Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

I used to know a guy (he died a couple of years ago) who was a retired testing engineer for a global manufacturing company. He had a home workshop that would be the envy of many small countries and thought that drones were the coolest things ever.
I'm sure that guy could, with a few thousand dollars worth of online purchases of computerized drones, have made weapons that could bring down Western society. Delivery some weaponized anthrax or radioactive material to the precisely right place at the precisely correct moment.
Was this assassination a drone strike?

I'm glad I'm old.
Tom

None of those payloads can be had for a few thousand dollars.

Going for a more dispersed target though I can see destroying the US with a price tag in the millions with no need to go into the WMD realm. Probably tens of millions if you are going to do it with prepositioned equipment so your people can get away before the strike. All targets are completely unguarded.

 

[laughing dog]

As usual, you are "misinformed":For years, Netanahyu has propped up Hamas

Thus, amid this bid to impair Abbas, Hamas was upgraded from a mere terror group to an organization with which Israel held indirect negotiations via Egypt, and one that was allowed to receive infusions of cash from abroad.......
Additionally, since 2014, Netanyahu-led governments have practically turned a blind eye to the incendiary balloons and rocket fire from Gaza.


Advertisement


Meanwhile, Israel has allowed suitcases holding millions in Qatari cash to enter Gaza through its crossings since 2018, in order to maintain its fragile ceasefire with the Hamas rulers of the Strip.

Note: "Allowed". Israel wasn't funding it, they just didn't take action against Qatar. Doing so would have triggered another war.

Nonsense.
Note that Hamas was a recognized terrorist group but Netanahyu had the designation changed in order to receive infusions of case.

No matter how you try to dodge reality - the US was not doing anything that their ally, Israel, was doing with respect to aid.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Note: "Allowed". Israel wasn't funding it, they just didn't take action against Qatar. Doing so would have triggered another war.

Nonsense.
Note that Hamas was a recognized terrorist group but Netanahyu had the designation changed in order to receive infusions of case.

No matter how you try to dodge reality - the US was not doing anything that their ally, Israel, was doing with respect to aid.

The world keeps expecting Israel to keep the peace even when that's against their interest. Blocking the Qatari money would have gone against that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And Iran calls for war crimes.

Iran: Hezbollah to deliberately target civilians in response to Shukr assassination

An Israeli official claimed that Iran's attack was predicted to be more extreme compared to April's and could extend to Israeli interests abroad.

www.jpost.com

 

[laughing dog]

Note: "Allowed". Israel wasn't funding it, they just didn't take action against Qatar. Doing so would have triggered another war.

Nonsense.
Note that Hamas was a recognized terrorist group but Netanahyu had the designation changed in order to receive infusions of case.

No matter how you try to dodge reality - the US was not doing anything that their ally, Israel, was doing with respect to aid.

The world keeps expecting Israel to keep the peace even when that's against their interest. Blocking the Qatari money would have gone against that.

Israel funded Hamas when it knew it was terrorist organization. It permitted funds to physically flow to a terrorist organization. You can spin it all you want, but is the reality. You have to explain whyit is ok for Israel to but not for its allies.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Note: "Allowed". Israel wasn't funding it, they just didn't take action against Qatar. Doing so would have triggered another war.

Nonsense.
Note that Hamas was a recognized terrorist group but Netanahyu had the designation changed in order to receive infusions of case.

No matter how you try to dodge reality - the US was not doing anything that their ally, Israel, was doing with respect to aid.

The world keeps expecting Israel to keep the peace even when that's against their interest. Blocking the Qatari money would have gone against that.

Israel funded Hamas when it knew it was terrorist organization. It permitted funds to physically flow to a terrorist organization. You can spin it all you want, but is the reality. You have to explain whyit is ok for Israel to but not for its allies.

You have established that they permitted funds to flow. That's not the same as establishing that they contributed funds.

And what were they supposed to, arrest the Qataris??

 

[laughing dog]

Note: "Allowed". Israel wasn't funding it, they just didn't take action against Qatar. Doing so would have triggered another war.

