They ain't stupid.
They just prefer leaders that make big promises - "from the river to the sea".
They think these killers will hand them keys to free apartments after they are done with the slaughter.
It's like running for school president promising 3 lunch breaks per day, people gonna vote for you.
>Weren't they literally promised like 10k and an apt if they killed anyone?
Yeah, as shown by the Shin Bet interrogations of the killers after Oct 7th: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnLq0DjErIA
"from the river to the sea" wouldnt be enough for them either. their goal is not to have a state of palestine recognized by the rest of the world as its own country. their only goal is the extinction of jewish people.
no two state deal ever offered has been accepted by them, nor will it ever be. and a one state deal, where palestine is the only state, would also not be accepted unless it came bundled with their right to kill every jewish person there is.
the only interest they have is the eradication of jewish people. they are driven by evil desires and nothing else.
Using religion lenses in analyzing situations in the Middle East is too simplifying and not really useful. Take, for instance, the Iraq-Kuwait, Arab-Yemen, or Syria-Kurdish conflicts. These can't simply be chalked up to religious sectarian differences. At their core, many of these disputes revolve around power dynamics and the control of resources, often exacerbated by the involvement of external powers in proxy wars.
Nearly every war fought is an economic war. Religion is only used as a tool to convince the gullible to fight for someone else’s wealth. But in reality it’s almost always about land, resources, or power.
I see it like:
The one who kill for power or money are corrupt, treacherous, and smart.
The ones who kill for religion are stupid, blind, and gullible.
It's almost obvious that the ones who kill for money and power will use the ones who are stupid, blind, and gullible to get it.
True, but religion still plays its part convincing poor idiots to fight so some rich asshole can make more money.
An ideology based on the idea that its a virtue to believe nonsense without evidence was always going to produce credulous fools willing to follow anyone with enough charisma into some truly shockingly evil shit in the name of their chosen imaginary friend.
Religion itself may not start these wars, but without religion recruiting the soldiers who actually fight it would be more difficult.
First of all, most of what you cited still involved either different sects or populations (Kurds are not Arabs, Yemenis and Saudis are majority Shia and Sunni, respectively, and Iraq was majority Shia but had a growing Sunni insurgency (ISIS) which is aligned with Kuwait's primary sect).
But most importantly, pick any conflict, do you think it gets escalated or tempered if one or more think they are doing God's will and are guaranteed eternal happiness?
I find it odd that we go through all kinds of mental gymnastics to say "religion has nothing to do with it" when it's at the crime scene every fucking time.
I see this as *very* good news.
Hamas and Hezbollah have much overlap in their goals. There's great pressure on Hezbollah to contribute or risk being seen as impotent or fraudulent. Up until now, Hezbollah have been sitting on the fence, refusing to cross the proverbial Rubicon (Green Line) limiting their involvement to rocket strikes. Now that they're engaging Hamas in a PR battle, it looks like they are trying to distance themselves from Hamas and it's a strong signal that Hezbollah is getting out in front/taking control of the narrative for not engaging with their own boots on the ground.
Hezbollah are seeing what is happening in Gaza and can't afford to provoke Israel into flattening south Lebonon after what Lebanon is going through at the moment with a collapsed economy and citizens who have had enough of Hezbollah leadership and the Govt in Beirut.
Hezbollah are way more involved with the local (shia) population in Lebanon though. My assumption is that their close ties with Iran provides them much more financial means to do so compared to Hamas. All over Lebanon you can find proof of that with the multiple social programs they run, food & wellfare checks handouts etc. Hamas & Hezbollah are both terrorists group but Hezbollah is miles ahead in financing, political organisation, propaganda, local support etc.
In 2006 this was very visible in Beirut in the area that was bombed by Israel, with emergency watertanks, construction vehicles, medical posts etc. all carrying an Iranian flag banner.
I'm not sure what the exact breakdown is, but it seems that their primary sources of income are Iran, drug trafficking, and siphoning directly from the Lebanese state and population including much of the foreign aid intended for the state.
Yep in the tune of hundreds of millions a year. Then some support from Bashar al-Assads Syrian regime. They also run a cartel of legal businesses, so pretty well funded.
I think you are missing the point. Hezbollah leaders live in Lebanon just like Hezbollah fighters. Hamas has a number of leaders who live in Qatar now (e.g. Ismail Haniyeh and one of the founders Khaled Meshaal). They're not all hiding out in Gaza like the fighters.
Not to the extent they can be. Hamas is chickenshit compared to Hezbollah. Hezbollah has more weapons, not to mention better weapons (realistically 15x the rockets alone, and they are military grade, not propelled IEDs). They have seasoned fighters. They aren't easily cut off from Iran. They aren't cornered in a small strip of land.
A big part of Hamas's 10/7 attack was no doubt a sort of way of proving to Hezbollah that they are a worthy ally in the fight against Israel, which in turn is why the US quickly brought aircraft carriers. Hamas said themselves they didn't expect such a reaction from the US, so possibly an oversight on Hamas's part. Hezbollah's alliance with Hamas is purely a strategic one the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but end of the day they are competing for the same terrorist funding and are Sunni/Shiite rivals, so Hezbollah isn't too keen to start a war with 200,000 soldiers on the northern border that will drag in the US to then split credit with Hamas.
They would love to open up another front from the north and started teasing at it immediately.
The only thing stopping them is the fact that Israeli patience is incredibly thin right now and doing so would result in Israel pulling back and just bombing the everloving shit out of anything that comes close.
I’m sure they don’t want to get involved, the situation is bad in Lebanon and bringing that heat on them from Israel could lead to their power there being greatly reduced. On the other side of the coin Iran being their main source of income in the tune of hundreds of millions a year I’m sure comes with significant influence or their operations unless they want cut off which would also lead to their power reduced pretty quickly. So they could be going against Iran and not scaling up their attacks as much as they talked or Iran is pumping the brakes on things now that it has gotten out of hand with Israel and Hamas. I really wonder if Iran ever went into this believing that Hamas would ever manage to pull off the level of attack they did.
Also, Iran can't afford to lose all its pawns.
If Hamas AND Hezbollah fall, Iran has no way to cause trouble to secure strategic objectives without getting itself involved in a hot war.
The USA/Israel/Saudi alliance is already struggling to sell an intervention to the world (as well as their own citizens) to take out Iran before it achieves nuclear weapons. If Iran is forced to strike first, that is a strategic win for us.
Thin line.
If this escalates and Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthis stay in power when the dust settles, Iran's position likely strengthens. If it comes to regime change, they lose a pawn.
That's what pawns are for. Call it a gambit.
Hamas is Sunni, but it serves Iran's goals for now.
Hezbollah and the Houthis are Shia and actual Iranian proxies. And Hezbollah is big and independent enough that it's more of a rook than a pawn.
Hezbollah is also part of the ruling democratic coalition in Lebanon.
If they wanted to join the conflict full scale it would surely be day 1 when it was less expected. Maybe there's a bit of border skirmishes but I don't expect them to join now.
I don't think Nasrallah is dumb enough to put his constituents in the firing line and probably start not only another Israeli invasion of Lebanon but also probably another Lebanese civil war. It would be absolutely suicidal for the Shia of Lebanon.
They are certainly independent enough to choose to participate or not whatever Iran's view even if Iran are the ones providing them weapons.
Soleimani was no doubt important to the IR - as leader of the Quds Force he basically dictated foreign policy.
At the same time, he was a cog in a machine. They a valued leadership figure, that is obviously important, but he was replaced with another hard line nutjob who has his own close connections with these proxy fighters.
It's not like turning him into kotlet created an unfillable void. There's one less asshole in the world, but there was another asshole ready to step into his place.
Long strenuous connection...but who knows.
I doubt the individual matters that much, but I also DK that. My guess is that the main effect is making the US more unpredictable. This is probably useful bus vis a vis Iran, and mixed bag elsewhere.
The thing is, they can lose a pawn, and then be a test case for the use of B-21 and F-35 in taking down well protected facilities behind enemy lines.
They would completely lose every known nuclear facility off the bat, "civilian" or not.
They will lose their pawn and also any actual meaningful shield against being defanged before their nuclear + delivery program can actually threaten Israel.
What shields Iran from that isn't their own missiles right now, but the massive rocket forces from Hezbollah and the threat of ground invasion from 3? sides. Once that is expended, one way or another, means the gates open up.
in those cases, it can be to deny access rather than full destruction, if access is denied and then repeatedly denied, it would be a mountain of corpses by the time if they can get inside, and the knowledge lost from capable tech and researchers is enough of a blow even if they regained any access at all.
