Israel-Iran conflicts - news and discussion

[tim]

He's not a lunatic, he's something worse.

We don't hear this terminology much in the Western MSM, but the moderate Israeli press has been calling him a "Jewish Supremacist" ever since he brought Kach into his government. The center-left paper Haaretz has no qualms about applying that label to him, and claiming that he regards Gentile life as less valuable than Jewish life. They call him the most overtly racist head of state currently in power:

Netanyahu is the leader of Jewish supremacy | Editorial

***

www.haaretz.com

After three days he rose from the dead, yet again.

Not that I disagree, although there has been plenty of coverage of the nastiness of Netanyahu in your MSM.

 

[mojo pixy]

Azerbaijan for a start, who the Israelis gave recent support enabling them to defeat the Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh. Iran is Azerbaijan's neighbour and most ethnic Azerbaijanis live in the Iranian Azerbaijani provinces where Iran do not want separatist movements emerging.

Israel has also always had strong historic links with Christian militias in Lebanon.

Israeli arms quietly helped Azerbaijan retake Nagorno-Karabakh, to the dismay of region's Armenians

Israel has quietly helped fuel Azerbaijan’s campaign to recapture Nagorno-Karabakh, supplying powerful weapons to the country ahead of its lightening offensive last month that brought the Armenian separatist enclave in its territory back under its control.

apnews.com

So you think Azerbaijan will attack Iran, at Israel's behest? Without fear of any russian response?

Interesting.

 

[tim]

So you think Azerbaijan will attack Iran, at Israel's behest? Without fear of any russian response?

Interesting.

I don't imagine that a stronger Azerbaijan will attack Israel just inspire separatist sentiment Iran.

 

[mojo pixy]

I don't imagine that a stronger Azerbaijan will attack Israel just inspire separatist sentiment Iran.

Yes that's possible, but it still puts us a very long way from the kind of direct Israel-Iran hot war the OP is on about.

 

[phildwyer]

Not that I disagree, although there has been plenty of coverage of the nastiness of Netanyahu in your MSM.

Yes, plenty of Western MSM will say Netanyahu is nasty. But the liberal Israeli press is more specific than that--they call him a Jewish Supremacist, in the Kahanite tradition. That is to say, someone who believes Jews are superior to Gentiles.

I've never seen that accusation reported in the Western MSM, which seems a strange omission. If for example the President of Germany was being accused of taking an analogous position we'd be hearing all about it.

 

[tim]

Yes that's possible, but it still puts us a very long way from the kind of direct Israel-Iran hot war the OP is on about.

Because we probably are a long way from a direct hot war. However, that doesn't mean that people aren't getting killed in the indirect conflicts of the type that both parties have a long tradition of engaging.

Anyway, Protag is an idiot.

 

[phildwyer]

Today's New York Times talks about Britain's "two realities" on the Gaza war: the "politicians" versus the "people."

A split between the politicians and the people isn't supposed to happen in a representative democracy, where the former are supposed to represent the latter.

But the Times is obviously correct about the existence of this division. The question they don't address, and which no-one seems to be addressing, is WHY this divergence has arisen. Why are the politicians saying one thing, and the people saying another?

I think everyone knows why. But no-one will say it. Which raises a whole other problem...

Opinion | In Britain, Reality Is Cleaving in Two

The country’s leading politicians support the war in Gaza. Much of its public does not.

www.nytimes.com

 

[mojo pixy]

A split between the politicians and the people isn't supposed to happen in a representative democracy, where the former are supposed to represent the latter.

But the Times is obviously correct about the existence of this division. The question they don't address, and which no-one seems to be addressing, is WHY this divergence has arisen. Why are the politicians saying one thing, and the people saying another?

I think everyone knows why. But no-one will say it.

Well go on then, be that fearless voice of truth.

Why?

 

[zahir]

Today's New York Times talks about Britain's "two realities" on the Gaza war: the "politicians" versus the "people."

A split between the politicians and the people isn't supposed to happen in a representative democracy, where the former are supposed to represent the latter.

But the Times is obviously correct about the existence of this division. The question they don't address, and which no-one seems to be addressing, is WHY this divergence has arisen. Why are the politicians saying one thing, and the people saying another?