Nonsense.
Note that Hamas was a recognized terrorist group but Netanahyu had the designation changed in order to receive infusions of case.

No matter how you try to dodge reality - the US was not doing anything that their ally, Israel, was doing with respect to aid.

The world keeps expecting Israel to keep the peace even when that's against their interest. Blocking the Qatari money would have gone against that.

Israel funded Hamas when it knew it was terrorist organization. It permitted funds to physically flow to a terrorist organization. You can spin it all you want, but is the reality. You have to explain whyit is ok for Israel to but not for its allies.

You have established that they permitted funds to flow. That's not the same as establishing that they contributed funds.

And what were they supposed to, arrest the Qataris??

FFS, I find it hard to believe that someone who makes some many authoritative pronouncements about the situation in Israel can be so ignorant of well-known facts:  Israeli_support_for_Hamas.

I also find it difficult to believe that the Israeli gov't would not be able to interdict such funds in a clever fashion. It's not like the Israel security services are terribly squeamish about dealing with such things. At a minimum, they did not have to permit suitcases filled with cash to be transported through Israel.

Regardless, it is "ironic" to complain that Israel's allies allowed Hamas to get funds when Israel was doing the same thing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

IDF releases file seized in Gaza to show Al Jazeera reporter was Hamas member

2021 terror group roster shows Ismail al-Ghoul was an engineer in Hamas's Gaza City Brigade, army says

www.timesofisrael.com

Once again, we see that a "reporter" was Hamas.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

FFS, I find it hard to believe that someone who makes some many authoritative pronouncements about the situation in Israel can be so ignorant of well-known facts:  Israeli_support_for_Hamas.

I also find it difficult to believe that the Israeli gov't would not be able to interdict such funds in a clever fashion. It's not like the Israel security services are terribly squeamish about dealing with such things. At a minimum, they did not have to permit suitcases filled with cash to be transported through Israel.

Regardless, it is "ironic" to complain that Israel's allies allowed Hamas to get funds when Israel was doing the same thing.

You still aren't establishing that they were helping Hamas when they became military. Nobody's disputing that Israel supported them at first to divide the Palestinians.

 

[laughing dog]

FFS, I find it hard to believe that someone who makes some many authoritative pronouncements about the situation in Israel can be so ignorant of well-known facts:  Israeli_support_for_Hamas.

I also find it difficult to believe that the Israeli gov't would not be able to interdict such funds in a clever fashion. It's not like the Israel security services are terribly squeamish about dealing with such things. At a minimum, they did not have to permit suitcases filled with cash to be transported through Israel.

Regardless, it is "ironic" to complain that Israel's allies allowed Hamas to get funds when Israel was doing the same thing.

You still aren't establishing that they were helping Hamas when they became military. Nobody's disputing that Israel supported them at first to divide the Palestinians.

Posts 5072 and 5087 establish that. Your disingenuous ignorance is duly noted.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think boycotting an invited address of an deomcratically leader of an ally is petty snd tacky on the part of the Democrats.

Arguably, he isn't a democratically elected leader though. He is the head of a very loosely tied coalition that was put together in an emergency due to the October terror attack on Israel.

You realize that's basically how parliamentary system work?? For one party to get an outright majority isn't common, a coalition is how it usually works.

No, it isn't how it generally works. In parliamentary systems, for minority parties to be in charge, they need to form a coalition. This coalition was only bounded together by the attack and the immediate need to a stable central government. It wasn't appearing that they would have got things together otherwise. This coalition government has a big fat asterisk on it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

FFS, I find it hard to believe that someone who makes some many authoritative pronouncements about the situation in Israel can be so ignorant of well-known facts:  Israeli_support_for_Hamas.

I also find it difficult to believe that the Israeli gov't would not be able to interdict such funds in a clever fashion. It's not like the Israel security services are terribly squeamish about dealing with such things. At a minimum, they did not have to permit suitcases filled with cash to be transported through Israel.

Regardless, it is "ironic" to complain that Israel's allies allowed Hamas to get funds when Israel was doing the same thing.

