Hamas attacking Israel

[Canuck Surfer]

2 hours ago, RomanPer said:

 

Sorry, bud, replying just to the bolded portion of your statement. There are plenty of people in the West Bank who are absolutely prefer to be under Israeli control over corrupt Fatah or fanatic Hamas. I personally know such people. They just keep quiet in fear of being killed as "collaborators".

 

There is a tipping point for every conversation. And yes past that tipping point people would and should feel under pressure while there is militant leadership. Sinwar started his career as a dissident as an enforcer, who literally killed collaborators. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas himself was subject to an assassination attempt even just last November.   By a group that also published a 24 hour notice that the PA join the conflict. 

 

Maybe the majority of residents in the Golan Heights fled in 1967, so there is no resistance? Considering that Syria itself has either been a military threat to Israel. Or at perennial civil war without resolve they could be at peace with Israel. I understand the concept of a security zone. Which is different than accepting it should be annexed or that continued settlement of the West Bank should occur.

 

You would know more than me the presence of those who might adopt Israel in either location. Golan or West Bank. You might also hold a negative view of those who would not? I hold an opinion that if either were not hostile it should be their choice. In the West Bank anyway. That Palestinians, if they want peace, need to reject their militant leaders.   

 

How that is accomplished is a tougher question for another day. 

[Canuck Surfer]

28 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

That is some aim.

 

Harder to hear about civilian casualities in this conflict when they have such abilities. 

 

I have also heard since it came from outside the country.  The initial reports were from inside Iran with outlets picking up statements by the IRG & Hamas.  Specifically by a missile through a residential window from an airplane. I listened to more than one report stating exactly that. 

 

Still, Haniyeh, his bodyguard and no civilian casualties is some aim if true. 

[RomanPer]

47 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

There is a tipping point for every conversation. And yes past that tipping point people would and should feel under pressure while there is militant leadership. Sinwar started his career as a dissident as an enforcer, who literally killed collaborators. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas himself was subject to an assassination attempt even just last November.   By a group that also published a 24 hour notice that the PA join the conflict. 

 

Maybe the majority of residents in the Golan Heights fled in 1967, so there is no resistance? Considering that Syria itself has either been a military threat to Israel. Or at perennial civil war without resolve they could be at peace with Israel. I understand the concept of a security zone. Which is different than accepting it should be annexed or that continued settlement of the West Bank should occur.

 

You would know more than me the presence of those who might adopt Israel in either location. Golan or West Bank. You might also hold a negative view of those who would not? I hold an opinion that if either were not hostile it should be their choice. In the West Bank anyway. That Palestinians, if they want peace, need to reject their militant leaders.   

 

How that is accomplished is a tougher question for another day. 

 

No, I don't hold negative view towards those who don't want to adopt Israel. As long as they don't want to kill me and my family/friends.

[RomanPer]

1 hour ago, bishopshodan said:

 

That is some aim.

 

Harder to hear about civilian casualities in this conflict when they have such abilities. 

 

It actually makes me question those Hamas Health Ministry numbers more. I'm pretty confident that more than 50% casualties in Gaza are combatants. There was never a war in a history of this world where collateral casualties were kept to anywhere close to 50%.

[Optimist Prime]

On 7/31/2024 at 9:52 AM, Canuck Surfer said:

 

I have also heard since it came from outside the country.  The initial reports were from inside Iran with outlets picking up statements by the IRG & Hamas.  Specifically by a missile through a residential window from an airplane. I listened to more than one report stating exactly that. 

 

Still, Haniyeh, his bodyguard and no civilian casualties is some aim if true. 

We all need to remember this is a religious dictatorship of a Terror State. Why do people here want to believe the Iranian Regime, or even Hamas for that matter all these long nine months...they lie, it is what they do to further their agendas, and it is all forgiven by the imams because the ends justify their means. (The ends invariably are the complete destruction of Israel). Incidentally, the Supreme Leader has just issued a call for Iran to personally strike back hard against Israel, in the last hour anyhow.

