FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Iran missiles hit Israeli hospital
Iran missiles hit Israeli hospital
Jump to: Newest in thread
Israel's defence minister says Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, "can no longer be allowed to exist" after the Soroka hospital was hit during an Iranian missile attack, according to local media and the AFP news agency.
Speaking to journalists in Holon, near Tel Aviv, Israel Katz reportedly said: "Khamenei openly declares that he wants Israel destroyed, he personally gives the order to fire on hospitals.
"He considers the destruction of the state of Israel to be a goal...Such a man can no longer be allowed to exist."
Obviously it is fine for Israel to flatten hospitals and kill innocent people whilst they commit genocide (let's call it genocide even though we are not allowed to in case it offends) but should another country, after being attacked, fire a missile which hit a hospital in error, then they are not playing by the rules and should sit in the naughty corner.
Shame on you Iran for not simply lying down and letting Israel and the US bomb you to oblivion.
Remember that Israel makes the rules of engagement and they have the US to call on if anyone gives them a telling off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Israel's defence minister says Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, "can no longer be allowed to exist" after the Soroka hospital was hit during an Iranian missile attack, according to local media and the AFP news agency.
Speaking to journalists in Holon, near Tel Aviv, Israel Katz reportedly said: "Khamenei openly declares that he wants Israel destroyed, he personally gives the order to fire on hospitals.
"He considers the destruction of the state of Israel to be a goal...Such a man can no longer be allowed to exist."
Obviously it is fine for Israel to flatten hospitals and kill innocent people whilst they commit genocide (let's call it genocide even though we are not allowed to in case it offends) but should another country, after being attacked, fire a missile which hit a hospital in error, then they are not playing by the rules and should sit in the naughty corner.
Shame on you Iran for not simply lying down and letting Israel and the US bomb you to oblivion.
Remember that Israel makes the rules of engagement and they have the US to call on if anyone gives them a telling off."
Thousands of Ukrainians have died from drones supplied by Iran. Iran is a terrorist state.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Shame on you for not condemning an attack on an Israeli hospital regardless of the circumstances of anything else."
Oh my oh my
I didn't think I needed to condem it as they should be a given.
Shame in you for not condemning the attacks on the hospitals and people of Gaza!
Or perhaps you condone those!
..and what about the attacks on hospitals in Ukraine?
And the stray missiles and civilian deaths in Yemen?
What about all the others who have been killed needlessly around the world - you didn't mention them either!
So - what is your actual point?
Are you attacking me or do you think that Israel has the right to attack and kill wherever they feel threatened but, others should not retaliate?
Have you an actual opinion?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I know I don’t say a lot.. or people just generally don’t listen to what I say.. but I said this in the main thread this morning  "
What you say counts, is on point and is generally well researched and well reasoned. Most importantly, your heart is (almost) always in the right place. Your voice is valuable here, even to those who don't always agree with you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
OP you do know that in the middle east, only Israeli deaths matter right. The Arabs are savages, if the Israelis weren't killing them, they would just be killing each other and hoping to go to heaven and claim their virgins.
If you didn't know that, you've not been listening. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I have this rather noisy aggressive neighbour that keeps threatening me and being abusive. I have a feeling he's going to obtain a illegal firearms and attack me.
Am wondering if I should attack him first with my illegal firearm before he does me any damage. Am sure the police and courts would understand my concerns. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Shame on you for not condemning an attack on an Israeli hospital regardless of the circumstances of anything else.
Oh my oh my
I didn't think I needed to condem it as they should be a given.
Shame in you for not condemning the attacks on the hospitals and people of Gaza!
Or perhaps you condone those!
..and what about the attacks on hospitals in Ukraine?
And the stray missiles and civilian deaths in Yemen?
What about all the others who have been killed needlessly around the world - you didn't mention them either!
So - what is your actual point?
Are you attacking me or do you think that Israel has the right to attack and kill wherever they feel threatened but, others should not retaliate?
Have you an actual opinion?
