When someone die its not a little damage.

Dont come whining when we lose patience and bomb the crap out of them

Tit for tat

This post was edited by Many_Names on Jun 20 2025 09:46am

and i just caught you in another lie. Israel DOES NOT subscribe to tit for tat. I thought you were in the IDF? Israel subscribes to "Doctrine of Disproportionate Response" or sometimes "The Dahiya Doctrine"

On Oct 7th <1500 people were killed. in response Israel killed over 50,000 people in Gaza. this is not tit for tat, this is the Doctrine of Disproportionate Response.
so to view the current conflict, approx 24-30 people killed in Israel and 600+ killed in Iran. i.e. Disproportionate

So if you think that 24-30 people killed in Israel is not a little damage, then what is 50,000 ppl killed in Gaza, or the impending disaster in Iran?

in the meantime it is widely reported that the US is sending its bombers over to the middle east...



This post was edited by ferdia on Jun 20 2025 10:34am

You’re conflating two completely different scenarios: Gaza and Iran.

Iran is a sovereign state with a formal military and identifiable leadership. It doesn’t operate from within civilian populations, so the IDF can target its military infrastructure and leadership directly and lawfully.

Hamas, on the other hand, is a terrorist organization that deliberately embeds itself within civilian areas it’s part of their doctrine. This tactic is what leads to civilian suffering in Gaza in the first place. And you know this. You’re not confused you’re just determined to frame Israel as the villain, no matter the facts.

That’s what I meant when I said your stance is anti-semitic: you accuse Israel of targeting civilians as a strategy, yet when it confronts a conventional military like Iran’s without hiding behind civilians and responds with precision strikes, you still find a way to blame Israel. Then you just pivot back to Gaza, ignoring the context, as if that somehow justifies the double standard.


Here is a fact check from chatgpt;

Claim Check:
• It’s factually correct that Iran is a sovereign nation with conventional armed forces, and that IDF operations against Iranian military assets (if verified) fall under laws of armed conflict.
• Hamas does have a documented history of embedding military assets in civilian areas. This has been acknowledged by organizations like the UN and even Amnesty International.
• There is no credible evidence that Israel targets civilians as a doctrine. Civilian casualties are often the result of fighting in dense urban environments where Hamas operates from schools, hospitals, and homes.
• Accusing Israel of deliberate civilian targeting while excusing or ignoring Iran’s or Hamas’s actions can reflect a double standard, which is often a hallmark of antisemitic bias—per the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.

You can keep posting videos, I dont need youtube to know what is real and what isnt

This post was edited by Many_Names on Jun 20 2025 11:01am

would anyone else like to respond to the above ? perhaps ? you mentioned something about anti-Semitic rhetoric the other day, i think we landed on the thread being anti-Israeli* rather then anti-Semitic. *i.e. users are challenged by the actions of the state of Israel, which is a valid challenge, noting what has been happening in Gaza and now Iran, as opposed to being anti Semitic (which is an attack on a religious group, with Many_names eager to pull that card repeatedly).

As a footnote, if you look carefully you will see I only respond to Many_names when he seeks me out and quotes me, otherwise i just ignore him. so well, if he does not like my responses he should consider not seeking me out.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jun 20 2025 11:18am

I come to this thread with genuine intent to debate, no intent to insult or cause offence to anyone, I might be a new member but am an adult (like most here discussing such topics I hope)

For background I am from the UK if you feel this may be relevant. I personally don't follow any political persuasion - I didn't vote at the last election and the election before that I "protest voted" Green, not so much on the wider environmental issues but on a specific issue local to me. I work in the charity sector and work with and meet people daily from diverse backgrounds - including practising Muslims and practising Jewish.

My view on the whole Israel-Iran scenario, in a nutshell, which I'm sure you can appreciate cannot be a holistic view on every single tiny issue at stake otherwise I would be here typing for days, is this:

- Hamas attacked Israel on Oct 7, 2023, intentionally setting out to murder as many civilians as possible
- Israel's security response on the day (and the intelligence prior) was woefully inadequate
- This necessitated a huge response of force from Israel - both to deter a future attack, but also to "save face" for Netanyahu and other prominent Israeli Government members who could be held liable for the security and intelligence failures
- Israel's initial response, over the first week or two, whilst overwhelming and undoubtedly causing immense loss of life, was likely "proportionate" in the sense that they were responding to an immediate attack and weight should be given to the fact that it can be difficult to judge exactly how much force to use in such scenarios
- Certainly beyond the first month, Israel's response became punitive in nature and was designed to cause suffering to the population
- Beyond this, Israeli Government figures, including Netanyahu, have publicly several times made statements that would equate to genoicidal intent (to rid Gaza of it's population)
- The world at large has not responded effectively to this - albeit the ICC has issued an arrest warrant, nobody has stated they would enact it

- Despite all of this, it must absolutely be recognised that Israel was attacked, and responded to defend itself.
- The force used was overwhelming and clearly at this current time is disproportionate to the current threat faced

The extension of this situation into a direct Iran-Israel conflict is obviously because of Iran's indirect control of almost all of Israel's "traditional" enemies. Israel has calculated that now is the time that Iran is at it's weakest point. It is noteworthy to state that Iran's Supreme Leader has publicly committed his country before to the destruction of Israel. Israel is entitled to take that as a credible threat, even if their current assessments of Iran's immediate nuclear capabilities are obviously extremely exaggerated.

It is simple. Israel has calculated that now is the opportune time to move. Iran has played with fire, and has been burnt. There is still time for Iran to back down, but all of the signals they have been sending thus far seem to suggest that they are preparing for a fight, and not ready to negotiate. Netanyahi, much like the Supreme Leader, is a hardline fundamentalist and will not compromise on his core demands. There is only two ways for this to go - a full back-down from Iran and verifiable abandonment of their nuclear program, or a regional war with the goal of removing the Iranian leadership.

hi and welcome! thank you for posting!

i agree with all of your assessment apart from the final point. i am not convinced that Israel wants, or will attempt, regime change in Iran. A more nuanced response from me would be: If Iran destabilizes and its leadership is destroyed, whatever fills that vacuum can be considered "regime change" and may occur. what i dont expect is Israel or the US installing a pro israeli regime into Iran.

and again, thank you for your post!

Careful what you say about you know who.

for sure lol i have 6 months "experience" lol.

I respectfully disagree - I think it is clear Israel does want regime change in Iran. If public reports are to be believed, Trump veto'd their plan to assassinate the Ayatollah. There is no reason to assassinate him, unless they want regime change. Now, I did not say that necessarily Israeli's or Americans for that matter want to control the regime in Iran, or install their own regime. But they certainly have a vested interest, and a clear intent, to remove the current regime, if only to send a message that they are powerful and not to be threatened.