 

 

Anyways.. Here is the strike, it took out many floors of a whole quarter of a heavily populated building. I don't believe only two people were killed, looks like it could be tens of people to me. This image is geolocated to 35.81931, 51.41559. it is legit. 

[Optimist Prime]

New York Times picking up the story of the Ayatollah commanding Iran to retaliate directly to Israel's assasinations of top leaders of both Hamas and Hezbollah. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/31/world/middleeast/iran-orders-attack-israel.html

 

Quote

Iran’s Leader Orders Attack on Israel for Haniyeh Killing, Officials Say

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered retaliation after a humiliating security failure, as Iran once again balances showing strength against the risk of escalation.

 

[Canuck Surfer]

 

[Optimist Prime]

1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

 

[bolt]

 

 

The Religion of peace has raised their revenge flag.

Edited August 1 by bolt

[Canuck Surfer]

7 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

 

 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

 

[Ilunga]

39 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

 

While I want regime change in Iran more than anyone, I wouldn't be using the Shahs son as a source. 

Nor do I believe that a " Prince " who wants to be a Shah is a proper replacement for the Mullahs. 

 

As this article from The Scotsman states

 

" Iran's despotic mullahs must not be replaced by son of deposed Shah. The people want a democratic republic "

 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/irans-despotic-mullahs-must-not-be-replaced-by-son-of-deposed-shah-the-people-want-a-democratic-republic-struan-stevenson-4036845

 

A little from the article 

 

" The self proclaimed " crown prince " has created hostility in Iran by stating his would - be support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) the theocratic regimes vile equivalent of the Gestapo.

" I am in bilateral with the regimes military the IRGC and the Basij.

We are communicating. They are signalling there readiness and willingness to align with the people "

 

It is the war mongering IRGC and the Basij who have shot, arrested, tortured, raped and brutalized opponents of the regime at home and abroad for four decades. They are blacklisted as a foreign terrorist organisation in America and Robert Mestola the President of the European Parliament recently called for their blacklisting in Europe. 

 

For Reza Pahlavi who has remained largely invisible in opposition circles for the past 44 years to suggest a role for the IRGC in a  future Iran, is an outrageous indication of the total illegitimacy of the Monarchy. 

 

During the current protests, the mullahs are trying to link the opposition to the monarchy, to discourage people from joining the protests. But in defiance of this trick, the protesters can routinely be heard " down with the oppressor, be it the Shah or the supreme leader (Khamenei)" and " no to the Shah! no to the mullahs "

 

 

Media Bias assessment of

The Scotsman

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-scotsman/

 

Least Biased 

High factual reporting

High Credibility 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

2 hours ago, Ilunga said:

The people want a democratic republic "

 

Look; I listen to video's and decide for myself. Rather than use rating services to determine how credible. Or left versus right a source is. That particular video called specifically for a democracy, not that he be leader.  Targeted dissatisfaction with the regime rather than a campaign or any specific leaning party. Except to oppose an autocratic Islamist fundamental regime that imposed itself. For an economic & political system largely installed by the US; the govt. that was deposed in the late 70's seemed a whole lot more friendly to its own population than in place now.

 

I do also post some articles and video's just so differing views are presented.  I did a Western video & Al Jazeera source, guaranteed to be aligned with Palestinian views. 

 

 

Then make my own somewhat winded editorials. 

 

Much shorter example; Gaza could use someone calling for democracy & to depose fanatic militants. Someone, anyone!     

 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

 

[Canuck Surfer]

'Each time peace deals get close, Netanyahu escalates!'

 

Turkish source...

 

 

[Ilunga]

31 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

Look; I listen to video's and decide for myself. Rather than use rating services to determine how credible. Or left versus right a source is. That particular video called specifically for a democracy, not that he be leader.  Targeted dissatisfaction with the regime rather than a campaign or any specific leaning party. Except to oppose an autocratic Islamist fundamental regime that imposed itself. For an economic & political system largely installed by the US; the govt. that was deposed in the late 70's seemed a whole lot more friendly to its own population than in place now.