"
You're thinking seems to be Iran hit an Israel hospital accidentally ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Trumps not going to congress if he gets involved. And jury out atm if Starmer will be helping out so he’s got a piece of it
Does look like Iran might get a bashing from that nine squadron usa strike fleet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Trumps not going to congress if he gets involved. And jury out atm if Starmer will be helping out so he’s got a piece of it
Does look like Iran might get a bashing from that nine squadron usa strike fleet. "
I doubt it, Russians are working in Iranian power facilities, the US has been warned. Turkey is struggling, Erdogan would join sides as his citizens would demand it, his position is far from secure and he'd just could not do nothing.
The problem is that Russia controls Iran and thus the oil in the middle east, if the US do nothing they just totally irrelevant on the global stage and pay the oil price Iran sets, OPEC would be useless, act and they will open the gates to hell for the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *otMe66Man 6 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Trumps not going to congress if he gets involved. And jury out atm if Starmer will be helping out so he’s got a piece of it
Does look like Iran might get a bashing from that nine squadron usa strike fleet.
I doubt it, Russians are working in Iranian power facilities, the US has been warned. Turkey is struggling, Erdogan would join sides as his citizens would demand it, his position is far from secure and he'd just could not do nothing.
The problem is that Russia controls Iran and thus the oil in the middle east, if the US do nothing they just totally irrelevant on the global stage and pay the oil price Iran sets, OPEC would be useless, act and they will open the gates to hell for the world."
How do Russia control Iran? I have heard this a lot and can't join the dots. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have this rather noisy aggressive neighbour that keeps threatening me and being abusive. I have a feeling he's going to obtain a illegal firearms and attack me.
Am wondering if I should attack him first with my illegal firearm before he does me any damage. Am sure the police and courts would understand my concerns. "
If you see his 3D printer being delivered... If you see his forum posts looking for gun schematics... If he has threatened to kill your family in the name of religion... If you can see that he has printed 50% of the components already... If he is mixing gunpowder... If there is no effective police force who could actually stop him, just friends who refuse to but his stuff (bit other people do but some, at knocked down rates)... If he has given knives to his extended family, who have stabbed other neighbours with his encouragement...
Then yes, your can destroy his 3D printer, gunpowder and anyone fighting to stop you destroying them.
The fact that you already own an illegal firearm is irrelevant in this instance, it's simply another factor. And nobody is suggesting that Israel should nuke Iran; that is a disingenuous red herring in the analogy.
Likening states to individuals isn't always easy, since the whole paradigm is different. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have this rather noisy aggressive neighbour that keeps threatening me and being abusive. I have a feeling he's going to obtain a illegal firearms and attack me.
Am wondering if I should attack him first with my illegal firearm before he does me any damage. Am sure the police and courts would understand my concerns.
If you see his 3D printer being delivered... If you see his forum posts looking for gun schematics... If he has threatened to kill your family in the name of religion... If you can see that he has printed 50% of the components already... If he is mixing gunpowder... If there is no effective police force who could actually stop him, just friends who refuse to but his stuff (bit other people do but some, at knocked down rates)... If he has given knives to his extended family, who have stabbed other neighbours with his encouragement...
Then yes, your can destroy his 3D printer, gunpowder and anyone fighting to stop you destroying them.
The fact that you already own an illegal firearm is irrelevant in this instance, it's simply another factor. And nobody is suggesting that Israel should nuke Iran; that is a disingenuous red herring in the analogy.
Likening states to individuals isn't always easy, since the whole paradigm is different."
Are you saying if I want legally kill someone, I need to become a politician. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"F*** Israel and anyone who supports them "
The only real democracy in the Middle East? The only place where Jews, Christians, Muslims and others live side by side with equal rights? The place where synagogues, mosques and churches are neighbours? The only place in the Middle East where gay people are not afraid to be openly gay? The only place in the Middle East where citizens are able to protest against their government without fear of death?
