Israel-Hamas Conflict: Updates & Discussions

Thats the problem you dont get to understand , more you fight & kill , more monkeys get created. There is endless supply of monkeys due to the very nature of their social fabric. Its not they will get tired of it and say enuf of death & destruction, they will keep continuing as they dont have any thing worth to lose. Its only the dictators fear losing power & their kingdom but the lunatic on the ground literally has nothing to lose.
Well I hope they brought some lube.
 
Its not abt this one , its a sign of things to come. They will change the battlefield like AK47 did when it started out. A single drone can make skies unsafe for commercial airliners, it will severely endanger civilian air traffic.
IAF explained yesterday that this drone was detected but due to a human error it was not destroyed.
I don't see a cloudy future for Israel with Houthis.
Thats the problem you dont get to understand , more you fight & kill , more monkeys get created. There is endless supply of monkeys due to the very nature of their social fabric. Its not they will get tired of it and say enuf of death & destruction, they will keep continuing as they dont have any thing worth to lose. Its only the dictators fear losing power & their kingdom but the lunatic on the ground literally has nothing to lose.
Sole solution used by east EU country (as Hungary, Poland...) : stop migration.
Let all that monkeys with themselves in Africa or Middle east.
 
One problem, there's not going to be a Hamas post war.
I really hope so !
 
America, France and Britain have not attacked Russia, we are providing Ukraine assistance in compliance with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum of Understanding signed by the US, UK AND Russia when Ukraine gave up its nukes! People should consider this document when proposing a deal a with Putin on anything and think long and hard whether a deal with Putin actually means anything.

These countries are directly providing arms to attack Russia, thus they are directly involved. Iran and Houthis can do the same. You cant dictate who can join in a conflict. Imagine afghanistan calling foul for anyone other than US joining fight.

Afghanistan attacked the US 4 times unprovoked:

1993 WTC bombing;
1998 US Embassy bombings;
2000 USS Cole attack;
2001 911 attacks.

Yes by Afghanistan because Al-Quaeda/Bin Laden could not possibly be operating there without the full consent and approval of the Taliban.
So if a militia in a ungoverned country attacks another that give right to invade? I thought sovereignty is sacrosanct.

According to which international law was the invasion of Iraq carried out again? Dont tell me they poked bush first.

Still waiting for "1 million children" claim, buddy. Made-up statistics and Wikipedia pages couldn't even come close to that.

Hamas attacked first, so lets see their leader have his day in court first, along with the leaders of Hamas's backers who ordered this war. Then we will discuss the trial of Netanyahu, although currently no ICJ arrest warrant has been issued. In fact, I think Putin's arrest warrant was issued first, so it's Putin's trial, then the Hamas leader's trial in order. If India arrests Putin and Hamas faces trial and an ICJ arrest warrant is issued for Netanyahu, then it will be executed. :)
Again with this kindergarten-level argument, "they attacked first." That does not give you the right to bomb hospitals and destroy civilian infrastructure.

As if an arrest warrant makes any difference.
One problem, there's not going to be a Hamas post war.
Just like the destruction of the Taliban?
 
These countries are directly providing arms to attack Russia, thus they are directly involved. Iran and Houthis can do the same. You cant dictate who can join in a conflict. Imagine afghanistan calling foul for anyone other than US joining fight.
Russia agreed to that when it signed the Budapest Memorandum, it's written in black and white that we would provide assistance. I think the issue here is that you're complaining the response is disproportionate in case you suffer from Amnesia. The Houthis have launched 200 attacks against civilian targets in Israel. Israel blew up their oil terminal and it would be entitled to do a lot more. The Houthis have also attacked civilian shipping from dozens of different uninvolved nations, Israel hit their port. Furthermore, the whole war started because Hamas attacked Israel. The Houthis can indeed choose to join a war, but that means they forfit the right to not have the hell bombed out of them.
So if a militia in a ungoverned country attacks another that give right to invade? I thought sovereignty is sacrosanct.
It's sacrosanct until you attack someone, especially if that attack kills 1,000+ people. All nations have the right to take the necessary steps to defend themselves from such actions and the future occurrence of such, which in this case means wiping out Hamas and in the case of Afghanistan meant wiping out Al-Quaeda. Many nations would currently have the right to invade Yemen and wipe out the Houthis. The Houthis should consider that fact very carefully. What? Do you expect people to sit back and put up with militias from 'ungoverned' regions (that want to be recognised as states :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: ) killing thousands of their citizens and do nothing?
According to which international law was the invasion of Iraq carried out again? Dont tell me they poked bush first.
The law of nine-stitches - they should have made the one stitch in 1991. Like it or not the UN sanctions were killing people indirectly and Saddam was killing people directly, that was driving recruitment for Al-Quaeda, which posed a threat to many countries. Saddam had also committed a million war crimes... use of chemical weapons on civilians, torture of civilians, hostages and PoWs, hostage takings, unprovoked invasion of Kuwait, deliberate environmental damage... etc. Should we allow someone to break all these international laws and get away with it? If so, what is the point in having the law? Enforcement of international law was the reason.
Still waiting for "1 million children" claim, buddy. Made-up statistics and Wikipedia pages couldn't even come close to that.
Okay 744,000. It's ballpark at least, unlike your bullshit.
Again with this kindergarten-level argument, "they attacked first." That does not give you the right to bomb hospitals and destroy civilian infrastructure.
You should read international law on warfare more clearly. If an otherwise civilian structure is being used for a military purpose, it ceases to be a military structure. That said, Israel's maths on acceptable collateral levels are somewhat outside those of NATO.

Whilst we're on the subject of rights and law, you should check out the 1951 Refugee Convention. It states that all the civilians should have been evacuated via Egypt about 9 months ago. Imagine if Ukraine had left Bakhmut, Soledar and Avdiivka fully populated. All these civilians are forced to remain in Gaza because they're the only defence against Israeli bombs that Hamas has and many of the nations making humanitarian accusations know this full well, and are exploiting the fact prolifically. You want to complain, evacuate them to India. That should be the first response to any nations/citizens complaining. People would rather set up dubious charities and UN organisations in Gaza than evacuate a single person, tell me I'm wrong.
As if an arrest warrant makes any difference.
Well it didn't for India when Putin visited, that's for sure, Mr. Western Hypocrisy.
Just like the destruction of the Taliban?
The goal was to destroy Al-Quaeda, don't see Bin Laden about, don't see any 9/11-sized attacks. Killing the Taliban would mean killing everybody, it's possible obviously, but people would complain too much.
 
You may also want to consider Russian drone attacks on grain ships when whining about attacks on Houthi fuel supplies LOL.
 
FAFO


Hamas leader is a HUGE deal because of where he was killed and how... they are saying it was some air strike whether by missile, drone or aircraft they are not saying however if it's one of those three Iran will have no choice but to retaliate strong. Israel has a lot of agents in Iran I always thought it would be by car bomb or ambush which would likely keep Iran from a missile retaliation.

I hope an F-35I was the cause... haters would have no choice but to respect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ginvincible
This idiot was living in qatar & came to tehran for presidential inauguration. Qatar is something very close to iran with american military base.
Very fact they dint take him out in qatar but they did it in iran sends a big message to iran.
 
This idiot was living in qatar & came to tehran for presidential inauguration. Qatar is something very close to iran with american military base.
Very fact they dint take him out in qatar but they did it in iran sends a big message to iran.
The "how" he was taken out is very important. If it was done by agents using IED's or anti-tank missile Iran may not be able to respond the way it would like but if it was a missile, drone or aircraft then Iran has no choice but to respond like the last time it attacked Israel.