 

I do also post some articles and video's just so differing views are presented.  I did a Western video & Al Jazeera source, guaranteed to be aligned with Palestinian views. 

 

 

Then make my own somewhat winded editorials. 

 

Much shorter example; Gaza could use someone calling for democracy & to depose fanatic militants. Someone, anyone!     

 

 

 

Seriously ?

The US and Britain who instigated a coup to overthrow the  democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh.

Who wanted the profits of Iranian oil to stay in Iran, not go to the coffers of British and American corporations.

Yeah it's all good, the bastions of democracy instigating coups against democratically elected governments.

The temerity of the government of Mohammad Mosaddegh to want to keep the profits of Iranian oil in Iranian hands.

 

The same Shah who terrorised his people with the Savak - secret police - was corrupt, authoritarian and lived an exorbitant lifestyle while the people of Iran lived like shit. 

 

As for media bias, that is a well credentialed organisation that rates how a media outlet can be trusted and how biased they are.

 

Me I like sources of news/information I can trust.

 

[Ilunga]

@Canuck Surfer 

 

As I have stated before 

 

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mohammad-Mosaddegh

 

 

" It is generally agreed today that the 1953 coup sowed the seeds for the Islamic Revolution of 1979. 

In which the Shah was overthrown and went into exile. In 2013 the CIA formerly disclosed its part in the coup "

 

So apart from the British and American engineering a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government in the middle, in Iran.

So they could help British and American corporations.

That has caused 70 years of suffering for the Iranian people.

First under the Shahs brutal regime, followed the the Mullahs brutal regime. 

 

And people talk about the only democracy in the middle east.

 

 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

33 minutes ago, Ilunga said:

Seriously ?

 

Yes seriously.

 

No the US should not have been interfering with a democracy for oil profit in the 1950's.  A step backwards. No argument.

 

It does not make Khomeini's regime, which has participated in wars that have killed 700,000 or 800,000 people directly.  See wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen.  Who are more aggressive, genocidal, in their quest for power, elimination of religious, militant & political opposition than the US was in the 50's. 

[Canuck Surfer]

Now take a look at their involvement in Lebanon & Gaza.

 

Israel has its crimes. I am for accountability.

 

Just my opinion they are not the worst actor where they have guilt & blood on their hands.   

 

 

Haniyeh, emboldened by Iranian support stated in 2017 he was willing to sacrifice palestinian children to eliminate all Jews in 'Palestine.' 

 

Prophetic. It has come true as he planned. He is not going to any heaven.

 

8 Months ago, and since, I have called for restraint by Israel.  Right now I call for restraint by Iran!  They have just been exposed, and I am not speaking security wise.  For who they are.  Haniyeh, who was in Tehran to swear in Irans new leader, joined a chorus called for the death of the US & Israel just hours before Ismail died.  

[Ilunga]

44 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

Yes seriously.

 

No the US should not have been interfering with a democracy for oil profit in the 1950's.  A step backwards. No argument.

 

It does not make Khomeini's regime, which has participated in wars that have killed 700,000 or 800,000 people directly.  See wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen.  Who are more aggressive, genocidal, in their quest for power, elimination of religious, militant & political opposition than the US was in the 50's. 

 

It was American and British intervention, the Coup that overthrew Mohammad Mosaddegh's democratically elected government, that sowed the seeds for the Islamic revolution as I have pointed out.

So ultimately the US and Britian have to assume part of the blame for all those wars, and proxy terror organisations that Irans mullahs have been responsible for.

And for the suffering of the Iranian people for the last 70 years.

[Optimist Prime]

6 hours ago, Ilunga said:

 

While I want regime change in Iran more than anyone, I wouldn't be using the Shahs son as a source. 

