Marina Salty
Ex QOTB
Many accounts on twitter say all of it are already InterceptedThis looks to be correct. US/UK downed some on the Syrian border with Iraq.
Many accounts on twitter say all of it are already InterceptedThis looks to be correct. US/UK downed some on the Syrian border with Iraq.
Doesn't look like that according the live footage from JerusalemMany accounts on twitter say all of it are already Intercepted
Well, Iran has been attacking Israel every single day for six months now, only through its proxies.Also, watch out for Iran attacking Israel this weekend.
If there's one thing we can count on is that Moopy will be totally objective on the issue and not assume the moral high ground.
the way you just implied that the posts and posters you don't agree with on "this issue"... are morally sound. interesting.If there's one thing we can count on is that Moopy will be totally objective on the issue and not assume the moral high ground.
If there's one thing we can count on is that Moopy will be totally objective on the issue and not assume the moral high ground.
I implied nothing. Because I don't "agree" OR disagree with anyone. Because there's nothing in this universe that says ANY party is more 'right' than another. It all comes down to your relative experience/relationship with this conflict. All are equally 'right'.the way you just implied that the posts and posters you don't agree with on "this issue"... are morally sound. interesting.
I agree. There IS no objective opinion on this or any conflict. People just seem to forget that.What would an objective opinion even look like?
This is a situation involving a terrorist group targeting civilians, a government responding by becoming itself a terrorist group targeting civilians, and the threat of this escalating into a full blown world war that will draw all of us in.
Who would we deem to be objective?
Because people SAY they 'respect' that but I don't think people always behave like it. There's always an underlying smugness that a plurality of views is just an illusion. That you just gotta 'humor' the other side because ultimately they're just deluded and crazy.Then why make backhanded comments implying that people should be objective?
Reading the difference in language between all the international responses today is fascinating but so frustrating.
Do you not see the irony in highlighting smugness when you're making snarky/sarcastic posts like the above that imply moral and intellectual superiority? And it's far from the first time.Because people SAY they 'respect' that but I don't think people always behave like it. There's always an underlying smugness that a plurality of views is just an illusion.
I mean sure it was a little sharp, but it was meant to highlight the moral superiority I see, not exacerbate it. Because I still see it in this thread. And I still think there are people here who will simply not accept that any more than one view is possible on any part of this conflict. Which is fine, but just come out and say it.Do you not see the irony in highlighting smugness when you're making snarky/sarcastic posts like the above that imply moral and intellectual superiority? And it's far from the first time.
I’m sure @KindaCool had a point, just nobody knows what it is
but I feel this was probably the best possible outcome of this incident. Iran certainly has much greater offensive capacities than what they utilized against Israel. The attack had to be strong enough to appease whatever domestic desires for retribution came after the hit on their consular annex in Damascus (I haven't seen anything specifically about this, but I am assuming there were at least some citizens in Iran who wanted payback for that), while also not being too strong as to provoke the Israelis into upping the degree of violence again (as they did when they hit the consular annex in the first place). The attack was balanced to make Iran look strong and capable internally and externally (and they almost certainly learned a lot about Israeli defensive systems in the process), while also allowing the Israelis an out from making another step forward toward all-out war. It was probably the best possible outcome of this incident, and I'm glad cooler heads prevailed in Tehran. It doesn't fundamentally change anything on either side of the strategic equation, except I guess to squash any doubts that the Saudis would pick Israel over Iran when things moved from discourse to missiles flying over their territory.
So it turns out that several Arab states helped defending Israel against Iran’s missile attack; Jordan by actively shooting down Iranian missiles, Saudi, UAE and other Gulf states by sharing intel and opening their airspace to American/allied warplanes. Saudi arabia by also allegedly intercepting missiles shot by the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
A rather remarkable but expected turn of events; it just goes to show that this is much bigger than the Palestinian issue (which doesn’t excuse Israel’s actions) and that half of the countries in that region would rather side with Israel than with Iran.
I think they’re all just playing the role they’re supposed to play. Iran knew they would all be shot down. They even spoilered their own attack. It was a warning sign as they had to be seen to be doing something. The Western-allied states equally had to be seen to be opposing any Iranian ‘aggression’ and it’s an easy win for them to display loyalty to the US (not Israel). Ultimately they just don’t want tensions rising in their own backyard because they’ll be dragged into it whether they want to or not. KSA in particular.
Apart from the IDF who continue to be destructive and counterproductive, they’re all just displaying feathers. Let’s hope that’s all it is.