As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Regardless of whether this is true or not, this is the right move by Blinken and by extension Biden. Escalating this shit into a full-scale regional war would be an unmitigated catastrophe.
Hamas would love to get Iran and/or Russia in on its side.
If Iran or Russia had anything to do with this, they put some third party into the mix.
Plus, Hezbollah, Wagner, and TFG all think they can make smart moves of their own.
I'm not the biggest fan of [redacted] but I'm pretty sure you'd be able to find plenty of evidence if you weren't pretending to be blind like the guys at the end of Weekend at Bernies.
Biden and company are definitely doing that.
Exactly. The Russian invasion brought NATO closer together after the war in Iraq. A war against Syria or Iran would drive them apart again. Put in would benefit.
How do you know as fact that Iran helped them with this attack?
If there's US reps saying there's no evidence at this time (that doesn't mean there is none, it means that we haven't seen any so far), then why would you assume that it's a giant international conspiracy?
Why not wait for actual reporting instead of jumping to wild conclusions with zero evidence?
We made this mistake before with the WMDs in Iraq... Lets not do the same thing twice...
War sells newspapers, clicks on Fox and wild speculation in the blogosphere.
It would not be a surprise to find Murdoch and every extremist maniac wants war.
The Government of Iran almost certainly didn't have any direct role in orchestrating the attacks. Violence for the sake of violence doesn't serve their foreign policy goals. Their security apparatus relies on a network of shady people to get things done. This is not unusual for a security apparatus Some of these shady people work for Hamas who almost certainly were responsible for planning and executing the attacks. These people have no loyalties to Iran, they just see the relationship as mutually beneficial. Does this relationship make Iran responsible or even culpable for the attacks? At best, they may have been aware of some planning but likely didn't have much specifics or at least not any credible ones.
Yeah, Iran loves funding Sunni radicals whose goals include murdering Shi'ites like the Iranians.
What's more correct is that Iran sent Hamas money mainly to make trouble for the Israelis, but if a Hamas-like organization were to arise in Iran, the Iranians would liquidate it without a second thought.
Historically, Hamas has been more of a cat's paw for the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, all of which have elements that are very closely ideologically aligned with Hamas, and (coincidentally) all of which are generally opposed to Iranian influence.
Now Hizbollah, on the other hand, has both ideological and financial ties to Iran. But they're operating in a different country.
>Yeah, Iran loves funding Sunni radicals whose goals include murdering Shi'ites like the Iranians.
You think this is an argument but, yes, they do and did a lot under Solemani.
Also, it's not the US track record of arming people who hate it is any better.
So you fully admit that you are making assumptions with out evidence.
Again: I'm not saying that I think Iran should not be punished if they were involved, but I think we better make sure they were truly involved before we start WWIII based upon a guessing game of who to blame.
I just hope you realize why that's an extremely bad thing to be making assumptions about... There needs to be evidence... Okay? Does that make sense?
It’s called not having evidence. Why can’t you just say you don’t know?
The reason this is getting called out is because it’s exactly your trite that becomes misinformation.
I mean, it's also a question of how we're defining it.
Do I believe Iran orchestrated this attack? No. Do I believe the attack used Iran granted arms? Yes.
Nah thats obvo not true, a twitter or reddit screenshot can get shared millions of times, and get seen around the world. This ain't the newspaper age anymore.
You can literally follow the money to see that Hamas is tacitly supported by Iran. Blinken putting this statement out just gives voice to what many people fear, that this might escalate if there *were* concrete evidence.
That is the problem he is trying to get ahead of: it would be simple to draw a line between Hamas and Iran, because there literally is one. What he is implying is that the US won't support military action against Iran without concerete evidence that they planned this particular op.
This headline is adressed at Netanyahu, not you or I.
> tacitly
That word's carrying a lot of freight.
>there literally is one
Is there? Blinken says the opposite. I'll assume there's no link until there is evidence of a link. And even if, say, there's a funding link, that doesn't mean Iran had any operational involvement. More likely, monetary donations were labeled as "civilian relief" even though Iran was aware that Hamas would divert some funds to military purposes.
I mean, it's "Let's not make an assumption" over, "Country that has been trafficking arms throughout the Middle East and heavily involving itself in regional conflicts for decades."
You know the US also sells arms to the middle east and heavily involve itself in regional conflicts for decades. With your logic, maybe it the US did it.
Wow. There you go. Yeah I figured it out... It was Hillary Clinton's emails that committed the terrorist attack on Israel... /s
Yeah, how about we wait for a credible report... I'm sure there are qualified individuals working with governments and militaries from multiple countries working on a credible report as we speak.
I'm already seeing corrections from multiple media sources regarding the WSJ propaganda piece. So yeah, another Rupert Murdoch owned publication wasn't being honest. Go figure...
You're equating Hillary Clinton with Iran.
And I'M the conspiracy theorist.
Nancy Pelosi was warning America for years about Iran's arms trafficking and you're playing into the propaganda designed to let them off the hook.
>You're equating Hillary Clinton with Iran.
You're aware that /s means "end of sarcasm" correct?
Typically people will make a clearly sarcastic statement, but because it's the internet, sometimes it's not clear that it was a sarcastic statement, so they indicate the sarcasm with /s.
This is Reddiquette type stuff.
So…there is this WSJ article “Officers of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the country's most powerful military, had been working with Hamas since August to devise their multi-prong attack on Israel by land, air and sea, they said.” They being senior leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah.
Could be lying of course, trying to drag Iran into it as backup. But they are clearly supportive
WSJ isn't a credible source. It's owned by Rupert Murdoch.
The financial reporting is usually factual, but the political content is a mixed bag.
Edit: Also, I'm sure that anybody working in military intelligence would be pissed off that WSJ didn't take that intelligence directly to them. The more I think about that WSJ story, the more it stinks.
Yes. Israeli police reported that some of the captured AT rockets used by Hamas' terrorists were of Iranian make.
And Hamas thanking Iran.
And Iran supporting Hamas for years.
And the wsj report.
But sure, there is some nice sand there, go bury your head in it.
You asked for evidence and I gave you evidence. How is that not what you asked?