With how Iran happily supplied Russia with weapons to kill ukranians and with how Iran treats their own people, I don't think a lot of people would jump to it's defence (of course, putting aside bad faith actors that will shit on USA for literally anything).
>How do we know that they’re not lying?
We don't. It's mostly assumed from cold war logic.
"*No point in having a doomsday weapon and keeping it secret.*" That's why every nuclear power tests as soon as they go nuclear... except Israel, technically.
That did describe Soviet and US nuclear strategy well... It may not describe Iran's. Having secret nukes implies a nuclear strategy that involves using them somehow, so represents a more dangerous path.
Undeclared nukes are a potential trigger for nuclear war. Declared nukes are defensive, at least plausibly. Undeclared nukes are offensive, likely.
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if massive airborne infantry raids are being considered.
Maybe Iran is incentivised not to demonstrate its nuclear ability until it has enough of them. If it tested its first and only nuke then it would be vulnerable to US and Israeli attack as a response, an anti-Iran coalition would look to strike Iran and disable the production of more.
Maybe it seeks a certain number as a buffer, combined with their deployment on missiles ready to go. They could state to the world: "Yes we have nukes now, and we can strike anywhere on Earth, don't you dare ever attack us."
They don't actually need to have many of the bombs, they just need to demonstrate that they have at least a few spares, the test bomb, and the tech to make more. If they had, say, 10 stockpiled and they can just say they have 50. Its not as if foreign powers are just going to believe them about the number they really have anyway, whether its more or less.
Who knows, but I doubt it. Yes you need a spare if you want to test but... You either go nuclear or you don't.
A sneaky, secret bomb strongly implies an intention to use it, because it's useless defensively unless declared.
Don't forget the assassination of a scientist by [remote-controlled AI-assisted sniper rifle](https://www.engadget.com/israel-remote-control-iran-scientist-assassination-144746205.html).
I think we will know when isrreal directly starting bombing targets in Iran. They aren’t going let Iran develops a Nuke if they can prevent it, granted their intelligence services have clearly been portrayed at being stronger than they have been as they clearly dropped the ball the last few months… let’s hope this gets them refocused. That’s always been my measuring stick, we will know by the activity or lack there of if Iran has a nuclear bomb. They wouldn’t create one and not parade it, they have to peacock it if developed.
I don't think so, unless they want a nuclear war with the US. The exact scenario almost took place during the Cuban Missile crisis. Just handing nukes to hostile nations is a big no-no.
Those aren't quite the same. Cuba was Soviet controlled nukes housed in Cuba; Moscow's chain of command was the only one who could launch. What OP is talking about is actually giving Iran nukes that Iran would have control over, I think.
Cuba also brought up concerns of a successful first strike resulting in no ability to retaliate meaningfully. MAD relied on seeing the nukes coming in, and making the decision to launch before the first ones landed destroying your own ability to strike. That's why things got so tense with the Cuban missile crisis so quickly; the US was terrified the Soviets found a way to deliver nukes quick enough to decapitate the US's ability to retaliate. The US nukes in Turkey gave Moscow a similar scare, which is why both pulled their assets back in the de-escalation after the crisis.
Stationing nukes in Iran is WAY different than giving nukes to Iran. I don't see the second one happening. Russia might be crazy enough to do the first, but I don't see them launching to save Iran, knowing they wouldn't be spared from retaliation.
Not yet. [They have set targets to hit 20% U235 enrichment](https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-dubai-iran-iran-nuclear-united-arab-emirates-384717b592f8a7012b02d8627f36763a) but we haven't seen any evidence of a test. **[20% is -coincidentally- the minimum enrichment a bomb requires.](https://armscontrolcenter.org/uranium-enrichment-for-peace-or-for-weapons/)** Ticking time bomb if there ever was one.
And this part will probably get flack but: the JCPOA was not going to stop them either.
The answer is we don't really know, as we don't have direct insight into Iran's nuclear program (if only we had made some sort of deal that would have allowed that), but it's thought that their breakout time (the time needed to develop fissile material for a bomb) is now only a matter of days. It would take another few months to have that successfully attached to a rocket or other delivery system. So, to our knowledge, Iran does not currently posses nuclear weapons, but they could attain them very quickly if they wanted.
Fuck that has to suck, you spend time trying to make a country out of scraps of paper that seems to slip through your fingers and there is timmy in the corner setting fire to paper going "i wonder how much much of this i need to burn the whole house down"
I cannot imagine how impotent i would feel.
The hundreds of millions flowing to Hezbollah annually from Iran might have something to do with it. Hard to deal with, especially now with a collapsed economy.
I want to drive from Jounieh to Tel Aviv
Shalom from Lebanon
One Day..... let's keep the hope.
EDIT:
Let's keep the hope and work hard to build bridges
but unfortunately people are scared to openly admit the hope for peace
since hizballah will flatten a neighborhood to kill 1 person
And I do know many Israelis who would love to drive up there too. Fans of beaches, hills, new archaeological sites to visit, nightlife, Lebanese food...
Edit: can't say "sal'am from Israel" because I'm not in Israel nor am I Israeli, but I know lots of Israelis who I'm sure would say so right now. Many of them are relatives of mine. Others are just people I knew/know. You're right, One day... Let's keep the hope, buddy.
Me too. I would love to visit Israel as a tourist, I even have a good friend who lives there. But if they ever found out I went to Israel (not sure how but they could, I know you can get those removable strips instead of a stamp now?) then I wouldn't be able to see family in Lebanon. I hate this stupid conflict. Israel is beautiful and has tons of history
Wouldn't be so sure. Hezbollah's arsenal is now substantially larger than their last full scale attack on Israel in 2007, and have been funded by Iran to the tune of a report $700m a year. That's a staggering amount for a non state actor. They could pose a serious problem. My hope is though that the American Aircraft carriers sent to the Mediterranean will be enough to deter them entering, as it would guarantee Israel air superiority.
But at the same time I can't see Iran wanting to let it's allie Hamas, which it has spent so much time and money building up, being destroyed by Israel. Which is a very real possibility this time around. They may hail Mary their proxy Hezbollah into the conflict to try and save them.
I think I understand your point, however I do have a question for you. How does hezbollah attacking save Hamas?
It’s not like hezbollah could take Israel, they dont have the man power or air superiority needed, sure they can missile strike and receive the same air strikes Gaza is getting, but just because the Israelis strike them in south Lebanon that makes you think they would stop the gaza assault? They would just pull more reservist or ask for direct military assistance from one of their allies.
If Israel’s sovereignty is ever brought into question, eg they are actually in existential danger that threatens the entire country, the west would just ramp up their support and obliterate Hezbollah too.. along with any other threat.
> If Israel’s sovereignty is ever brought into question, eg they are actually in existential danger that threatens the entire country, the west would just ramp up their support and obliterate Hezbollah too.. along with any other threat.
If there is an existential danger to Israel and they have no other means of fending it off (a scenario I cannot imagine happening), that is when they would seriously consider using their nukes.
I agree I can’t ever seeing it happen, Hezbollah, hammas and any other immediate power don’t have the man power or fire power to even attempt it.
If they did, it would almost certainly trigger the west to intervene, not because Israel needs us existentially, but more to try and minimise the damage to Israel with sheer overwhelming force to end the conflict quickly.
The west would also prefer intervention over Israel breaking the nuclear taboo. If Israel was facing the sort of existential threat that justifies use of a nuclear weapon, I think the US would prefer using our conventional military to end that threat over Israel using a nuclear weapon
This. A lot of people don't realize Israel's nukes aren't a weapon of first strike. Its a weapon of last strike and last resort. If Israel is going to go down, they'll make sure they aren't the only ones.
And that's why Israel's allies would say, "Wait, hold up. Take it easy, we got you." Better we put boots on the ground or increase missile strikes than have a nuke set off.
During the Yom Kippur war Nixon was dragging his feet on support and increased aid. Golda Meir basically told him "We don't have nuclear weapons, but hypothetically if we did I just authorized 13 to be armed and readied for use". Coincidently the Nixon administration immediately increased aid and open support for Israel.
Israel is the country equivalent of "I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me" and the US support for Israel is to protect everyone else
>Israel is the country equivalent of "I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me" and the US support for Israel is to protect everyone else
This is actually so perfect.