You still aren't establishing that they were helping Hamas when they became military. Nobody's disputing that Israel supported them at first to divide the Palestinians.

The radicals in the Israeli government helped create the beast that slaughtered thousands of Israelis. That is what complicates this math. Netanyahu is partially to blame for the utter inability to deal with Palestine. There was a chance, and it ended with Rabin's assassination after monsters like Netanyahu fanned the flames of nationalism.

You are wanting to back the radicals that helped create this entire mess. Their culpability doesn't go away simply because the radicals in Iran are complicit in Hamas' and Hezbollah's actions against the Israeli people.

 

[lpetrich]

I'll do this for the US, but it can be adapted for other countries.

This will require a bottom-up rewrite of the US Constitution to implement, but I'll go ahead nevertheless.

Abolish the Senate, and make the House elected by proportional representation with the entire nation its electoral district. The President will be elected by the House, but will be a mostly-ceremonial Head of State. The entire executive branch of government will be run out of Congress, with Congresspeople deciding which ones among them will be in charge of which agencies. The Head of Government and acting leader will be the Speaker of the House, and will be chosen by whichever party or coalition of parties can get a majority of seats. The states will be turned into administrative districts, with their governments composed of representatives of local and national governments.

Guess which nation this is.

 

[pood]

Israeli minister says “it may be moral” to starve 2 million Gazans, and that they won’t be receiving education, welfare, or get their sewers unclogged. There in stark relief is the madness of the genocidal Netanyahu government, and you know what? None of it is working. The NY Times reported the other day that Hamas is more powerful in Gaza now than it was at the war’s start. As I predicted. All Israel is doing with their atrocities is breeding untold more generations of Israel haters among the Palestinian people. Good work, Netanyahu.

 

[Gospel]

Guess which nation this is.

Bureaucraptopia?

 

[jonatha]

Guess which nation this is.

Israel

 

[lpetrich]

I notice that nobody says that if one does not want to adopt Israel's system of government, then one is anti-Semitic. Nobody says that not adopting it means turning one's back on the world's only Jewish nation and the only democracy in its region.

 

[pood]

“Ideas like killing the entire population of Gaza suddenly became almost normal.”

 

[Loren Pechtel]

FFS, I find it hard to believe that someone who makes some many authoritative pronouncements about the situation in Israel can be so ignorant of well-known facts:  Israeli_support_for_Hamas.

I also find it difficult to believe that the Israeli gov't would not be able to interdict such funds in a clever fashion. It's not like the Israel security services are terribly squeamish about dealing with such things. At a minimum, they did not have to permit suitcases filled with cash to be transported through Israel.

Regardless, it is "ironic" to complain that Israel's allies allowed Hamas to get funds when Israel was doing the same thing.

You still aren't establishing that they were helping Hamas when they became military. Nobody's disputing that Israel supported them at first to divide the Palestinians.

Posts 5072 and 5087 establish that. Your disingenuous ignorance is duly noted.

#5087 is right here to address so I'll show your problem:

The only "support" you have shown happening while Hamas was a combat force is the Qatari money. And that comes down to the same thing as always--the world telling Israel to kick the can rather than deal with it. Peace in our time worked as well as it usually does--that can-kicking let them do 10/7.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think boycotting an invited address of an deomcratically leader of an ally is petty snd tacky on the part of the Democrats.

Arguably, he isn't a democratically elected leader though. He is the head of a very loosely tied coalition that was put together in an emergency due to the October terror attack on Israel.

You realize that's basically how parliamentary system work?? For one party to get an outright majority isn't common, a coalition is how it usually works.

No, it isn't how it generally works. In parliamentary systems, for minority parties to be in charge, they need to form a coalition. This coalition was only bounded together by the attack and the immediate need to a stable central government. It wasn't appearing that they would have got things together otherwise. This coalition government has a big fat asterisk on it.

What bound the coalition together doesn't change how it works.

We see the same thing with our system--those two senators on the fence wielded very disproportionate power.