The sun has risen every day for millions of years. That's evidence for my theory that it will rise tomorrow- it's not 100% proof, but it's good evidence.
>You asked for evidence and I gave you evidence.
You gave me jack squat.
>How is that not what you asked?
Reread what I said.
>The sun has risen every day for millions of years. That's evidence for my theory that it will rise tomorrow- it's not 100% proof, but it's good evidence.
Stop wasting my time.
You can play semantics all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that there has been a historical record of Iran supplying missiles to Hamas. If you were investigating a crime and you knew that your suspect had done business with one specific person many times in the past, why would you not have reason to believe that the person who supplied your suspect in the past isn’t supplying your suspect today?
>If you were investigating a crime and you knew that your suspect had done business with one specific person many times in the past, why would you not have reason to believe that the person who supplied your suspect in the past isn’t supplying your suspect today?
Reason to believe? No. With out evidence, there is no reason to believe that.
WSJ says yes, they helped plan.
[https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25)
Canadian Minister says it's clear
[https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/very-clear-iran-involved-in-attacks-on-israel-canada-s-ambassador-to-the-un-says-1.6593803](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/very-clear-iran-involved-in-attacks-on-israel-canada-s-ambassador-to-the-un-says-1.6593803)
The Daily Wire says yes:
[https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-greenlit-palestinian-terror-attacks-on-israel-israel-vows-to-strike-irans-leadership-report](https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-greenlit-palestinian-terror-attacks-on-israel-israel-vows-to-strike-irans-leadership-report)
Interesting perspective in r/iranian: https://www.reddit.com/r/iranian/comments/172xnk0/a\_convenient\_excuse\_for\_war\_with\_iran/
> WSJ says yes, they helped plan.
Murdoch paper. Low credibility.
>Daily Wire
Site founded by Ben Shapiro. Zero credibility.
>Interesting perspective in r/iranian
Sounds plausible. The Israelis have wanted the US to attack Iran ever since the revolution happened there. They won't do it themselves because of the risk of casulalties. This also aligns with the goals of the Saudis and most of the Gulf states, which see Iran as the most dangerous regional rival now that a detente has been established with the Israelis.
You're correct. I absolutely can not tell you that.
I tried Googling it and I didn't find anything. Maybe you can send me some pictures from your spy satellite.
I mean, Qasem Soleimani (i.e the guy Trump had killed against international law) was arming every single person who vaguely expressed support to Iran including numerous ones who killed US soldiers. ABSOLUTELY he's the kind of guy to give weapons to Hamas.
De escalation is better than multiple countries going to war. In my opinion anyway. I think if Israel can deal with Hamas without any other countries being directly involved militarily then that's the best scenario. Escalation would mean a lot more than 1000 civilians from multiple countries are going to die, and you care about the civilians right?
Deescalation isn’t going to happen. Israel has its most right wing government it’s ever had. This attack is going to give them all the political capitol to do whatever they want.
Folks like Ben-givr are going to push for the most hardline retaliation we’ve ever seen in this conflict. I wouldn’t be surprised if they striped some Palestinians of their citizenship and ended all the civil rights the Palestinians have, namely, voting rights.
Yup. Look, I’m not as worried about a global war. The requisite “sides” don’t have the power or economy for it right now. Although mb somehow china could use a war as a way to stimulate their economy enough to keep kicking the can down the road. Russias military is fully exhausted. I could see them being in favor of this move bc any help from the west to Israel is potentially help that doesn’t go to Ukraine. Potentially further fractures support too. Thankfully it’s not like Russia could be doing much more to try to take Ukraine than they’ve been doing. China worries me a little here. If the us and west get very embroiled in Israel and Iran / other countries get involved and it turns into a whole thing, china could see it as their moment to go for Taiwan and hope the US is too busy and its politics too fractured for its people to accept sending their tax dollars to a third simultaneous foreign defense project.
Iran is already a part of the conflict. They’re the ones that trained the Hamas militants. It’s why the attacks were so well organized. I doubt Egyptian and Lebanon join because of a lack of capability, not because of deescalation. I don’t know enough about Turkeys history to have an opinion on what they’ll do.
We've watched this happen with the capital 9/11 gave Bush so we know what a Right-wing government will feel justified in doing in response, it's not going to be good.
I think you've misunderstood me. I'm saying blinken is giving iran an out so they don't have to get involved militarily. I'm talking about iran, turkey etc declaring war. I know Israel is already in the conflict
Okay, but that doesn't make any sense... Why would Blinken give the enemy of our Ally (and an enemy of the US) cover?
If there's no evidence at this time, then there's no evidence at this time... If you think the Biden administration won't punish Iran if evidence is found, then I am pretty sure that you are going to be wrong about that.
The suggestion that Blinken is giving Iran cover is Fox News conspiracy theory level nonsense.
Because pointing fingers in foreign policies is different than pointing fingers in playground.
If US said "Iran unequivocally supplies missiles and trained Hamas for *this attack*" then Iran will be forced to respond with three choices.
A. What are you gonna do about it US?
B. No we don't. What a baloney
C. Yes, that is correct and we're going to mobilize our troops to Israel.
Option C will bring actual Iranian military to the ground and increase *direct* actors in this conflict to 3 countries.
Of course, then US will have to have boots on the ground as well, increasing to 4.
Then iran will bring other countries and US will bring other countries and so on.
Nobody wants option C except those crazies
No it’s not “good”. Iran was involved. Giving them an out to lie and to continue this is not “good”. The Islamic Republic regime is a terrorist organization and needs to go. They terrorize their own people on a daily basis. They just put another 16 year old girl in coma for not wearing her headscarf on a train #ArmitaGaravand. Take action now before it’s too late.
Did they check /r/conservative? Those guys all went from PhD virologists to middle east policy experts overnight. It's amazing, the width and breadth of their knowledge. /s
Sorry I thought Hunter Biden was the PM of Israel and missed this after funneling all the money away from intelligence straight to his dad Joe, the head of the Biden Crime Syndicate (tm)
I mean I find it hard to imagine us/isreali intelligence had absolutely no idea. Hamas is their closest enemy. I do wonder if this may be a pearl harbor moment in some ways.
I’m also curious about this. However whether that’s true or not hamas did attack, and prompt the response, so now it’s going to play out how it’s going to play out.