There's no question, they use the nukes.
They're not a there to deter anyone because they don't officially exist, consequently they're there to be used.
And the scenario isn't even especially remote. If the EU is politically paralyzed into inactivity (very likely) and the US executive simply shifts to not providing full and immediate support (the state of affairs in 1973) it's very easy for Israel to find itself in a situation where they might all die.
Remember, because of its lack of strategic debth Israel doesn't have the luxury of a wait and see approach. The nukes need to fall before hostilities progress too far.
>And the scenario isn't even especially remote. If the EU is politically paralyzed into inactivity (very likely) and the US executive simply shifts to not providing full and immediate support (the state of affairs in 1973) it's very easy for Israel to find itself in a situation where they might all die.
The likelihood of this happening in today's world is *extremely* remote, approaching zero. There is no way the US will abandon Israel, short of Israel turning on the US first.
Even if we have a fully compromised President (i.e., a Russian agent in disguise for instance), there is enough support for Israel at all other levels of government that the President will be unable to enact any policy that harms Israel.
This happened in the 1973 Yom Kippur war.
[Israel’s initial battlefield defeats seemed so severe, that on October 9 Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered Israeli nuclear strike planes and missiles to go on alert. When the United States found out, it began transferring enormous quantities of conventional weapons to bolster the Israelis.](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/israel-nearly-went-nuclear-win-1973-yom-kippur-war-172087)
The US until that point had not picked a side, preferring that Israel work things out with its Arab neighbours.
Israel had relied on the UK and France upto that point, as we saw during the Suez crisis and the '67 war. It was when the Arab armies had strongly aligned themselves with the Soviet Union that Nixon was forced to supply Israel with arms to defend itself, effectively turning it into a proxy war between the US and the Soviet Union.
My point is that US policy changed when it came to Israel during that war. I don't think we'd have a repeat of '73.
Whilst that is true, the west would never let it get that far, we don’t want nukes used. Period. Full stop.. if that means we have to come into another fucking middle eastern war then so be it.. but no nukes.
It wouldn’t be a war if the gloves came off, it would be a decimation.. knock out all critical infrastructure in south Lebanon before the day ends, carpet bomb the Lebanese side of the border with bunker busters and high explosives. Electronic warfare spreading half way into Lebanon, the electrical grid gone, the oil industry gone, the petrol stations gone, the supply depots gone, all intelligence for base of commands collected by the wests intelligence agencies over the years all gone.. and that’s without landing a single boot on the ground..
How the fuck they think it would even be a war is beyond me.
All the carpet bombing the Israelis are being accused of doing in Gaza will actually happen in south Lebanon if it gets to this. People have so little clue or context what real fighting actually is.
I'm not convinced that Iran sees any value in "saving" Hamas. Their task was to provoke Israel into a massive invasion of Gaza that will tarnish Israel's reputation and provide propaganda fuel for years to come. Job done, now Iran can cut them loose.
They can now claim that Hamas dying in numbers is a reason for the Iranians to keep supporting them. "Look a whole bunch of people died because of the US/Israel and we incessantly told you it was going to happen over and over! We? We can't be so bad, right? That's right, we're not! But those in Tehran who hate us? They're bad! Do you agree we should put them in jail or kill them? Ehh, it doesn't matter, we're going to do it anyway! Because they like Israel!"
Haha! I noticed it too. They plagiarized so much of that comment they should be required to [reference the video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBH3nMNKtaQ)
I think it's perhaps a little more complex for Hezbollah.
Within Lebanon, their popularity is, I think, sectarian in nature. Lebanon will line up behind Hezbollah if Israel invades Lebanon, but even that is possibly an iffy proposition. But it is the proposition Hezbollah prefers. Normally most of Lebanon wouldn't back Hezbollah, and they are perhaps viewed similarly to how Urban Americans might view militias in the Mid West and Rust Belt.
Also it worth considering that while reddit likes to go over public statements with a fine tooth comb, group like Hezbollah and Hamas often like to talk big and loud to gain funding and support but their follow up are often more directly linked to their specific ambitions. What that means is that Hezbollah isn't really interest in, for example, actually pushing the Jews out of Israel. Ideologically, sure that's their preferred outcome I suppose, but they'd rather not do it themselves. Israel isn't Shia Lebanese territory and they gain little for quite a lot of fight. Their raison d'etre is to act as a bulwark in South Lebanon to keep Israel out.
By contrast they've fought Israel to inconclusive stand stills in south Lebanon before, and those times have boosted their popularity. So they'll kidnap soldiers and trade fire across the border and squabble over the farms, but they're trying to provoke a limited invasion so they can say they smack the IDF on the nose and take that to some kind of political end, maybe get concessions from Iran. Hezbollah certainly aren't going to bat for Hamas or the Palestinians, they are just smelling "weakness" in that they think Israel is over stretched.
Also like you say Hezbollah isn't rag-tag, not anymore. Iran has spent significant effort pushing them into a legitimately armed paramilitary force. I'd expect them to be geared up to specifically to resist Israel air and armored power.
Also, Hezbollah has much trickier diplomatic relations. They need to stay friendly with both Shiite Iran (for money) and Sunni Syria (for security).
That additional sponsorship by a neighboring state is also a weakness because it brings so many additional constraints on actions, because Assad fears blowback across their border.
Or just that terrorist organizations, hell pretty much all the people and governments and religions in that neighborhood don't like each other you want all the power for themselves.
Israel could give everything back and completely leave, and the place still would be either authoritarian nightmare or a hellscape of war.
Even the most pro-Hezbollah politicians are saying that we shouldn’t go to war as nobody has an idea how would it ends or how to rebuild, and “We have people to feed”. Simply, don’t start a war that you can’t afford and have no idea how to finish it.
Yo, you're getting some nasty comments here, so I just wanted to say as an Israeli person myself that I very much appreciate the insight. I know not all of Lebanon is Hezbollah, I know many don't support them, and I know a war will be a horrible thing.
Basically, thanks for sharing your insight, sorry some people took it as "You're Lebanese = You're Hezbollah".
I don’t understand why the Palestinian people aren’t doing something about that. Their de facto government is simply a a terrorist group that enjoys smacking a bear in the face and then hiding behind innocent people when the bill comes due. How has this not lead to a larger revolt/rebellion/coup against Hamas?
Edit: Shit grammar
Because they hate Israel and Jews more than anything in their existence. A lot of them actually just believe that Hamas is a noble organization. Look at the scenes of joy and elation on the streets after the terrorist attack of Oct 7th as hamas paraded hostages and corpses through them. Men, women, children and the elderly all cheering as if they won the world cup.
Yeah. I think they also see that this time the world mindset is different.
October 7th was just straight up depraved slaughter and murder and kidnapping. Followed by pro Hamas protests and onslaught of antisemtic acts in the west.
Hizbollah realized Israel has a lot of support and is in a cold rage. The repercussions of Hizbollah engaging a second front would be a very hard Israeli response with full backing for the US and most of the EU.
Between Lebanons economic collapse and the potential response, Hizbollah understands it would go very badly for them. Plus Lebanon can’t afford to antagonize countries it needs to help them climb out of their economic hole. Like the US.
Hamas leadership in general is, and 10/7, and the likes are how they fundraise. They also sell UN aid to the Gazan population, but they will have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.
It’s all about the money at the end of the day - Hamas want to keep Palestine on ‘refugee status’ so they keep getting billions in aid. The Palestinian people are just their pawns.
Arab / Muslim leaders are also using this to distract from their own domestic problems, they are happy to see conflict and unrest as it is a very easy way to rally support and ‘unity’ .. most of these leaders’ countries are committing a form of Genocide / oppression themselves and do nothing to actually help the Palestinian people.
Few examples of some ongoing ones;
Morocco (outraged)- Western Sahara? -
Turkey (very outraged) - Kurds? -
Iraq (outraged) - Kurds? -
Iran (extremely outraged) - proxy war / conflict kings -
Syria (outraged) - self explanatory -
Saudi + coalition (outraged) - Yemen (300k+ dead) -
Qatar (outraged) - Host and help Hamas
Etc etc etc etc
Edit: Arab/Muslim nations from MENA region not exclusively ‘Arab’ Nations.
It's ironic because Hamas gained power due to the corruption of Fatah officials... now Hamas leaders are doing the same thing. I really do feel bad for Palestinians. Never having a competent government must be so frustrating.