I think everyone knows why. But no-one will say it. Which raises a whole other problem...

Opinion | In Britain, Reality Is Cleaving in Two

The country’s leading politicians support the war in Gaza. Much of its public does not.

www.nytimes.com

Archived version: https://archive.ph/O4eu8

 

[Dogsauce]

Archived version: https://archive.ph/O4eu8

The first sentence in that article is patently untrue:

In Britain, Armistice Day is usually an understated affair, marked only by two minutes of silence at 11 a.m.

Hasn’t been that way for at least 20 years, when we saw the hijacking of the occasion to be about ‘sporting our troops’ in Iraq (with approval implied by poppy-wearing). It was a solemn and dignified occasion once, but has been used for political division since the Blair years.

 

[Gramsci]

Archived version: https://archive.ph/O4eu8

New York Times is saying what mainstream press here avoid that there is a cleavage between our elected politicians and public on a ceasefire.

Reminds me of Iraq marches.

I thought it is fair article.

One thing positive that has come out of the large peaceful marches is that the demonization has not worked. Socialist Campaign Group MPs turning up and speaking at marches have largely been not disciplined. One MP I think is under discipline for saying to the river to the sea. So big marches and public opinion has reduced Starmers power to get rid of pro Palestinian MPs

On Labour party- traditionally it supported Zionism from its early days.

So not just Starmer. History of support. Labour Friends of Israel do not support ceasefire for example. Support for Zionism is of the secular kind.

 

[phildwyer]

On Labour party- traditionally it supported Zionism from its early days.

Because early C20th Zionism was socialist. That tradition appears to have evaporated completely, and now it's generally supremacist afaics.

 

[Gramsci]

Because early C20th Zionism was socialist. That tradition appears to have evaporated completely, and now it's generally supremacist afaics.

Yes. The two parties the Labour friends of Israel support are now very minor parties.

However for Palestinians ethnic cleansing took place under Labour Zionism and the hard right version now.

 

[teqniq]

Lol:

 

[krtek a houby]

Really wish the op would change the ridiculous thread title

 

[editor]

Really wish the op would change the ridiculous thread title

What would you suggest?

 

[Silas Loom]

What would you suggest?

“Israel-Iran conflicts” would sum it up. It needs its own thread. Separately from the Israel and Palestinian territories discussions. But the current title is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[krtek a houby]

What would you suggest?

Netanyahu

 

[Serge Forward]

Israel-Iran conflicts - news and discussion

 

[Silas Loom]

Hopefully, Israel’s response to the Iranian missiles will be a string of cyber attacks and assassinations in reasonably slow time, justifying the plural in “conflicts”, and avoiding a change in title to “the Israel-Iran and supporting powers war, 2024”.

 

[Pickman's model]

Well go on then, be that fearless voice of truth.

Why?

Dwyer wouldn't know the truth if it whacked him round the chops with a kipper

 

[mojo pixy]

Dwyer wouldn't know the truth if it whacked him round the chops with a kipper

Plus it's easy to be fearless behind miles of telephone cable

 

[Pickman's model]

Plus it's easy to be fearless behind miles of telephone cable

He is posting from beneath a table just in case

 

[Protag]

Looks like Nutteryahoo is going to get his war with Iran then. Let's thank Genocide Joe for his input.

 

[Protag]

See Naomi Klein struggle to fit her understanding of the world with reality:



Time to wake up methinks.

 

[Protag]

Nutteryahoo blocks Oct 7 investigation, Ha. I am sure the mainstream narrative is correct and you would be a fool or a fascist to think otherwise:

 

[Magnus McGinty]

‘Wake up’ - check
‘Mainstream narrative’ - check
Give us a sheeple for a full house.

 

[Artaxerxes]

For fucks sake

 

[Rimbaud]

Nutteryahoo blocks Oct 7 investigation, Ha. I am sure the mainstream narrative is correct and you would be a fool or a fascist to think otherwise:

Stop trying to make Nutteryahoo happen.

It isn't going to happen.

 

[Pickman's model]

‘Wake up’ - check
‘Mainstream narrative’ - check
Give us a sheeple for a full house.

What would really be a surprise is if he stfu