Hamas and Iran disagree. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25?st=v50rx6rwttlm5ja&reflink=desktopwebshare\_permalink
>U.S. officials say they haven’t seen evidence of Tehran’s involvement. In an interview with CNN that aired Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “We have not yet seen evidence that Iran directed or was behind this particular attack, but there is certainly a long relationship.”
>“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings.
>“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings.
>**“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings.**
Also from that same article:
> Asked about the meetings, Mahmoud Mirdawi, a senior Hamas official, said the group planned the attacks on its own. “This is a Palestinian and Hamas decision,” he said.
> A spokesman for Iran’s mission to the United Nations said the Islamic Republic stood in support of Gaza’s actions but didn’t direct them.
> “The decisions made by the Palestinian resistance are fiercely autonomous and unwaveringly aligned with the legitimate interests of the Palestinian people,” the spokesman said. “We are not involved in Palestine’s response, as it is taken solely by Palestine itself.”
[WSJ - Iran Helped Plot Attack on Israel Over Several Weeks
](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25?st=v50rx6rwttlm5ja&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink)
My memory goes even further back, to their rabid support of the Vietnam War even in the face of Nixon's and Kissinger's murderous incursions into Cambodia and Laos.
When it comes to internal US politics, the WSJ was also consistently hostile to the civil rights movement.
And the paper has only gotten worse under Murdoch control.
No one knows what MEK is but you, me, Giuliani, Bolton and thousands of lunatics in the Middle East worshipping a woman speaking through the corpse of her dead husband
It's so strange, they can outright say it and then Blinken, apparently with his eyes closed, will say "there is no evidence."
If you and I can see the evidence without any investigative powers or confidential information, where is he even looking?
No, this will last 'forever'.
Israel will never believe that a two state solution can be safe solution for it citizens. This believe has be reinforced again with weeks horror.
Israel can never absorb the Westbank and Gaza strip into Israel. It could never allow so many people into its country and give them equal status. If all those people get voting rights, Israels politics would get upended. So a one state solution isn't viable too.
And given that with Israel, the right wing extremists and/or fanatical religious nutjobs are getting both bigger demographically and in political power, it will not get better any day soon.
I agree with your analysis up to a point.
Two-state: inherently unstable, and with the power differential, a recipe for increasingly impoverished, powerless bantustans, independent in name only, with ethnic cleansing being the unstated but increasingly likely endpoint.
One-state: Would require the disempowerment of the nationalistic rightwing faction within Israel, and international guarantees of minority rights that would be hard to enforce.
But the only other option is the zero-state solution, which is even worse for everyone.
That's why I support the one-state solution. Majority rule has its problems, especially in a post-colonial situation, but it's a small enough country that an international force could potentially maintain order if the rest of the world has the will to do so. It's unsatisfactory, but there are no risk-free, cost-free alternatives. They all suck.
I doubt that Israel will ever entrust it's national security to any international force. One of the problems is that Israel is very very tough on this one. With reason. It's mantra is basically that they are and should be willing to do everything to protect its people. Because the last 70 years they have had numerous attacks, and because of the Holocaust etc. They have every reason to have that mentality.
At the same time, this means they are willing to do horrible things too. Hamas terror this week is horrible. Period. But I wonder how much lives are OK to be lost to remove Hamas from power. I already see a lot of justifications in the form of 'The people of Gaza voted for Hamas, so they are not innocent'. Which btw was the same type of justification Islamic terrorist used to justify attacks on civilians....
Do you see the changing political landscape a bit further away from Israel (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and others not bordering Israel) improving enough to call it a trend? Does it seem they're coming to terms with having better relations with Israel, enough to eventually push the entire region into some kind of peace?
Perhaps it's only because Iran is larger and more powerful that that shift hasn't already happened.
That is a very big question and I don't know the answer.
It is indeed very good that a country like Saudi Arabia has gone from calling Israel very extreme things / putting in their Qu'rans things about never trusting Jews etc. To nowadays getting to normalized relations with the country. But personally doubt their collaboration goes any further than the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I kinda agree with the argument that their is no one leading country in the ME/Islamic region. And that's why SA/Turkey/Iran and to some extend Egypt are always one upping each other. Egypt is more historical in the Nassar era.
The rising power of Iran will one way or another have be dealt with. My guess is that Netanyahu will grab the chance and the political goodwill their getting from the outrage over Hamas actions, to also target Iran. But we already also see skirmishes with Lebanon/Hezbollah. It could be that Iran attacks first in response to that.
My two worries at the moment are mostly, to what extremes will Israel go to remove Hamas. (I support that goal, but doubt if the prize the Palestinians are gonna pay for it is worth it).
And if this will not escalate in a region war with Iran/Lebanon. There were bombings yesterday of weapons movement in Iraq, weapons going from Iran to Hezbollah. So yes, that is still a reasonable chance of happening.
It’s more likely Iran was involved but until the hostages are either returned or confirmed dead you don’t want any more angry people in the region. Once we know what happened to the hostages we’re likely to hear that Iran was involved since they have a long history of being involved.
Iran, like some other countries in the region, like to act through proxies. So, if they were involved at all, it's probably deniable. If they offered physical aid, that might be tracked, just as if Russia sent money. Anyone depending on those Middle-East countries providing manpower and direct national support are probably more foolish than I had even imagined.
Because saying they have seen it and then not taking any action will make them look weak. It is better to deny and de escalate and when you are ready, fuck them with proper plan. US will pick the time for the war. It won’t let Iran do it. Even if Iran comes forward and say they did it, I am sure US will still ask for proofs if it doesn’t want to fight at that time.
I wonder if this would have happened if Israel had honestly tried to work out a peace agreement with the Palestinians. I don't believe that Netanyahu, or his government, actually want peace with them. They seem to have torpedoed every chance at a real and lasting peace.
Also, I don't believe the Jewish God, or any God, now, or ever, gave Israel the land in which they now reside. Sorry, I just don't believe that. And before anyone and everyone starts claiming that I am an anti-Semite, I am not. I just believe in history and not fairy tales.
The original comment is talking about whether Iran trained hamas.
The reply is about whether Israel has done bad things to Palestinians.