The only place in the Middle East where Arab Muslims will fight side by side with Jews - yeah, you’re right 🤦♂️
I mean you’d probably criticise them for committing a genocide - although I’m unsure of who given that the self-proclaimed Palestinians have had a year on year population increase 🤷♂️
I’d suggest your post sums up your TikTok induced antisemitism quite nicely |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The only real democracy in the Middle East?
If Israel ever changes its policy of denying equal rights to five million Palestinians then we will all celebrate it being a "real democracy".
"
Arab Israelis have equal rights in Israel. Palestinians are not Israelis, what democratic rights are they owed by Israel? You are aware that they were offered a two state solution and their own “democratically elected” government turned this down, aren’t you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Arab Israelis have equal rights in Israel. Palestinians are not Israelis, what democratic rights are they owed by Israel? You are aware that they were offered a two state solution and their own “democratically elected” government turned this down, aren’t you?"
I felt that your comment couldn't go unaddressed and it sounds like you are unaware of the facts.
It's off-topic but if you want I'm more than willing to review and debate the history of the two-state solution and discuss possible paths forward if people aren't going to complain about it being off-topic.
Perhaps if you feel passsionate about it you could start a new thread called "Two State Solution".
I'd do it myself but I've been waiting for the UN convention on the matter that has been postponed due to Israel's attack on Iran.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The point was not off topic given that you were implying that Israel owed the Palestinians democratic rights - could you explain how this would work, given the fact they aren’t citizens of Israel?"
There are basically two mechanisms for the relationship between Israelis and the Palestianians to be normalized.
The first is a one-state solution where Israel formally annexes Gaza and the West Bank and grants all people in the area the same democratic rights regardless of ethnicity.
The second is a two-state solution where Israel formally recognises the existence of a Palestinian state.
The current Israeli government rejects both choices.
In the past a one-state solution has been rejected on the grounds that Israel wants to be a Jewish state. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, however the only democratic way to achieve it would be to declare the boundaries of Israel to be within an area where there is a clear Jewish majority. So this is where the idea of a two-state solution comes in.
The two-state solution has for decades been the preferred mechanism for most of the world to solve the problem, with boundaries more or less on the 1967 Green Line. This was accepted by the PLO as early as 1982 at the Arab Conference in Fez.
Unfortunately the Israeli government has never offered a genuine two-state solution. It was getting close after the Oslo Accords but then derailled following the 1995 assassination of Yitzhack Rabin by an Israeli extremist.
So far the Palestinian "state" offered by the Israeli government has been one where Israel controls the borders, the airspace, the natural resources including water and the foreign policy. In addition Israel wanted Israeli bases inside the Palestinian "state" and complete freedom for the IDF to patrol.
This was rejected by the Palestinians because it is exactly the same as the existing situation but dressed up as a state. Also the Israeli government insisted that this would be a final settlement rather than a transitional one.
The PLO did understand Israeli concerns about security so offered demilitarization and for their nascent sate to be policed by a third party. They accepted a transition where they would not have the same sovereignty as Israel until after there had been a very long period of peace. The Israeli government rejected this plan and continues to do so.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I’m sure there’s more than 2 possible options moving forward but let’s deal with one of the two you mentioned. There’s no way an Israeli government could sell the first option to its people
and the current government wouldn’t want to. You don’t invite kidn@ppers and terrorists inside your borders!
I think a demilitarised buffer zone policed by the UN could work. And Iran pay for it as they seem happy to pay for war, they could try paying for peace.
But while Palestinians are willing to hide and shelter Hamas within their borders, and Lebanon are willing (or unable to stop) Hezbollah within there’s, it doesn’t really matter what anyone does. The same shit will hit the same fan sooner or later |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 6 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"The point was not off topic given that you were implying that Israel owed the Palestinians democratic rights - could you explain how this would work, given the fact they aren’t citizens of Israel?
There are basically two mechanisms for the relationship between Israelis and the Palestianians to be normalized.
The first is a one-state solution where Israel formally annexes Gaza and the West Bank and grants all people in the area the same democratic rights regardless of ethnicity.