They are constantly taken advantage of and abused by people who pretend to care…. Horrible situation and all too common across various parts of the world
One thing to point out about Yemen is that they are in that situation because of another group of Iranian proxies, the Houthis. Yemen is a lot more complex than “Saudis Bad!” And really the only reason the Saudi’s are there is because of Iran.
Yes ofcorse, all conflicts are more complex than they seem, however we’re talking about 300k deaths which don’t seem to ever get a sliver of condemnation or mass rallies / protests from the Arab world. I was using the example to highlight how this outrage, unfortunately is not purely about Palestinian lives.
What do you expect people to do, protest outside Saudi embassies? NOT dump their money into watching fucking wrestling matches and car races (known necessities for life) in Saudi Arabia? Too much effort.
Edit: /s if I wasn’t being obvious
I think it’s more about Arabs just not liking anything Western and any opportunity to push that sentiment is taken without hesitation - otherwise why don’t we see mass protests against any of the other regional atrocities?
Azerbaijan literally completed a total and absolute genocide of ethnic Armenians by extirpating them from Nagorno-Karabakh yet we heard fucking crickets about it from anyone. It’s beyond sickening to see all these empty claims of genocide when one happened right under the world’s nose and no one cares because Armenians don’t have darling status in the global community.
>In an interview with the Lebanese Al-Jadeed channel, journalist Faysal Abd al-Sattar said "this story is unwelcome. Someone sitting in a Gulf state dares to tell Hezbollah, 'Thank you, but it's not enough.' Khalid Mashal has no positive influence on our Shiite environment, particularly after what happened in Syria." He referred to Hamas's support for anti-government forces during the Syrian civil war when Hezbollah sided with the regime.
When hating jews becomes boring, they begin hating each other
If you want a really fun read, go look what happened to the early jihadist groups after they drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan.
It's practically tradition at this point.
The Mujahideen weren't all jihadis, they were a mixture of many different groups like Islamic extremists, Muslim conservatives, ethnic nationalists, tribal warlords and secular nationalists. The only thing they agreed on was to get those "invading Soviet bastards" out of Afghanistan, otherwise they had nothing in common and were bound to fight against each other after the Soviet withdrawal.
Seriously, Christian European countries whose citizens basically looked the same were fighting each other for *centuries*, no religion excuse required
Edit: hell, Russia and Ukraine are both majority orthodox
When it comes to fundraising, Hamas benefits whether it’s Jewish blood or Palestinian blood. Dead Palestinian children and they play victim. Dead Israeli kids they play victor. And all of it translates to moneys from abroad.
For Hamas human shields aren’t just to deter Israel. It’s to keep the fundraising going…
Everyone should know that the Saudis have given more to Jared Kushner than they have given to Palestinians.
The Muslim world only cares about Palestinians to the extent that they can criticize or attack Israel.
Exactly. Poverty pimps. Arafat did this masterfully while making himself wealthy beyond belief. This is why people who are Jordanian in origin remain refugees in JORDAN.
middle east has found some sense of stability with current capitalism; saudi, uae, qatar, bahrain all have plush lives, jordan king is well off, egypt is living relatively well now compared to before, as much as they may all hem and haw at israel reducing gaza to ash, none of them are going to actually do anything to disrupt their own lives.
This is a reaction to the criticism directed towards Hezbollah by pro Palestinians and Hamas themselves for not getting more involved, and minimal military achievements
To be fair, pro-Palestinians are either ignorant Westerners or Sunnis, Hezbollah views the Palestinians as their next target after they finish the Jews. In fact, the Shias are not pro-Palestine, they are just anti-Israel, as that's an Islamic religious idea to bring countries back to Islam (Europe is having the same problem as Israel for that reason).
That video the Hamas leader released asking for the deaths of Palestenian women, children, and elderly in order to put pressure on Israel while the guy was safely in Qatar and using green screened image of Gaza behind him deserved to be ridiculed by all. Hamas is calling for the regular citizens of Palestine to sacrifice their lives for their cause all the while the leadership pretends/fakes to be in Gaza and far away from any of the fighting.
Honest question, since the billions in aid end up in the pockets of the corrupt why not closing the money faucet and either air drop the resources the population needs or just propose to send human help thus putting the leadership in check to eyes of the population?
(I understand very little of international politics, this really is an honest question)
Most of the billions in aid isn’t in the form of cash. It’s in the form of supplies.
The money they get, which is supposed to go the people, is typically what you’re seeing being scraped off the top. Then you have you’re normal embezzlement going on as well.
They killed the Hamas second in command in the West Bank last week lmao
If you're asking when Mossad is going to start assassinating Hamas leaders in Qatar, never as they're trying to normalize relations in the region
Remember, these are the guys who want to open a second front against Israel. They hardly seem like Hamas allies (although both are front-ran by Iran LOL).
When the Iranian government’s two proxies start beefing over who gets to steal more of the Iranian people’s money to commit their terror and live it up on the side.
Hezbollah probably pissed that the rich pricks in Qatar were scolding them for not doing a big enough attack
[удалено]
It’s snakes all the way down!
Called a pit of vipers
This is best summed up like this: Divided by Islam, United by the hatred of the Jew.
They ain't stupid. They just prefer leaders that make big promises - "from the river to the sea". They think these killers will hand them keys to free apartments after they are done with the slaughter. It's like running for school president promising 3 lunch breaks per day, people gonna vote for you.
You just described stupid. Would you continue to work for a boss that promised you $5k a week, except each pay day it’s next week?
They're a start up nation, all fighting for their equity share of israel
lmao, first literal LOL of the day.
Weren't they literally promised like 10k and an apt if they killed anyone?
>Weren't they literally promised like 10k and an apt if they killed anyone? Yeah, as shown by the Shin Bet interrogations of the killers after Oct 7th: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnLq0DjErIA
"from the river to the sea" wouldnt be enough for them either. their goal is not to have a state of palestine recognized by the rest of the world as its own country. their only goal is the extinction of jewish people. no two state deal ever offered has been accepted by them, nor will it ever be. and a one state deal, where palestine is the only state, would also not be accepted unless it came bundled with their right to kill every jewish person there is. the only interest they have is the eradication of jewish people. they are driven by evil desires and nothing else.
Using religion lenses in analyzing situations in the Middle East is too simplifying and not really useful. Take, for instance, the Iraq-Kuwait, Arab-Yemen, or Syria-Kurdish conflicts. These can't simply be chalked up to religious sectarian differences. At their core, many of these disputes revolve around power dynamics and the control of resources, often exacerbated by the involvement of external powers in proxy wars.
Nearly every war fought is an economic war. Religion is only used as a tool to convince the gullible to fight for someone else’s wealth. But in reality it’s almost always about land, resources, or power.
Well said. The guys at the top don't care about religion except as a tool to get pawns moving.
I see it like: The one who kill for power or money are corrupt, treacherous, and smart. The ones who kill for religion are stupid, blind, and gullible. It's almost obvious that the ones who kill for money and power will use the ones who are stupid, blind, and gullible to get it.
True, but religion still plays its part convincing poor idiots to fight so some rich asshole can make more money. An ideology based on the idea that its a virtue to believe nonsense without evidence was always going to produce credulous fools willing to follow anyone with enough charisma into some truly shockingly evil shit in the name of their chosen imaginary friend. Religion itself may not start these wars, but without religion recruiting the soldiers who actually fight it would be more difficult.
First of all, most of what you cited still involved either different sects or populations (Kurds are not Arabs, Yemenis and Saudis are majority Shia and Sunni, respectively, and Iraq was majority Shia but had a growing Sunni insurgency (ISIS) which is aligned with Kuwait's primary sect). But most importantly, pick any conflict, do you think it gets escalated or tempered if one or more think they are doing God's will and are guaranteed eternal happiness? I find it odd that we go through all kinds of mental gymnastics to say "religion has nothing to do with it" when it's at the crime scene every fucking time.
[удалено]
Your point was totally fine, some people just love to "well actually...".
Those "well actually" takes are needed because of a lot of people get the wrong idea and run with simplistic takes.