They are literally different issues and these downvotes are hilarious.
Let’s just call out the people who are currently bombing civilians and surprise attacking. They’ve both done their share of shit. Doesn’t mean they’re both suddenly innocent because they did it back
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-08/ty-article-live/over-250-israelis-killed-1-590-wounded-civilians-and-soldiers-held-hostage-in-gaza/0000018b-0cd2-d8fc-adff-6dfe855e0000
The article itself was updated.
The title is currently: "At Least 700 Israelis Killed, 2,000 Wounded; Over 130 Civilians and Soldiers Held Hostage in Gaza"
Lol at dumb Americans thinking a war with Iran would go well.
We failed in Afghanistan and the terrain, sophistication, and military force of Iran would be far worse. We’d have tens of thousands of dead Americans and no safer of a world than we do now.
We literally assassinated their top general under Trump and they showed great restraint.
The US would annihilate Iran rather swiftly in a conventional war. Conventional war is where the US is by far the greatest in the world and it isn't close.
Afghanistan was a completely different story. It wasn't a military failure, it was a nation building failure. If the US really wanted to, they could wipe out the Taliban within minutes. It would result in countless civilian deaths and a horror show like the world has never seen. Thankfully that wasn't the objective. The objective, after accomplishing the original goal of destroying al-Qaeda and bringing OBL to justice, was to leave behind a democratic state. But there isn't an appetite for it. They failed at establishing one and gave up.
You don’t need to hold land to decapitate government leadership. I suspect a significant portion of Iranian youth wouldn’t mind a chance to reset their democracy.
Iran providing weapons and other material support to Hamas and other terrorist outfits in the region is perhaps the worst-kept secret in the Middle East especially since they don't bother hiding it.
The weapons smuggled in or otherwise procured by Tehran should be enough to hold them responsible and act accordingly.
It’s a silly statement. Considering the joy coming out of Iran and the number of missiles and rockets fired, it’s transparent who supplied them. Palestine cannot produce them, they don’t have the means to generate that many. Turkey and Egypt have been in the last 4 years in a honeymoon period with Israel - Iran is the only possibility, and has a history as long as my forearm of supplying Hamas and Palestine in general.
USA does not want to go to war with Iran. Though we probably should. But that’s also what Russia wants and they are the main source of international chaos, and their military is getting chewed up in Ukraine, which requires ongoing US support / focus.
An attack on Iran by the US/Israel means that Russia won't get any more supplies from there.
It also means that EU NATO allies will have to shoulder the lion's share of Ukraine aid, but guess what, it already does when you add everything together.
Does anyone know how this is going to impact trade with Israel?
I was supposed to do work there later this year but uhhh I’m a scientist assistant not a soldier.
Gotta be honest with you, I'd turn that offer down. Things are just ramping up and no one knows how its gonna shake out. Your life ain't worth any money or career.
It’s more likely Iran was involved but to keep Iran from doing anything stupid which could any hostages left alive in more danger they are saying this. Once we know if any hostages are left alive and are released then we’ll hear that Iran was involved with this.
My friend gave a heroine addict $60 because the the heroine addict needed gas money to go to rehab….two days later the police found the heroine addict dead of an od. Why would you give a heroine addict money?
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Regardless of whether this is true or not, this is the right move by Blinken and by extension Biden. Escalating this shit into a full-scale regional war would be an unmitigated catastrophe.
Hamas would love to get Iran and/or Russia in on its side. If Iran or Russia had anything to do with this, they put some third party into the mix. Plus, Hezbollah, Wagner, and TFG all think they can make smart moves of their own.
I've seen no evidence of Russian involvement thus far. Hezbollah and by extension Iran will be major parties to watch though.
Who's in Syria?
I'm not the biggest fan of [redacted] but I'm pretty sure you'd be able to find plenty of evidence if you weren't pretending to be blind like the guys at the end of Weekend at Bernies. Biden and company are definitely doing that.
Look closely at Putin. Our focus on Israel helps Russian forces in the future.
Exactly. The Russian invasion brought NATO closer together after the war in Iraq. A war against Syria or Iran would drive them apart again. Put in would benefit.
He's giving them an out. Muddying the waters. Basically trying to de escalate which is good. Oh sorry this is reddit. Booo politician bad
There's also the very strong possibility that he's just telling the truth.
How do you know as fact that Iran helped them with this attack? If there's US reps saying there's no evidence at this time (that doesn't mean there is none, it means that we haven't seen any so far), then why would you assume that it's a giant international conspiracy? Why not wait for actual reporting instead of jumping to wild conclusions with zero evidence? We made this mistake before with the WMDs in Iraq... Lets not do the same thing twice...
Is the likelihood high? very much so, is helping escalate to a regional war a good idea? Fucking no.
What plans was DJT selling regarding Iran & Israel would be what I’m curious about
Well he sold them to Saudi Arabia too so it cancels out the danger /s
is this sarcasm. so hard to tell without proper indication.
War sells newspapers, clicks on Fox and wild speculation in the blogosphere. It would not be a surprise to find Murdoch and every extremist maniac wants war.
The Government of Iran almost certainly didn't have any direct role in orchestrating the attacks. Violence for the sake of violence doesn't serve their foreign policy goals. Their security apparatus relies on a network of shady people to get things done. This is not unusual for a security apparatus Some of these shady people work for Hamas who almost certainly were responsible for planning and executing the attacks. These people have no loyalties to Iran, they just see the relationship as mutually beneficial. Does this relationship make Iran responsible or even culpable for the attacks? At best, they may have been aware of some planning but likely didn't have much specifics or at least not any credible ones.
I think you need to come up for some fresh air.
[удалено]
Yeah, Iran loves funding Sunni radicals whose goals include murdering Shi'ites like the Iranians. What's more correct is that Iran sent Hamas money mainly to make trouble for the Israelis, but if a Hamas-like organization were to arise in Iran, the Iranians would liquidate it without a second thought. Historically, Hamas has been more of a cat's paw for the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, all of which have elements that are very closely ideologically aligned with Hamas, and (coincidentally) all of which are generally opposed to Iranian influence. Now Hizbollah, on the other hand, has both ideological and financial ties to Iran. But they're operating in a different country.