The second is a two-state solution where Israel formally recognises the existence of a Palestinian state.
The current Israeli government rejects both choices.
In the past a one-state solution has been rejected on the grounds that Israel wants to be a Jewish state. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, however the only democratic way to achieve it would be to declare the boundaries of Israel to be within an area where there is a clear Jewish majority. So this is where the idea of a two-state solution comes in.
The two-state solution has for decades been the preferred mechanism for most of the world to solve the problem, with boundaries more or less on the 1967 Green Line. This was accepted by the PLO as early as 1982 at the Arab Conference in Fez.
Unfortunately the Israeli government has never offered a genuine two-state solution. It was getting close after the Oslo Accords but then derailled following the 1995 assassination of Yitzhack Rabin by an Israeli extremist.
So far the Palestinian "state" offered by the Israeli government has been one where Israel controls the borders, the airspace, the natural resources including water and the foreign policy. In addition Israel wanted Israeli bases inside the Palestinian "state" and complete freedom for the IDF to patrol.
This was rejected by the Palestinians because it is exactly the same as the existing situation but dressed up as a state. Also the Israeli government insisted that this would be a final settlement rather than a transitional one.
The PLO did understand Israeli concerns about security so offered demilitarization and for their nascent sate to be policed by a third party. They accepted a transition where they would not have the same sovereignty as Israel until after there had been a very long period of peace. The Israeli government rejected this plan and continues to do so.
"
You claim Israel has “never offered a genuine two state solution,” but that’s not true. The 2000 Camp David Summit and Olmert’s 2008 proposal both made offers including nearly all of the West Bank and a capital in East Jerusalem which the Palestinian leadership rejected without any counteroffers.
It is everything other than Israel again...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’m sure there’s more than 2 possible options moving forward but let’s deal with one of the two you mentioned. There’s no way an Israeli government could sell the first option to its people
and the current government wouldn’t want to. You don’t invite kidn@ppers and terrorists inside your borders!
I think a demilitarised buffer zone policed by the UN could work. And Iran pay for it as they seem happy to pay for war, they could try paying for peace.
But while Palestinians are willing to hide and shelter Hamas within their borders, and Lebanon are willing (or unable to stop) Hezbollah within there’s, it doesn’t really matter what anyone does. The same shit will hit the same fan sooner or later "
I agree that a one-state solution isn't feasible primarily because it wouldn't lead to a Jewish state as the number of Jews and non-Jews would be roughly equal.
And as you say because of Israeli mistrust of Palestinians. I also can't see Palestinians accepting such an arrangement either as they definitely don't trust Israelis. After all the Israelis have killed about ten times as many Palestinians as Israelis have been killed by Palestinians.
The PLO have repeatedly sought a two-state solution and would accept a UN buffer zone and UN internal policing. If the Israeli government were to make the offer then the Arab gulf states would almost certainly finance this.
There is an obvious Nelson Mandela type leader for the Palestinian's to coalesce around in the person of Marwan Barghouti. He's been imprisoned by the Israelis for other two decades. Hamas support would completely disappear if Barghouti was released.
A genuine two-state solution would also tame Hezbollah and the Iranians. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You claim Israel has “never offered a genuine two state solution,” but that’s not true. The 2000 Camp David Summit and Olmert’s 2008 proposal both made offers including nearly all of the West Bank and a capital in East Jerusalem which the Palestinian leadership rejected without any counteroffers.
It is everything other than Israel again..."
As I said there were motions towards a real deal but they fell apart.
Olmert was sunk in a corruption scandal and the plan was sketchy at best and in opinion polls 70% of Israelis rejected it so it was a non-starter politically.
The Israeli side constantly talk about territorial boundaries and how generous their offers were but the maps are only one aspect of a two-state solution. What really matters in the sovereignty of the Palestinans within these areas. There wasn't any real sovereignty offered, just a continuation of the status quo with Israel being in control of everything. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Are you saying if I want legally kill someone, I need to become a politician.