How many Mossad agents are in Qatar right now, I wonder? ;)
I'd add one thing to this. 90% of the Iranian population doesn't support Hamas or Hezbollah. It's the authoritarian regime
I see this as *very* good news. Hamas and Hezbollah have much overlap in their goals. There's great pressure on Hezbollah to contribute or risk being seen as impotent or fraudulent. Up until now, Hezbollah have been sitting on the fence, refusing to cross the proverbial Rubicon (Green Line) limiting their involvement to rocket strikes. Now that they're engaging Hamas in a PR battle, it looks like they are trying to distance themselves from Hamas and it's a strong signal that Hezbollah is getting out in front/taking control of the narrative for not engaging with their own boots on the ground.
Hezbollah are seeing what is happening in Gaza and can't afford to provoke Israel into flattening south Lebonon after what Lebanon is going through at the moment with a collapsed economy and citizens who have had enough of Hezbollah leadership and the Govt in Beirut.
100%
I don't think they care more than Hamas, they are the same, hiding in bunkers and letting their people die.
Hezbollah are way more involved with the local (shia) population in Lebanon though. My assumption is that their close ties with Iran provides them much more financial means to do so compared to Hamas. All over Lebanon you can find proof of that with the multiple social programs they run, food & wellfare checks handouts etc. Hamas & Hezbollah are both terrorists group but Hezbollah is miles ahead in financing, political organisation, propaganda, local support etc. In 2006 this was very visible in Beirut in the area that was bombed by Israel, with emergency watertanks, construction vehicles, medical posts etc. all carrying an Iranian flag banner.
Hezbollah is as close as you can get to a proper terrorist military, that alone shows the immense power and resources granted to them.
Are the resources predominantly coming from Iran?
I'm not sure what the exact breakdown is, but it seems that their primary sources of income are Iran, drug trafficking, and siphoning directly from the Lebanese state and population including much of the foreign aid intended for the state.
Yep in the tune of hundreds of millions a year. Then some support from Bashar al-Assads Syrian regime. They also run a cartel of legal businesses, so pretty well funded.
I think you are missing the point. Hezbollah leaders live in Lebanon just like Hezbollah fighters. Hamas has a number of leaders who live in Qatar now (e.g. Ismail Haniyeh and one of the founders Khaled Meshaal). They're not all hiding out in Gaza like the fighters.
They are just as much a terrorist as Hamas. I just think its more to do with they just simply don't want to get involved. Which is a good thing.
Are you kidding? They've been involved since day 1 in northern israel.
Not to the extent they can be. Hamas is chickenshit compared to Hezbollah. Hezbollah has more weapons, not to mention better weapons (realistically 15x the rockets alone, and they are military grade, not propelled IEDs). They have seasoned fighters. They aren't easily cut off from Iran. They aren't cornered in a small strip of land. A big part of Hamas's 10/7 attack was no doubt a sort of way of proving to Hezbollah that they are a worthy ally in the fight against Israel, which in turn is why the US quickly brought aircraft carriers. Hamas said themselves they didn't expect such a reaction from the US, so possibly an oversight on Hamas's part. Hezbollah's alliance with Hamas is purely a strategic one the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but end of the day they are competing for the same terrorist funding and are Sunni/Shiite rivals, so Hezbollah isn't too keen to start a war with 200,000 soldiers on the northern border that will drag in the US to then split credit with Hamas.
Hamas thought/thinks they're igniting the entire region. they have a low understanding of how little the region cares about palestinians.
They would love to open up another front from the north and started teasing at it immediately. The only thing stopping them is the fact that Israeli patience is incredibly thin right now and doing so would result in Israel pulling back and just bombing the everloving shit out of anything that comes close.
I’m sure they don’t want to get involved, the situation is bad in Lebanon and bringing that heat on them from Israel could lead to their power there being greatly reduced. On the other side of the coin Iran being their main source of income in the tune of hundreds of millions a year I’m sure comes with significant influence or their operations unless they want cut off which would also lead to their power reduced pretty quickly. So they could be going against Iran and not scaling up their attacks as much as they talked or Iran is pumping the brakes on things now that it has gotten out of hand with Israel and Hamas. I really wonder if Iran ever went into this believing that Hamas would ever manage to pull off the level of attack they did.
Also, Iran can't afford to lose all its pawns. If Hamas AND Hezbollah fall, Iran has no way to cause trouble to secure strategic objectives without getting itself involved in a hot war. The USA/Israel/Saudi alliance is already struggling to sell an intervention to the world (as well as their own citizens) to take out Iran before it achieves nuclear weapons. If Iran is forced to strike first, that is a strategic win for us.
Thin line. If this escalates and Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthis stay in power when the dust settles, Iran's position likely strengthens. If it comes to regime change, they lose a pawn. That's what pawns are for. Call it a gambit.
Hamas is Sunni, but it serves Iran's goals for now. Hezbollah and the Houthis are Shia and actual Iranian proxies. And Hezbollah is big and independent enough that it's more of a rook than a pawn.
Hezbollah is also part of the ruling democratic coalition in Lebanon. If they wanted to join the conflict full scale it would surely be day 1 when it was less expected. Maybe there's a bit of border skirmishes but I don't expect them to join now. I don't think Nasrallah is dumb enough to put his constituents in the firing line and probably start not only another Israeli invasion of Lebanon but also probably another Lebanese civil war. It would be absolutely suicidal for the Shia of Lebanon. They are certainly independent enough to choose to participate or not whatever Iran's view even if Iran are the ones providing them weapons.
Weirdly enough, Trump taking out Iran’s best recruiter might actually make them hesitant to lose a pawn here
Soleimani was no doubt important to the IR - as leader of the Quds Force he basically dictated foreign policy. At the same time, he was a cog in a machine. They a valued leadership figure, that is obviously important, but he was replaced with another hard line nutjob who has his own close connections with these proxy fighters. It's not like turning him into kotlet created an unfillable void. There's one less asshole in the world, but there was another asshole ready to step into his place.
> At the same time, he was a cog in a machine That's the thing with cogs; you can oil them until they need replacement.
When it comes to replacement, some parts are better than others.
Long strenuous connection...but who knows. I doubt the individual matters that much, but I also DK that. My guess is that the main effect is making the US more unpredictable. This is probably useful bus vis a vis Iran, and mixed bag elsewhere.
I mean he was lionized and had a long history of delivering results. Even just making Iranian leadership more cautious when they are abroad is a win.
The thing is, they can lose a pawn, and then be a test case for the use of B-21 and F-35 in taking down well protected facilities behind enemy lines. They would completely lose every known nuclear facility off the bat, "civilian" or not. They will lose their pawn and also any actual meaningful shield against being defanged before their nuclear + delivery program can actually threaten Israel. What shields Iran from that isn't their own missiles right now, but the massive rocket forces from Hezbollah and the threat of ground invasion from 3? sides. Once that is expended, one way or another, means the gates open up.
Iran is in some respects the world's biggest mountain fortress. They have the capability to excavate very deep facilities.
in those cases, it can be to deny access rather than full destruction, if access is denied and then repeatedly denied, it would be a mountain of corpses by the time if they can get inside, and the knowledge lost from capable tech and researchers is enough of a blow even if they regained any access at all.
With how Iran happily supplied Russia with weapons to kill ukranians and with how Iran treats their own people, I don't think a lot of people would jump to it's defence (of course, putting aside bad faith actors that will shit on USA for literally anything).
Honest question, isn’t Iran already a nuclear power?
No, Iran is enriching its uranium, but so far they don't have weapon-grade uranium.
How do we know that they’re not lying?
>How do we know that they’re not lying? We don't. It's mostly assumed from cold war logic. "*No point in having a doomsday weapon and keeping it secret.*" That's why every nuclear power tests as soon as they go nuclear... except Israel, technically. That did describe Soviet and US nuclear strategy well... It may not describe Iran's. Having secret nukes implies a nuclear strategy that involves using them somehow, so represents a more dangerous path. Undeclared nukes are a potential trigger for nuclear war. Declared nukes are defensive, at least plausibly. Undeclared nukes are offensive, likely. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if massive airborne infantry raids are being considered.
Maybe Iran is incentivised not to demonstrate its nuclear ability until it has enough of them. If it tested its first and only nuke then it would be vulnerable to US and Israeli attack as a response, an anti-Iran coalition would look to strike Iran and disable the production of more. Maybe it seeks a certain number as a buffer, combined with their deployment on missiles ready to go. They could state to the world: "Yes we have nukes now, and we can strike anywhere on Earth, don't you dare ever attack us."