Nor do I believe that a " Prince " who wants to be a Shah is a proper replacement for the Mullahs. 

 

As this article from The Scotsman states

 

" Iran's despotic mullahs must not be replaced by son of deposed Shah. The people want a democratic republic "

 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/irans-despotic-mullahs-must-not-be-replaced-by-son-of-deposed-shah-the-people-want-a-democratic-republic-struan-stevenson-4036845

 

A little from the article 

 

" The self proclaimed " crown prince " has created hostility in Iran by stating his would - be support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) the theocratic regimes vile equivalent of the Gestapo.

" I am in bilateral with the regimes military the IRGC and the Basij.

We are communicating. They are signalling there readiness and willingness to align with the people "

 

It is the war mongering IRGC and the Basij who have shot, arrested, tortured, raped and brutalized opponents of the regime at home and abroad for four decades. They are blacklisted as a foreign terrorist organisation in America and Robert Mestola the President of the European Parliament recently called for their blacklisting in Europe. 

 

For Reza Pahlavi who has remained largely invisible in opposition circles for the past 44 years to suggest a role for the IRGC in a  future Iran, is an outrageous indication of the total illegitimacy of the Monarchy. 

 

During the current protests, the mullahs are trying to link the opposition to the monarchy, to discourage people from joining the protests. But in defiance of this trick, the protesters can routinely be heard " down with the oppressor, be it the Shah or the supreme leader (Khamenei)" and " no to the Shah! no to the mullahs "

 

 

Media Bias assessment of

The Scotsman

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-scotsman/

 

Least Biased 

High factual reporting

High Credibility 

 

I think literally any alternative government is better than one rooted in theocratic cult fanaticism. 

[Optimist Prime]

Confirmed!
 

Hamas military leader Mohammed Deif killed last month, Israel says

Announcement of his death on July 13 follows this week's killing of Hamas leader Haniyeh

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/israel-hamas-war-deif-1.7281995

[Bob Long]

28 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

I think literally any alternative government is better than one rooted in theocratic cult fanaticism. 

 

apparently this needs to be continually explained. Even in the US now. 

[RWMc1]

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/disinformation-iran-russia-anti-israel-protests-canada

 

This article talks about russia and iran using media to manipulate public opinion.

[Taxi]

On 7/31/2024 at 2:14 AM, Canuck Surfer said:

 

There was a video posted here.  Many on line.  The Druze were squarely blaming Hezbollah.  Were just pissed Bibi used it as a photo op & media blitz. I am sure they would be more upheival if it became the impetus for all out war. Especially if fought in the Golan Heights.

 

The Druze are not the only inhabitants.  They were just the direct victims in this instant.

 

I do agree Israel has / had no business annexing the Golan Heights. A security zone, considering what has gone on debatable in a much different way than the West Bank. Isreal has provided security to the area from the civil war in Syria the past 12 years that had ten times the death of what is occurring in Gaza.  There are also people that side with being under Israeli control. None of this is the case in West Bank.   

 

Lebanon as a failed state = a cause / effect discussion.  It seems obvious the infiltration of Palestinian militants in lebanon, that became Hezbollah. Changed the balance of power. Hezbollah are also the faction driving the economy underground & into a tailspin as that failed state.  Not war, or even conflict with Israel.  

 

This isn't correct. Palestinians are almost entirely Sunni, while Hezbollah is a Shiite organization. Iran set up Hezbollah, and Hezbollah sees the Ayatollah as their supreme leader.

 

There's zero chance Israel gives the Golan Heights back to Syria though. It's a sparsely population area that gives the high ground to whoever has it. From the Golan Heights, you'd be able to launch rockets easily into just about anywhere in Israel, and this is what Syria did until Israel took it over. The idea that you can't take strategically important land in a war, particularly a defensive one, is absurd. Land has and does change hands all the time in wars. If you expect Israel to withdraw from land that they were attacked from, it's not happening.