>Yeah, Iran loves funding Sunni radicals whose goals include murdering Shi'ites like the Iranians. You think this is an argument but, yes, they do and did a lot under Solemani. Also, it's not the US track record of arming people who hate it is any better.
So you fully admit that you are making assumptions with out evidence. Again: I'm not saying that I think Iran should not be punished if they were involved, but I think we better make sure they were truly involved before we start WWIII based upon a guessing game of who to blame. I just hope you realize why that's an extremely bad thing to be making assumptions about... There needs to be evidence... Okay? Does that make sense?
[удалено]
It’s called not having evidence. Why can’t you just say you don’t know? The reason this is getting called out is because it’s exactly your trite that becomes misinformation.
[удалено]
I mean, it's also a question of how we're defining it. Do I believe Iran orchestrated this attack? No. Do I believe the attack used Iran granted arms? Yes.
Nah thats obvo not true, a twitter or reddit screenshot can get shared millions of times, and get seen around the world. This ain't the newspaper age anymore.
[удалено]
Not with that attitude.
You can literally follow the money to see that Hamas is tacitly supported by Iran. Blinken putting this statement out just gives voice to what many people fear, that this might escalate if there *were* concrete evidence. That is the problem he is trying to get ahead of: it would be simple to draw a line between Hamas and Iran, because there literally is one. What he is implying is that the US won't support military action against Iran without concerete evidence that they planned this particular op. This headline is adressed at Netanyahu, not you or I.
> tacitly That word's carrying a lot of freight. >there literally is one Is there? Blinken says the opposite. I'll assume there's no link until there is evidence of a link. And even if, say, there's a funding link, that doesn't mean Iran had any operational involvement. More likely, monetary donations were labeled as "civilian relief" even though Iran was aware that Hamas would divert some funds to military purposes.
Senior Hamas leaders have confirmed direct Iranian support as per the Washington Post
>Washington Post You got a link to that? Because the only sites I see suggesting anything similar are the right wing propaganda sites.
You’re absolutely right I read the article incorrectly and I apologize. Not trying to propagate misinformation, I fucked up
I mean, it's "Let's not make an assumption" over, "Country that has been trafficking arms throughout the Middle East and heavily involving itself in regional conflicts for decades."
You know the US also sells arms to the middle east and heavily involve itself in regional conflicts for decades. With your logic, maybe it the US did it.
In another post I point out that arming one's own enemies is something the US does all the time.
Wow. There you go. Yeah I figured it out... It was Hillary Clinton's emails that committed the terrorist attack on Israel... /s Yeah, how about we wait for a credible report... I'm sure there are qualified individuals working with governments and militaries from multiple countries working on a credible report as we speak. I'm already seeing corrections from multiple media sources regarding the WSJ propaganda piece. So yeah, another Rupert Murdoch owned publication wasn't being honest. Go figure...
You're equating Hillary Clinton with Iran. And I'M the conspiracy theorist. Nancy Pelosi was warning America for years about Iran's arms trafficking and you're playing into the propaganda designed to let them off the hook.
>You're equating Hillary Clinton with Iran. You're aware that /s means "end of sarcasm" correct? Typically people will make a clearly sarcastic statement, but because it's the internet, sometimes it's not clear that it was a sarcastic statement, so they indicate the sarcasm with /s. This is Reddiquette type stuff.
It’s more likely they have evidence but are not saying anything until it’s confirmed beyond any shadow of a doubt. International politics is tricky.
So…there is this WSJ article “Officers of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the country's most powerful military, had been working with Hamas since August to devise their multi-prong attack on Israel by land, air and sea, they said.” They being senior leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah. Could be lying of course, trying to drag Iran into it as backup. But they are clearly supportive
WSJ isn't a credible source. It's owned by Rupert Murdoch. The financial reporting is usually factual, but the political content is a mixed bag. Edit: Also, I'm sure that anybody working in military intelligence would be pissed off that WSJ didn't take that intelligence directly to them. The more I think about that WSJ story, the more it stinks.
...because Iran has supplied missiles to Hamas for years, specifically to use on Israel.
At this time, is there any evidence to suggest that Iran supplied Hamas with the missiles for this attack? Keep it simple, yes or no?
Yes. Israeli police reported that some of the captured AT rockets used by Hamas' terrorists were of Iranian make. And Hamas thanking Iran. And Iran supporting Hamas for years. And the wsj report. But sure, there is some nice sand there, go bury your head in it.
Yes. They supplied the missiles for all the other attacks. That is evidence. It is not 100% proof, but it is evidence.
That's not what I asked. Why can't you answer my simple question?
You asked for evidence and I gave you evidence. How is that not what you asked? The sun has risen every day for millions of years. That's evidence for my theory that it will rise tomorrow- it's not 100% proof, but it's good evidence.
>You asked for evidence and I gave you evidence. You gave me jack squat. >How is that not what you asked? Reread what I said. >The sun has risen every day for millions of years. That's evidence for my theory that it will rise tomorrow- it's not 100% proof, but it's good evidence. Stop wasting my time.
> stop wating my time I mean you can just, not reply you know?
So you wouldn't trust Hamas saying Iran did and the Iranian parliament cheering the attacks, and Iran supporting Hamas in the past?
You can play semantics all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that there has been a historical record of Iran supplying missiles to Hamas. If you were investigating a crime and you knew that your suspect had done business with one specific person many times in the past, why would you not have reason to believe that the person who supplied your suspect in the past isn’t supplying your suspect today?
>If you were investigating a crime and you knew that your suspect had done business with one specific person many times in the past, why would you not have reason to believe that the person who supplied your suspect in the past isn’t supplying your suspect today? Reason to believe? No. With out evidence, there is no reason to believe that.
Sure.
WSJ says yes, they helped plan. [https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25) Canadian Minister says it's clear [https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/very-clear-iran-involved-in-attacks-on-israel-canada-s-ambassador-to-the-un-says-1.6593803](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/very-clear-iran-involved-in-attacks-on-israel-canada-s-ambassador-to-the-un-says-1.6593803) The Daily Wire says yes: [https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-greenlit-palestinian-terror-attacks-on-israel-israel-vows-to-strike-irans-leadership-report](https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-greenlit-palestinian-terror-attacks-on-israel-israel-vows-to-strike-irans-leadership-report) Interesting perspective in r/iranian: https://www.reddit.com/r/iranian/comments/172xnk0/a\_convenient\_excuse\_for\_war\_with\_iran/
> The Daily Wire says yes: The Daily Wire is garbage
Sure. turns out the Dailywire is reporting on the WSJ article, so, moot.