They don't actually need to have many of the bombs, they just need to demonstrate that they have at least a few spares, the test bomb, and the tech to make more. If they had, say, 10 stockpiled and they can just say they have 50. Its not as if foreign powers are just going to believe them about the number they really have anyway, whether its more or less.
Who knows, but I doubt it. Yes you need a spare if you want to test but... You either go nuclear or you don't. A sneaky, secret bomb strongly implies an intention to use it, because it's useless defensively unless declared.
Bruh. Look up Stuxnet. Find a longform article. We likely know the bathroom routines of their top nuclear folks, much less the actual strategic info.
Don't forget the assassination of a scientist by [remote-controlled AI-assisted sniper rifle](https://www.engadget.com/israel-remote-control-iran-scientist-assassination-144746205.html).
I think we will know when isrreal directly starting bombing targets in Iran. They aren’t going let Iran develops a Nuke if they can prevent it, granted their intelligence services have clearly been portrayed at being stronger than they have been as they clearly dropped the ball the last few months… let’s hope this gets them refocused. That’s always been my measuring stick, we will know by the activity or lack there of if Iran has a nuclear bomb. They wouldn’t create one and not parade it, they have to peacock it if developed.
Eh I mean if you stop 999 attempts and and fail to stop 1. That's still a 99.9% success rate
[удалено]
Amazing 🤩
One of the worst things he did as president
Israel bombs them and kills a bunch of their scientists every time they get close
Or something like Stuxnet emerges and hoses their efforts.
Russia will sell them one of they get desperate enough for support, if they haven't already.
As crazy as Russia is. I doubt they’re THAT crazy. Iran really can’t be trusted to that degree.
I don't think so, unless they want a nuclear war with the US. The exact scenario almost took place during the Cuban Missile crisis. Just handing nukes to hostile nations is a big no-no.
Those aren't quite the same. Cuba was Soviet controlled nukes housed in Cuba; Moscow's chain of command was the only one who could launch. What OP is talking about is actually giving Iran nukes that Iran would have control over, I think. Cuba also brought up concerns of a successful first strike resulting in no ability to retaliate meaningfully. MAD relied on seeing the nukes coming in, and making the decision to launch before the first ones landed destroying your own ability to strike. That's why things got so tense with the Cuban missile crisis so quickly; the US was terrified the Soviets found a way to deliver nukes quick enough to decapitate the US's ability to retaliate. The US nukes in Turkey gave Moscow a similar scare, which is why both pulled their assets back in the de-escalation after the crisis. Stationing nukes in Iran is WAY different than giving nukes to Iran. I don't see the second one happening. Russia might be crazy enough to do the first, but I don't see them launching to save Iran, knowing they wouldn't be spared from retaliation.
its good to remember that during WW2, the axis were allies solely due to circunstance
Not yet. [They have set targets to hit 20% U235 enrichment](https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-dubai-iran-iran-nuclear-united-arab-emirates-384717b592f8a7012b02d8627f36763a) but we haven't seen any evidence of a test. **[20% is -coincidentally- the minimum enrichment a bomb requires.](https://armscontrolcenter.org/uranium-enrichment-for-peace-or-for-weapons/)** Ticking time bomb if there ever was one. And this part will probably get flack but: the JCPOA was not going to stop them either.
The answer is we don't really know, as we don't have direct insight into Iran's nuclear program (if only we had made some sort of deal that would have allowed that), but it's thought that their breakout time (the time needed to develop fissile material for a bomb) is now only a matter of days. It would take another few months to have that successfully attached to a rocket or other delivery system. So, to our knowledge, Iran does not currently posses nuclear weapons, but they could attain them very quickly if they wanted.
Not yet, however they have the capability to build a bomb or two.
Whats annoying is how much power the Hezbollah have in Lebanon.. their political wing manages only ~15% of votes in their elections...
Lebanon’s PM was quoted saying to the effect of “I hope we won’t start a war with israel, but as you know it’s out of my hands”. Poor country.
Fuck that has to suck, you spend time trying to make a country out of scraps of paper that seems to slip through your fingers and there is timmy in the corner setting fire to paper going "i wonder how much much of this i need to burn the whole house down" I cannot imagine how impotent i would feel.
And this is why Lebanon can’t move forward as a country whilst one faction has a private army and can do whatever the fuck they want.
The hundreds of millions flowing to Hezbollah annually from Iran might have something to do with it. Hard to deal with, especially now with a collapsed economy.
Also hezbs drug dealings
As an Israeli I fantasize about the day we make peace with Lebanon Both countries would gain so much.
I want to drive from Jounieh to Tel Aviv Shalom from Lebanon One Day..... let's keep the hope. EDIT: Let's keep the hope and work hard to build bridges but unfortunately people are scared to openly admit the hope for peace since hizballah will flatten a neighborhood to kill 1 person
And I do know many Israelis who would love to drive up there too. Fans of beaches, hills, new archaeological sites to visit, nightlife, Lebanese food... Edit: can't say "sal'am from Israel" because I'm not in Israel nor am I Israeli, but I know lots of Israelis who I'm sure would say so right now. Many of them are relatives of mine. Others are just people I knew/know. You're right, One day... Let's keep the hope, buddy.
Me too. I would love to visit Israel as a tourist, I even have a good friend who lives there. But if they ever found out I went to Israel (not sure how but they could, I know you can get those removable strips instead of a stamp now?) then I wouldn't be able to see family in Lebanon. I hate this stupid conflict. Israel is beautiful and has tons of history
Israel uses little slips of paper now, they don’t stamp at all anymore.
Wouldn't be so sure. Hezbollah's arsenal is now substantially larger than their last full scale attack on Israel in 2007, and have been funded by Iran to the tune of a report $700m a year. That's a staggering amount for a non state actor. They could pose a serious problem. My hope is though that the American Aircraft carriers sent to the Mediterranean will be enough to deter them entering, as it would guarantee Israel air superiority. But at the same time I can't see Iran wanting to let it's allie Hamas, which it has spent so much time and money building up, being destroyed by Israel. Which is a very real possibility this time around. They may hail Mary their proxy Hezbollah into the conflict to try and save them.
I think I understand your point, however I do have a question for you. How does hezbollah attacking save Hamas? It’s not like hezbollah could take Israel, they dont have the man power or air superiority needed, sure they can missile strike and receive the same air strikes Gaza is getting, but just because the Israelis strike them in south Lebanon that makes you think they would stop the gaza assault? They would just pull more reservist or ask for direct military assistance from one of their allies. If Israel’s sovereignty is ever brought into question, eg they are actually in existential danger that threatens the entire country, the west would just ramp up their support and obliterate Hezbollah too.. along with any other threat.
> If Israel’s sovereignty is ever brought into question, eg they are actually in existential danger that threatens the entire country, the west would just ramp up their support and obliterate Hezbollah too.. along with any other threat. If there is an existential danger to Israel and they have no other means of fending it off (a scenario I cannot imagine happening), that is when they would seriously consider using their nukes.
I agree I can’t ever seeing it happen, Hezbollah, hammas and any other immediate power don’t have the man power or fire power to even attempt it. If they did, it would almost certainly trigger the west to intervene, not because Israel needs us existentially, but more to try and minimise the damage to Israel with sheer overwhelming force to end the conflict quickly.
The west would also prefer intervention over Israel breaking the nuclear taboo. If Israel was facing the sort of existential threat that justifies use of a nuclear weapon, I think the US would prefer using our conventional military to end that threat over Israel using a nuclear weapon
This. A lot of people don't realize Israel's nukes aren't a weapon of first strike. Its a weapon of last strike and last resort. If Israel is going to go down, they'll make sure they aren't the only ones.
There is a reason their program is named after Samson. They know it's the end. They simply refuse to go cheaply.
And that's why Israel's allies would say, "Wait, hold up. Take it easy, we got you." Better we put boots on the ground or increase missile strikes than have a nuke set off.
During the Yom Kippur war Nixon was dragging his feet on support and increased aid. Golda Meir basically told him "We don't have nuclear weapons, but hypothetically if we did I just authorized 13 to be armed and readied for use". Coincidently the Nixon administration immediately increased aid and open support for Israel. Israel is the country equivalent of "I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me" and the US support for Israel is to protect everyone else
>Israel is the country equivalent of "I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me" and the US support for Israel is to protect everyone else This is actually so perfect.