If you *want* to kill someone, then you've got bigger problems."
Your against killing..? Now that's a surprise, given your eagerness for conflict. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Are you saying if I want legally kill someone, I need to become a politician.
If you *want* to kill someone, then you've got bigger problems.
Your against killing..? Now that's a surprise, given your eagerness for conflict. "
Please explain that. Seriously - use that little green arrow and find examples of "eagerness for conflict".
War might be necessary when other avenues do not work, but it is never an initial and preferred option. There are plenty of death cults who do pursue war, however. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
in light of how many hospitals that israel have bombed in the last couple of years that's just sauce for the gander.
still, i think bombing hospitals is an abhorrent act and shouldn't happen in the 21st century. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"in light of how many hospitals that israel have bombed in the last couple of years that's just sauce for the gander.
still, i think bombing hospitals is an abhorrent act and shouldn't happen in the 21st century."
What's abhorrent is terrprists hiding behind patients, Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"in light of how many hospitals that israel have bombed in the last couple of years that's just sauce for the gander.
still, i think bombing hospitals is an abhorrent act and shouldn't happen in the 21st century.What's abhorrent is terrprists hiding behind patients, Mrs x"
i dare say a good proportion of the israeli hospital occupants were IDF considering the nature of their conscription. as already established, this was sauce for the gander. and also as already established, no matter how one dresses it up, the bombing of hospitals doesn't belong in the 21st century. it's just an act perpertrated by barbarous savages. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *erces LetiferMan 5 weeks ago
Somewhere off the edge of the map... 'ere there be monsters |
"in light of how many hospitals that israel have bombed in the last couple of years that's just sauce for the gander.
still, i think bombing hospitals is an abhorrent act and shouldn't happen in the 21st century.What's abhorrent is terrprists hiding behind patients, Mrs x
i dare say a good proportion of the israeli hospital occupants were IDF considering the nature of their conscription. as already established, this was sauce for the gander. and also as already established, no matter how one dresses it up, the bombing of hospitals doesn't belong in the 21st century. it's just an act perpertrated by barbarous savages."
The “barbarous” and “savage” act here is the intentional embedding of military personnel and materials within schools and hospitals, knowing and hoping that a provoked enemy will retaliate and harm the civilians with which you are responsible to protect. Oh, that’s of course after remembering the other barbarous and savage act of carrying out a terrorist attack against the civilians of said enemy in the first place…
But hey, why bother contextualising such things with all these pesky details, eh? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"in light of how many hospitals that israel have bombed in the last couple of years that's just sauce for the gander.
still, i think bombing hospitals is an abhorrent act and shouldn't happen in the 21st century.What's abhorrent is terrprists hiding behind patients, Mrs x
i dare say a good proportion of the israeli hospital occupants were IDF considering the nature of their conscription. as already established, this was sauce for the gander. and also as already established, no matter how one dresses it up, the bombing of hospitals doesn't belong in the 21st century. it's just an act perpertrated by barbarous savages.
The “barbarous” and “savage” act here is the intentional embedding of military personnel and materials within schools and hospitals, knowing and hoping that a provoked enemy will retaliate and harm the civilians with which you are responsible to protect. Oh, that’s of course after remembering the other barbarous and savage act of carrying out a terrorist attack against the civilians of said enemy in the first place…
But hey, why bother contextualising such things with all these pesky details, eh?"
yet you willfully ignore the pesky details of thousands of patients and medical staff being collateral damage in the pursuit of killing a handful of combatants .... you sicken me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It is terrible terrorists opt to fight behind civilians but why are they doing that exactly?
Because it isn’t an even fight?
This strategy has been repeated all around the globe & will very highly likely continue to be as long as a weaker group are going up against a stronger group.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *erces LetiferMan 5 weeks ago
Somewhere off the edge of the map... 'ere there be monsters |
"yet you willfully ignore the pesky details of thousands of patients and medical staff being collateral damage in the pursuit of killing a handful of combatants .... you sicken me."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