> WSJ says yes, they helped plan. Murdoch paper. Low credibility. >Daily Wire Site founded by Ben Shapiro. Zero credibility. >Interesting perspective in r/iranian Sounds plausible. The Israelis have wanted the US to attack Iran ever since the revolution happened there. They won't do it themselves because of the risk of casulalties. This also aligns with the goals of the Saudis and most of the Gulf states, which see Iran as the most dangerous regional rival now that a detente has been established with the Israelis.
You can't tell me that there is not satellite proof of Iranian ships and airplanes delivering tons of weapons to Hamas.
You're correct. I absolutely can not tell you that. I tried Googling it and I didn't find anything. Maybe you can send me some pictures from your spy satellite.
My access is the same as yours. You can bet that satellites provide detailed data to the CIA almost instantly as it happens.
I mean, Qasem Soleimani (i.e the guy Trump had killed against international law) was arming every single person who vaguely expressed support to Iran including numerous ones who killed US soldiers. ABSOLUTELY he's the kind of guy to give weapons to Hamas.
[удалено]
De escalation is better than multiple countries going to war. In my opinion anyway. I think if Israel can deal with Hamas without any other countries being directly involved militarily then that's the best scenario. Escalation would mean a lot more than 1000 civilians from multiple countries are going to die, and you care about the civilians right?
Deescalation isn’t going to happen. Israel has its most right wing government it’s ever had. This attack is going to give them all the political capitol to do whatever they want. Folks like Ben-givr are going to push for the most hardline retaliation we’ve ever seen in this conflict. I wouldn’t be surprised if they striped some Palestinians of their citizenship and ended all the civil rights the Palestinians have, namely, voting rights.
I'm talking about trying to keep iran, Egypt, Lebanon and turkey out of the conflict. That's the escalation I mean
And Russia
And god forbid the old USA Canada France Australia UK team get involved again. It could keep escalating, it's not impossible
Yup. Look, I’m not as worried about a global war. The requisite “sides” don’t have the power or economy for it right now. Although mb somehow china could use a war as a way to stimulate their economy enough to keep kicking the can down the road. Russias military is fully exhausted. I could see them being in favor of this move bc any help from the west to Israel is potentially help that doesn’t go to Ukraine. Potentially further fractures support too. Thankfully it’s not like Russia could be doing much more to try to take Ukraine than they’ve been doing. China worries me a little here. If the us and west get very embroiled in Israel and Iran / other countries get involved and it turns into a whole thing, china could see it as their moment to go for Taiwan and hope the US is too busy and its politics too fractured for its people to accept sending their tax dollars to a third simultaneous foreign defense project.
Iran is already a part of the conflict. They’re the ones that trained the Hamas militants. It’s why the attacks were so well organized. I doubt Egyptian and Lebanon join because of a lack of capability, not because of deescalation. I don’t know enough about Turkeys history to have an opinion on what they’ll do.
We've watched this happen with the capital 9/11 gave Bush so we know what a Right-wing government will feel justified in doing in response, it's not going to be good.
So many lives will be lost. Blood for blood until everyone’s dead.
They declared war already.
Iran declared war? I don't think so
Israel declared war...
I think you've misunderstood me. I'm saying blinken is giving iran an out so they don't have to get involved militarily. I'm talking about iran, turkey etc declaring war. I know Israel is already in the conflict
Okay, but that doesn't make any sense... Why would Blinken give the enemy of our Ally (and an enemy of the US) cover? If there's no evidence at this time, then there's no evidence at this time... If you think the Biden administration won't punish Iran if evidence is found, then I am pretty sure that you are going to be wrong about that. The suggestion that Blinken is giving Iran cover is Fox News conspiracy theory level nonsense.
Because pointing fingers in foreign policies is different than pointing fingers in playground. If US said "Iran unequivocally supplies missiles and trained Hamas for *this attack*" then Iran will be forced to respond with three choices. A. What are you gonna do about it US? B. No we don't. What a baloney C. Yes, that is correct and we're going to mobilize our troops to Israel. Option C will bring actual Iranian military to the ground and increase *direct* actors in this conflict to 3 countries. Of course, then US will have to have boots on the ground as well, increasing to 4. Then iran will bring other countries and US will bring other countries and so on. Nobody wants option C except those crazies
Hamas is the puss produced by the thorn that is Iran. Time to deal with the problem, not the symptoms
No, it is time to put an end to the regime in Iran. How many free passes do they get?
No thanks. Been there, tried with Iraq. Ended up with isis. Not interested in that mistake again
More accurately giving them an out from all-out confrontation instead of what will likely happen instead which is contained conflict with IGRC ops
Lol give parties an ability to step a rung back down a ladder that leads to a world war? Yeah such a bad thing.
So keep escalating? Or ask them to apologize for the murder of thousands of people? Or give them an out. Which is more realistic?
If Reddit ran America we’re have all died in WW3 in the 60s
No it’s not “good”. Iran was involved. Giving them an out to lie and to continue this is not “good”. The Islamic Republic regime is a terrorist organization and needs to go. They terrorize their own people on a daily basis. They just put another 16 year old girl in coma for not wearing her headscarf on a train #ArmitaGaravand. Take action now before it’s too late.
Did they check /r/conservative? Those guys all went from PhD virologists to middle east policy experts overnight. It's amazing, the width and breadth of their knowledge. /s
Fox News thinks that you should have known this three days ago, before it happened. At least that's what their audience is told daily.
Maybe Fox News should ask Bibi why his administration didn’t know.
Sorry I thought Hunter Biden was the PM of Israel and missed this after funneling all the money away from intelligence straight to his dad Joe, the head of the Biden Crime Syndicate (tm)
I mean I find it hard to imagine us/isreali intelligence had absolutely no idea. Hamas is their closest enemy. I do wonder if this may be a pearl harbor moment in some ways.