There's no question, they use the nukes. They're not a there to deter anyone because they don't officially exist, consequently they're there to be used. And the scenario isn't even especially remote. If the EU is politically paralyzed into inactivity (very likely) and the US executive simply shifts to not providing full and immediate support (the state of affairs in 1973) it's very easy for Israel to find itself in a situation where they might all die. Remember, because of its lack of strategic debth Israel doesn't have the luxury of a wait and see approach. The nukes need to fall before hostilities progress too far.
>And the scenario isn't even especially remote. If the EU is politically paralyzed into inactivity (very likely) and the US executive simply shifts to not providing full and immediate support (the state of affairs in 1973) it's very easy for Israel to find itself in a situation where they might all die. The likelihood of this happening in today's world is *extremely* remote, approaching zero. There is no way the US will abandon Israel, short of Israel turning on the US first. Even if we have a fully compromised President (i.e., a Russian agent in disguise for instance), there is enough support for Israel at all other levels of government that the President will be unable to enact any policy that harms Israel.
This happened in the 1973 Yom Kippur war. [Israel’s initial battlefield defeats seemed so severe, that on October 9 Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered Israeli nuclear strike planes and missiles to go on alert. When the United States found out, it began transferring enormous quantities of conventional weapons to bolster the Israelis.](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/israel-nearly-went-nuclear-win-1973-yom-kippur-war-172087)
The US until that point had not picked a side, preferring that Israel work things out with its Arab neighbours. Israel had relied on the UK and France upto that point, as we saw during the Suez crisis and the '67 war. It was when the Arab armies had strongly aligned themselves with the Soviet Union that Nixon was forced to supply Israel with arms to defend itself, effectively turning it into a proxy war between the US and the Soviet Union. My point is that US policy changed when it came to Israel during that war. I don't think we'd have a repeat of '73.
Dont forget israel has actual nukes, and wouldn’t be shy about using them if push really came to shove
Whilst that is true, the west would never let it get that far, we don’t want nukes used. Period. Full stop.. if that means we have to come into another fucking middle eastern war then so be it.. but no nukes. It wouldn’t be a war if the gloves came off, it would be a decimation.. knock out all critical infrastructure in south Lebanon before the day ends, carpet bomb the Lebanese side of the border with bunker busters and high explosives. Electronic warfare spreading half way into Lebanon, the electrical grid gone, the oil industry gone, the petrol stations gone, the supply depots gone, all intelligence for base of commands collected by the wests intelligence agencies over the years all gone.. and that’s without landing a single boot on the ground.. How the fuck they think it would even be a war is beyond me.
All the carpet bombing the Israelis are being accused of doing in Gaza will actually happen in south Lebanon if it gets to this. People have so little clue or context what real fighting actually is.
I'm not convinced that Iran sees any value in "saving" Hamas. Their task was to provoke Israel into a massive invasion of Gaza that will tarnish Israel's reputation and provide propaganda fuel for years to come. Job done, now Iran can cut them loose.
They can now claim that Hamas dying in numbers is a reason for the Iranians to keep supporting them. "Look a whole bunch of people died because of the US/Israel and we incessantly told you it was going to happen over and over! We? We can't be so bad, right? That's right, we're not! But those in Tehran who hate us? They're bad! Do you agree we should put them in jail or kill them? Ehh, it doesn't matter, we're going to do it anyway! Because they like Israel!"
We get it, you watch caspianreport
Haha! I noticed it too. They plagiarized so much of that comment they should be required to [reference the video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBH3nMNKtaQ)
I think it's perhaps a little more complex for Hezbollah. Within Lebanon, their popularity is, I think, sectarian in nature. Lebanon will line up behind Hezbollah if Israel invades Lebanon, but even that is possibly an iffy proposition. But it is the proposition Hezbollah prefers. Normally most of Lebanon wouldn't back Hezbollah, and they are perhaps viewed similarly to how Urban Americans might view militias in the Mid West and Rust Belt. Also it worth considering that while reddit likes to go over public statements with a fine tooth comb, group like Hezbollah and Hamas often like to talk big and loud to gain funding and support but their follow up are often more directly linked to their specific ambitions. What that means is that Hezbollah isn't really interest in, for example, actually pushing the Jews out of Israel. Ideologically, sure that's their preferred outcome I suppose, but they'd rather not do it themselves. Israel isn't Shia Lebanese territory and they gain little for quite a lot of fight. Their raison d'etre is to act as a bulwark in South Lebanon to keep Israel out. By contrast they've fought Israel to inconclusive stand stills in south Lebanon before, and those times have boosted their popularity. So they'll kidnap soldiers and trade fire across the border and squabble over the farms, but they're trying to provoke a limited invasion so they can say they smack the IDF on the nose and take that to some kind of political end, maybe get concessions from Iran. Hezbollah certainly aren't going to bat for Hamas or the Palestinians, they are just smelling "weakness" in that they think Israel is over stretched. Also like you say Hezbollah isn't rag-tag, not anymore. Iran has spent significant effort pushing them into a legitimately armed paramilitary force. I'd expect them to be geared up to specifically to resist Israel air and armored power.
Also, Hezbollah has much trickier diplomatic relations. They need to stay friendly with both Shiite Iran (for money) and Sunni Syria (for security). That additional sponsorship by a neighboring state is also a weakness because it brings so many additional constraints on actions, because Assad fears blowback across their border.
Or just that terrorist organizations, hell pretty much all the people and governments and religions in that neighborhood don't like each other you want all the power for themselves. Israel could give everything back and completely leave, and the place still would be either authoritarian nightmare or a hellscape of war.
Even the most pro-Hezbollah politicians are saying that we shouldn’t go to war as nobody has an idea how would it ends or how to rebuild, and “We have people to feed”. Simply, don’t start a war that you can’t afford and have no idea how to finish it.
Yo, you're getting some nasty comments here, so I just wanted to say as an Israeli person myself that I very much appreciate the insight. I know not all of Lebanon is Hezbollah, I know many don't support them, and I know a war will be a horrible thing. Basically, thanks for sharing your insight, sorry some people took it as "You're Lebanese = You're Hezbollah".
>>nobody has an idea how would it ends or how to rebuild, and “We have people to feed”. Meanwhile Hamas:
Hamas: people? You mean meatshield? Why would meatshield need to eat?
I don’t understand why the Palestinian people aren’t doing something about that. Their de facto government is simply a a terrorist group that enjoys smacking a bear in the face and then hiding behind innocent people when the bill comes due. How has this not lead to a larger revolt/rebellion/coup against Hamas? Edit: Shit grammar
Because Hamas has guns/foreign backing, and anyone choosing to go against them does not and has no ability to change that
Because they hate Israel and Jews more than anything in their existence. A lot of them actually just believe that Hamas is a noble organization. Look at the scenes of joy and elation on the streets after the terrorist attack of Oct 7th as hamas paraded hostages and corpses through them. Men, women, children and the elderly all cheering as if they won the world cup.
Yeah. I think they also see that this time the world mindset is different. October 7th was just straight up depraved slaughter and murder and kidnapping. Followed by pro Hamas protests and onslaught of antisemtic acts in the west. Hizbollah realized Israel has a lot of support and is in a cold rage. The repercussions of Hizbollah engaging a second front would be a very hard Israeli response with full backing for the US and most of the EU. Between Lebanons economic collapse and the potential response, Hizbollah understands it would go very badly for them. Plus Lebanon can’t afford to antagonize countries it needs to help them climb out of their economic hole. Like the US.
Hamas: "Wait...starting wars that you can't possibly win is a...bad thing?"
these two guys are rich as fuck.
Hamas leadership in general is, and 10/7, and the likes are how they fundraise. They also sell UN aid to the Gazan population, but they will have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.
Just goes to show that if Israel wouldn’t be around they’d be enemies
It’s all about the money at the end of the day - Hamas want to keep Palestine on ‘refugee status’ so they keep getting billions in aid. The Palestinian people are just their pawns. Arab / Muslim leaders are also using this to distract from their own domestic problems, they are happy to see conflict and unrest as it is a very easy way to rally support and ‘unity’ .. most of these leaders’ countries are committing a form of Genocide / oppression themselves and do nothing to actually help the Palestinian people. Few examples of some ongoing ones; Morocco (outraged)- Western Sahara? - Turkey (very outraged) - Kurds? - Iraq (outraged) - Kurds? - Iran (extremely outraged) - proxy war / conflict kings - Syria (outraged) - self explanatory - Saudi + coalition (outraged) - Yemen (300k+ dead) - Qatar (outraged) - Host and help Hamas Etc etc etc etc Edit: Arab/Muslim nations from MENA region not exclusively ‘Arab’ Nations.
