What about the many fair skinned and blue eyed Palestinians and Lebanese (guess the crusaders have a lot to answer for) So where does that leave them in this conflict apparently based on how dark one is?
I know Arab society can be incredibly racist towards black people and I'm sorry you've experienced that but the conflict is not about skin colour.
You also seem to be implying that one day Hamas terrorists will be feted as liberators and we shall all see the justice of the Nova festival massacre and the kidnapping and disappearance of the Bibas children among other atrocities.

It was actually incredibly targeted and strategic. Blowing out an enemy's military communication devices is permitted. That the enemy decides to place those miltiary devices in civilian areas is their decision.
Yes, there may be innocent civilians involved but the numbers were tiny compared with the impact achieved which could save innocent Israeli civilian lives. They very much only hurt those in very close range as we have seen from the footage in the supermarkets. Even the fruit remained in place and all those around were unharmed. So much better than airstrikes, that's for sure. Far more targeted.
Also, all those with the pagers were issued them by Hezbollah. They are not used by civilians who not invovled with the Hezbollah military and they were receiving messages from Hezbollah that they did not want Israel to infiltrate so unlikely they would let this fall into the hands of some random drug dealer (the other main users of pagers these days).

Have you read them out of interest?

However, it is accepted that operations may cause civilian casualties. Luis Moreno Ocampo, chief prosecutor of the international criminal court, wrote in 2006: "International humanitarian law and the Rome statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) ... or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality)."

Necessity and proportionality also underpins this. The pagers would fall under this, there wasn't an abundance of civilian casualties (thankfully), the military advantage was much greater ie it wasn't 10 civvy deaths and just 1 target hit, for example.

So you're saying that Israel can use exploding pagers because it expects Hezbollah to behave with better humanitarian ethics than it abides by itself? That explains a lot about why Israel has killed tens of thousands of civilians in the last year.

In terms of damage, of course the pagers caused less damage than airstrikes. I never argued otherwise. I'm saying they're not targeted because Israel have no idea where they are when they blow them up. But the pagers were only a preamble to the airstrikes, which have killed hundreds already in the last week or so so your point is moot.

I think if you view all lives as being equal, rather than Israeli lives being more important than other lives you see things a bit differently. I don't see killing Lebanese civilians as worth it in order to "save" Israeli lives.

No you wouldn't value Israeli civilian over Lebanese and that's fine. No expects you to do so.

But Israel's first responsibility si to protect its own citizens from the threat of Hezbollah and the constant barrage of missiles and the constant threat to hit Tel Aviv and the fear of a repeat of 7/10 from the northern border. They are responding to Hezbollah's threats and weaponry (in violation of un security council resolution 1701) to protect their citizens from a very very serious threat that has been funded by Iran. Unfortunately, this might mean that civilians could be caught up in conflict. But one must ask why has Hezbollah/Iran decided to create this situation? What exactly is the conflict with Israel? Why should Lebanese be the victims of Iran's machinations? The questions should be posed to Iran.

No one expects Hezbolah to have any humanitarian ethics. That's why they constantly fire at civilian areas, including killing 12 children in Israel. That's why they committed massacres in Syria to support the Assad regime. That's why they blew up the marine barracks in Beirut. That's why they blew up the ISraeli embassy in Buenos Aires and later a Jewish community building. But THEY decide to place their military equipment in their own civilian areas, that's not Israel's fault.

If you can't see the message within the post, then you are not as smart as you think.

What is the message then?

You seem to insinuate that whoever is considered a terrorist now, will not be seen as such “when the truth will be revealed decades from now”.

They were black African and considered terrorists internationally. Years later as the brutality and common sense took hold, the world could see they were not terrorist. (…) The truth about this war will only be revealed decades from now.

Isn’t that what you’re trying to say here? Otherwise why bring in other people who were (wrongly) considered to be terrorists?

And why mention “the hatred for darker peoples” and then attack PP for questioning who the “darker peoples” where in the current conflict in the Middle East?

You'll have to forgive me as I may not be smart. I would really appreciate it if you could answer @StupidFarang and @inamarina's questions. If you hide messages in posts you do leave yourself open to misinterpretation and it would be so much better to understand what you're saying.

I was extremely active in the antiapartheid movement in this country & on the whole the anc and others did not attack people but infrastructure and also had an honourable tradition of peaceful resistance. I dont think even the most avid Hamas supporter would claim that for Hamas.

First, you don't know how smart I may think I am so that's a bit weird.

Second, I don't know why you need to be so coy and cryptic about it. Why not be proud?

The Israeli government shouldn't expect terrorists to adhere to UN resolution when they, themselves, ignore them on a daily basis.
Double standard again.

I give in. Please explain what your "message" is, if it’s not one if the obvious ones that others have already stated.

If your "message" is so obscure that no-one can understand it, as we are all clearly not smart enough to meet your exacting standards, what’s the point of that?