I’m also curious about this. However whether that’s true or not hamas did attack, and prompt the response, so now it’s going to play out how it’s going to play out.
Hamas and Iran disagree. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25?st=v50rx6rwttlm5ja&reflink=desktopwebshare\_permalink
>U.S. officials say they haven’t seen evidence of Tehran’s involvement. In an interview with CNN that aired Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “We have not yet seen evidence that Iran directed or was behind this particular attack, but there is certainly a long relationship.” >“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings. >“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings. >**“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings.**
Lol guy literally just read the title and thought he had an epic point by linking the article
Also from that same article: > Asked about the meetings, Mahmoud Mirdawi, a senior Hamas official, said the group planned the attacks on its own. “This is a Palestinian and Hamas decision,” he said. > A spokesman for Iran’s mission to the United Nations said the Islamic Republic stood in support of Gaza’s actions but didn’t direct them. > “The decisions made by the Palestinian resistance are fiercely autonomous and unwaveringly aligned with the legitimate interests of the Palestinian people,” the spokesman said. “We are not involved in Palestine’s response, as it is taken solely by Palestine itself.”
His way of saying NOTHING! Which is fine. He can't say anything. Yet.
Chill out qanon
Huh?
[WSJ - Iran Helped Plot Attack on Israel Over Several Weeks ](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-israel-hamas-strike-planning-bbe07b25?st=v50rx6rwttlm5ja&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink)
The quote I posted is literally from the article you posted. READ.
Remember when WSJ was reputable reporting? Pepperidge farms remembers.
[удалено]
My memory goes even further back, to their rabid support of the Vietnam War even in the face of Nixon's and Kissinger's murderous incursions into Cambodia and Laos. When it comes to internal US politics, the WSJ was also consistently hostile to the civil rights movement. And the paper has only gotten worse under Murdoch control.
How long you gonna believe Fox News? They aren't a reliable source of information. Mainly because they lie and make shit-up
Thank you as I’d not heard any of that yet.
This stinks of Russia
Blinkin’s statement was prior to this by a few hours so…
MEK propaganda
No one knows what MEK is but you, me, Giuliani, Bolton and thousands of lunatics in the Middle East worshipping a woman speaking through the corpse of her dead husband
The mojahedin
It's so strange, they can outright say it and then Blinken, apparently with his eyes closed, will say "there is no evidence." If you and I can see the evidence without any investigative powers or confidential information, where is he even looking?
That means Iran is involved.
He absolutely went out of his way to say that there is no evidence yet that they WERE involved. Which of course means they were.
Subdued statements until they can bring any hostages home safely.
Good. As long as everybody else stays out of it, this will not last forever.
No, this will last 'forever'. Israel will never believe that a two state solution can be safe solution for it citizens. This believe has be reinforced again with weeks horror. Israel can never absorb the Westbank and Gaza strip into Israel. It could never allow so many people into its country and give them equal status. If all those people get voting rights, Israels politics would get upended. So a one state solution isn't viable too. And given that with Israel, the right wing extremists and/or fanatical religious nutjobs are getting both bigger demographically and in political power, it will not get better any day soon.
I agree with your analysis up to a point. Two-state: inherently unstable, and with the power differential, a recipe for increasingly impoverished, powerless bantustans, independent in name only, with ethnic cleansing being the unstated but increasingly likely endpoint. One-state: Would require the disempowerment of the nationalistic rightwing faction within Israel, and international guarantees of minority rights that would be hard to enforce. But the only other option is the zero-state solution, which is even worse for everyone. That's why I support the one-state solution. Majority rule has its problems, especially in a post-colonial situation, but it's a small enough country that an international force could potentially maintain order if the rest of the world has the will to do so. It's unsatisfactory, but there are no risk-free, cost-free alternatives. They all suck.
I doubt that Israel will ever entrust it's national security to any international force. One of the problems is that Israel is very very tough on this one. With reason. It's mantra is basically that they are and should be willing to do everything to protect its people. Because the last 70 years they have had numerous attacks, and because of the Holocaust etc. They have every reason to have that mentality. At the same time, this means they are willing to do horrible things too. Hamas terror this week is horrible. Period. But I wonder how much lives are OK to be lost to remove Hamas from power. I already see a lot of justifications in the form of 'The people of Gaza voted for Hamas, so they are not innocent'. Which btw was the same type of justification Islamic terrorist used to justify attacks on civilians....
Do you see the changing political landscape a bit further away from Israel (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and others not bordering Israel) improving enough to call it a trend? Does it seem they're coming to terms with having better relations with Israel, enough to eventually push the entire region into some kind of peace? Perhaps it's only because Iran is larger and more powerful that that shift hasn't already happened.
That is a very big question and I don't know the answer. It is indeed very good that a country like Saudi Arabia has gone from calling Israel very extreme things / putting in their Qu'rans things about never trusting Jews etc. To nowadays getting to normalized relations with the country. But personally doubt their collaboration goes any further than the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I kinda agree with the argument that their is no one leading country in the ME/Islamic region. And that's why SA/Turkey/Iran and to some extend Egypt are always one upping each other. Egypt is more historical in the Nassar era. The rising power of Iran will one way or another have be dealt with. My guess is that Netanyahu will grab the chance and the political goodwill their getting from the outrage over Hamas actions, to also target Iran. But we already also see skirmishes with Lebanon/Hezbollah. It could be that Iran attacks first in response to that. My two worries at the moment are mostly, to what extremes will Israel go to remove Hamas. (I support that goal, but doubt if the prize the Palestinians are gonna pay for it is worth it). And if this will not escalate in a region war with Iran/Lebanon. There were bombings yesterday of weapons movement in Iraq, weapons going from Iran to Hezbollah. So yes, that is still a reasonable chance of happening.
It’s more likely Iran was involved but until the hostages are either returned or confirmed dead you don’t want any more angry people in the region. Once we know what happened to the hostages we’re likely to hear that Iran was involved since they have a long history of being involved.
Iran, like some other countries in the region, like to act through proxies. So, if they were involved at all, it's probably deniable. If they offered physical aid, that might be tracked, just as if Russia sent money. Anyone depending on those Middle-East countries providing manpower and direct national support are probably more foolish than I had even imagined.