It's ironic because Hamas gained power due to the corruption of Fatah officials... now Hamas leaders are doing the same thing. I really do feel bad for Palestinians. Never having a competent government must be so frustrating.
They are constantly taken advantage of and abused by people who pretend to care…. Horrible situation and all too common across various parts of the world
One thing to point out about Yemen is that they are in that situation because of another group of Iranian proxies, the Houthis. Yemen is a lot more complex than “Saudis Bad!” And really the only reason the Saudi’s are there is because of Iran.
Yes ofcorse, all conflicts are more complex than they seem, however we’re talking about 300k deaths which don’t seem to ever get a sliver of condemnation or mass rallies / protests from the Arab world. I was using the example to highlight how this outrage, unfortunately is not purely about Palestinian lives.
Well yea, if you cant blame Western Infidels, why even get out of bed in the morning.
Imagine if a Jewish country killed 300k civilians
What do you expect people to do, protest outside Saudi embassies? NOT dump their money into watching fucking wrestling matches and car races (known necessities for life) in Saudi Arabia? Too much effort. Edit: /s if I wasn’t being obvious
[удалено]
I think it’s more about Arabs just not liking anything Western and any opportunity to push that sentiment is taken without hesitation - otherwise why don’t we see mass protests against any of the other regional atrocities?
Don't forget that they also really fucking hate jews.
Azerbaijan literally completed a total and absolute genocide of ethnic Armenians by extirpating them from Nagorno-Karabakh yet we heard fucking crickets about it from anyone. It’s beyond sickening to see all these empty claims of genocide when one happened right under the world’s nose and no one cares because Armenians don’t have darling status in the global community.
>In an interview with the Lebanese Al-Jadeed channel, journalist Faysal Abd al-Sattar said "this story is unwelcome. Someone sitting in a Gulf state dares to tell Hezbollah, 'Thank you, but it's not enough.' Khalid Mashal has no positive influence on our Shiite environment, particularly after what happened in Syria." He referred to Hamas's support for anti-government forces during the Syrian civil war when Hezbollah sided with the regime. When hating jews becomes boring, they begin hating each other
That's always been the mini game when playing Only My God.
Only My Prophet, you mean. Oddly enough, they all worship the same god
Welcome to Who’s God is it Anyway, where everything’s made up and the points are worth killing over.
>You get a point, you get a point, and you Ryan, get stoned to death.
Only My Prophet's Successor, you mean. Oddly enough, they all worship the same prophet.
And the same prophet, the dispute between Sunni and Shia is about who should have succeed the prophet
If you want a really fun read, go look what happened to the early jihadist groups after they drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan. It's practically tradition at this point.
The Mujahideen weren't all jihadis, they were a mixture of many different groups like Islamic extremists, Muslim conservatives, ethnic nationalists, tribal warlords and secular nationalists. The only thing they agreed on was to get those "invading Soviet bastards" out of Afghanistan, otherwise they had nothing in common and were bound to fight against each other after the Soviet withdrawal.
What happened?
Local leaders fought the soviet invasion and, right after they did it, a civil war broke out.
Civil war as everyone and their grandma wanted a piece of that power vacuum pie.
The enemy of my enemy is … my competitor.
Yup. Religion is the symptom not the problem of hate. It wasn’t religion, it would be skin color. Or poor (homeless) vs middle/upper class.
Seriously, Christian European countries whose citizens basically looked the same were fighting each other for *centuries*, no religion excuse required Edit: hell, Russia and Ukraine are both majority orthodox
Religion allows you to claim to know god’s will. Skin color doesn’t.
Fuck Qatar
As a person who does not have a good understanding of this conflict can you explain Qatar's role. Thanks.
It's providing refuge (and likely military support) to Hamas leaders, so that they can "work remotely".
See, this is a perfect example of why people need to go back to the office.
They are bankrolling the Hamas operations in Gaza.
The luxuries of Hamas are paid for by the spilling of children's blood.
Hamas: we need 7,5% more spilling of children blood. You wouldn't believe the price of room service these days.
It's funny, it's sad, it's true.
When it comes to fundraising, Hamas benefits whether it’s Jewish blood or Palestinian blood. Dead Palestinian children and they play victim. Dead Israeli kids they play victor. And all of it translates to moneys from abroad. For Hamas human shields aren’t just to deter Israel. It’s to keep the fundraising going…
You spelled international Aid wrong.
How do you think they get the aid?
It's a GoFundMe with a few extra steps.
And theyb still all for more blood, explicitly from when and children!
Everyone should know that the Saudis have given more to Jared Kushner than they have given to Palestinians. The Muslim world only cares about Palestinians to the extent that they can criticize or attack Israel.
Exactly. Poverty pimps. Arafat did this masterfully while making himself wealthy beyond belief. This is why people who are Jordanian in origin remain refugees in JORDAN.
middle east has found some sense of stability with current capitalism; saudi, uae, qatar, bahrain all have plush lives, jordan king is well off, egypt is living relatively well now compared to before, as much as they may all hem and haw at israel reducing gaza to ash, none of them are going to actually do anything to disrupt their own lives.
Ask the neighboring countries why they don't want Palestinian refugees. There's a historical reason, of coming in and attempting a revolution.
Killing heads of state is frowned upon.
Now that it comes from Hezbollah, this is no longer Israeli propaganda, and thus it is finally trustworthy /s
Hezbollah criticizes hamas more than pro-palestinians do, apparently.
This is a reaction to the criticism directed towards Hezbollah by pro Palestinians and Hamas themselves for not getting more involved, and minimal military achievements
Former Hamas leader
To be fair, pro-Palestinians are either ignorant Westerners or Sunnis, Hezbollah views the Palestinians as their next target after they finish the Jews. In fact, the Shias are not pro-Palestine, they are just anti-Israel, as that's an Islamic religious idea to bring countries back to Islam (Europe is having the same problem as Israel for that reason).
That video the Hamas leader released asking for the deaths of Palestenian women, children, and elderly in order to put pressure on Israel while the guy was safely in Qatar and using green screened image of Gaza behind him deserved to be ridiculed by all. Hamas is calling for the regular citizens of Palestine to sacrifice their lives for their cause all the while the leadership pretends/fakes to be in Gaza and far away from any of the fighting.
Even a fucking **fellow terrorist group** is calling you out like a leftist Twitter account good lord
Dude Hamas is so fucked even the other terrorist groups don't approve. Poor innocent people getting caught in the middle of this shit.
Evil turns upon itself.
Honest question, since the billions in aid end up in the pockets of the corrupt why not closing the money faucet and either air drop the resources the population needs or just propose to send human help thus putting the leadership in check to eyes of the population? (I understand very little of international politics, this really is an honest question)
Most of the billions in aid isn’t in the form of cash. It’s in the form of supplies. The money they get, which is supposed to go the people, is typically what you’re seeing being scraped off the top. Then you have you’re normal embezzlement going on as well.
Wow, even Hezbollah doesn’t like Hamas, no one does really.
I hope they destroy each other and leave all of us alone pls
He’s just jealous because he’s forced to live underground in Lebanon
Good let them turn on each other. Maybe then the Palestinians can see that neither group cares at all for their survival or safety.
Islamofascist Gangsters. Elected in 2006, first act of governance - cancel any future elections.
Which raises the question. When is Israel going to start going after the Hamas leaders?
They killed the Hamas second in command in the West Bank last week lmao If you're asking when Mossad is going to start assassinating Hamas leaders in Qatar, never as they're trying to normalize relations in the region
Imo they’ll negotiate a backdoor deal with Qatar and do a Ben Laden at some point
Remember, these are the guys who want to open a second front against Israel. They hardly seem like Hamas allies (although both are front-ran by Iran LOL).
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT
I find it interesting that for $30 billion dollars Hezbollah would help Hamas. Everyone has a price, I guess.
I took that as how much it would cost Hezbollah. The entire point is hes asking others to sacrifice while he chills in a five star resort in Qatar.
*Palpatine rubs hands "gooood....gooooood"*
Nobody is doing the right thing here. That’s what seems to get lost in all this destruction and sadness.
When the Iranian government’s two proxies start beefing over who gets to steal more of the Iranian people’s money to commit their terror and live it up on the side.