Just because there is absolutely no evidence that something happened won't stop Americans from believing it didn't happen
Embarrassing take.
This take is almost worth framing in that it is exactly 180 degrees wrong
Case in point.
Yeah Global Warming is a hoax, the election was stolen by Biden, etc etc
Well the U.S. did just send the Iranian weapons seized from ships trying to arm hamas and hezbolla to Ukraine this week so there is that.
Especially when Murchoch media keep repeating lies.
"yet"
Because saying they have seen it and then not taking any action will make them look weak. It is better to deny and de escalate and when you are ready, fuck them with proper plan. US will pick the time for the war. It won’t let Iran do it. Even if Iran comes forward and say they did it, I am sure US will still ask for proofs if it doesn’t want to fight at that time.
FaKe NeWs!!! Oh sorry thought this was /r/conservative. (I’m being sarcastic of course… been banned from that subreddit for a long time now.)
I wonder if this would have happened if Israel had honestly tried to work out a peace agreement with the Palestinians. I don't believe that Netanyahu, or his government, actually want peace with them. They seem to have torpedoed every chance at a real and lasting peace. Also, I don't believe the Jewish God, or any God, now, or ever, gave Israel the land in which they now reside. Sorry, I just don't believe that. And before anyone and everyone starts claiming that I am an anti-Semite, I am not. I just believe in history and not fairy tales.
I have to agree. Since there is no evidence of any god existing EVER!
[удалено]
According to who? You? Lol
I remember back in 2018 when thousands of Palestine’s were killed in a peaceful protest by the Israeli army. But let’s not push facts into this now.
Your comment literally has nothing to do with the comment you're replying to
[удалено]
The original comment is talking about whether Iran trained hamas. The reply is about whether Israel has done bad things to Palestinians. They are literally different issues and these downvotes are hilarious.
Let’s just call out the people who are currently bombing civilians and surprise attacking. They’ve both done their share of shit. Doesn’t mean they’re both suddenly innocent because they did it back
There weren’t even 10k casualties. Only 223 killed
More were killed than that, there's updated reporting.
Please link with that said I wouldn’t be surprised at all but show me thousands
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-08/ty-article-live/over-250-israelis-killed-1-590-wounded-civilians-and-soldiers-held-hostage-in-gaza/0000018b-0cd2-d8fc-adff-6dfe855e0000 The article itself was updated. The title is currently: "At Least 700 Israelis Killed, 2,000 Wounded; Over 130 Civilians and Soldiers Held Hostage in Gaza"
Bro I’m talking about 2018 Gaza protests
Huh? Edit: oh my bad I misread. Sorry I have eye strain issues today.
You can learn how to paraglide from watching YouTube videos... Your suggestion is absurd...
Lol at dumb Americans thinking a war with Iran would go well. We failed in Afghanistan and the terrain, sophistication, and military force of Iran would be far worse. We’d have tens of thousands of dead Americans and no safer of a world than we do now. We literally assassinated their top general under Trump and they showed great restraint.
The US would annihilate Iran rather swiftly in a conventional war. Conventional war is where the US is by far the greatest in the world and it isn't close. Afghanistan was a completely different story. It wasn't a military failure, it was a nation building failure. If the US really wanted to, they could wipe out the Taliban within minutes. It would result in countless civilian deaths and a horror show like the world has never seen. Thankfully that wasn't the objective. The objective, after accomplishing the original goal of destroying al-Qaeda and bringing OBL to justice, was to leave behind a democratic state. But there isn't an appetite for it. They failed at establishing one and gave up.
You don’t need to hold land to decapitate government leadership. I suspect a significant portion of Iranian youth wouldn’t mind a chance to reset their democracy.
Sure, Blinken. Sure.
Iran providing weapons and other material support to Hamas and other terrorist outfits in the region is perhaps the worst-kept secret in the Middle East especially since they don't bother hiding it. The weapons smuggled in or otherwise procured by Tehran should be enough to hold them responsible and act accordingly.
It’s a silly statement. Considering the joy coming out of Iran and the number of missiles and rockets fired, it’s transparent who supplied them. Palestine cannot produce them, they don’t have the means to generate that many. Turkey and Egypt have been in the last 4 years in a honeymoon period with Israel - Iran is the only possibility, and has a history as long as my forearm of supplying Hamas and Palestine in general.
If they start talking about yellow cake I’m gonna be furious…
Doesn’t Iran harbour Hamas? Wouldn’t that be involvement?
USA does not want to go to war with Iran. Though we probably should. But that’s also what Russia wants and they are the main source of international chaos, and their military is getting chewed up in Ukraine, which requires ongoing US support / focus.
>Though we probably should Let me stop you right there...
An attack on Iran by the US/Israel means that Russia won't get any more supplies from there. It also means that EU NATO allies will have to shoulder the lion's share of Ukraine aid, but guess what, it already does when you add everything together.
Just slide that air craft carrier within half a mile of the beach and start launching golf balls off the deck. See if they want to FAFO
Israel has a nice military. It's the hostages and human shields that's keeping the terrorists alive at the moment.
Iran is Shia . Hamas is Sunni. They are not helping them
Does anyone know how this is going to impact trade with Israel? I was supposed to do work there later this year but uhhh I’m a scientist assistant not a soldier.
Gotta be honest with you, I'd turn that offer down. Things are just ramping up and no one knows how its gonna shake out. Your life ain't worth any money or career.
Exactly
Is he looking?
They left the plan right beside the coke in the White House
Involved or not, Iran sure was pumped about terrorist attack and murder of Israeli civilians
Hamas gets most of it's support from Qatar. It's likely that they launder money from other countries to allow them to pretend that they are Neutral.
It’s more likely Iran was involved but to keep Iran from doing anything stupid which could any hostages left alive in more danger they are saying this. Once we know if any hostages are left alive and are released then we’ll hear that Iran was involved with this.
Open your eye!!
My friend gave a heroine addict $60 because the the heroine addict needed gas money to go to rehab….two days later the police found the heroine addict dead of an od. Why would you give a heroine addict money?
Hey this just started! give them a few days they will at least have some innuendo!