Originally thought this was a Iran bullsit strike when it was the Shaheed drones… but that looks like it was cover for a very legit ballistic strike.
Another solid win for “Genocide Joe”
https://x.com/toialerts/status/1779491593877364837?s=46&t=N0_fcOKIYYmlCS2e4YShsQ
Will leftists take big wins like this and Afghanistan or submarine Joe for Trump?
Yeah would be interesting to know if Israel “needed” the help or not? I assume it’s a situation where they would have been fucked if everyone waited to see how things went and then turned out was too much so everyone immediately started shooting down the drones to make sure the pressure didn’t build.
From the Quds force’s Wiki page:
U.S. Army’s Iraq War General Stanley McChrystal describes the Quds Force as an organization analogous to a combination of the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the United States.[4] Responsible for extraterritorial operations,[5] the Quds Force supports non-state actors in many countries, including Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Yemeni Houthis, and Shia militias in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan.[5] According to Michael Wigginton et al., the Al-Quds Force is “a classic example of state-sponsored terrorism.”
I mean:
I think it’s clear that the United States has done a lot of the same shit as the Quds Force, and not a single person in this country would be like “well what can you do, that’s how the game is played” if some group incinerated William J. Casey while he was visiting the U.S. embassy in Honduras.
The quds force isn’t the same as running an intelligence through an embassy. They are literally military leadership in a foreign country actively lobbing rockets into Israel. If the USA did that out of their embassy they’d be skewered here, and for good reason.
I seem to remember no one giving a shit when the American embassy in Iraq was attacked either. Seems like a valid military target
I honestly can’t tell the difference you’re trying to establish here other than that IRGC people wear uniforms whereas the guy running the CIA wears a suit. Otherwise this all fits just fine (“launching missiles” doesn’t have a good analogue to U.S. support of terrorism in Latin America but obviously you would be fine with taking out the Quds Force people for planning terrorism too).
I’m not aware of the CIA using embassies as cover as part of an active military operation in a war zone. If you’re aware of it, please let me know. I’m not particularly sympathetic to Iran trying to label their military activities as diplomatic missions, and wouldn’t be for the USA either.
I think the distinction between intelligence/military is completely arbitrary just to keep the lawbros happy. Like the special forces in Bin Laden raid stopped being under US military command for a couple hours and became CIA to keep the lawbros happy and then back to military. I mean come on.
So like if USA has Colonels hanging out at an embassy in Warsaw working on intel for Ukraine, would it be justified for Russia to bomb it?
The actual comparison here is:
If the USA was bombing Russia from Poland using commanders sitting in an embassy then yeah I don’t think the USA has much to complain about.
Hell I don’t even think your example would be particularly egregious. Bombing various military supply routes in Eastern Europe seems like obvious legitimate military targets. Russia ain’t going to do that though, because they can’t handle that response.
Yeah seriously it’s this. People take shots at us all the time and we hit back in a proportional way. This was a very not proportional response by Iran that actually helps the US by lowering the temp in the region. That’s twice in 5 years they’ve done more for us than any of our so called allies in the region have in the last three decades.
If you’re still taking Israel’s side in April 2024 it’s because you aren’t capable of enough self reflection to take the loss and change your mind even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Bibi has made every person who said a single supportive thing about Israel in the last three decades a chump myself absolutely included.
3 Likes
Was the US bombing Laos during Vietnam also appropriate in your eyes due to the Ho Chi Minh trail?
I think the question of could it be possibly be justified vs was how it was actually done justified are pretty different and more about the level of care to prevent civilian casualties than the legality of attacking targets in a non combatant country.
Like hypothetically if Ukraine bombed the drone factories in Iran not sure Iran could have much complaint. Similarly if Saddam had some cruise missile to strike an airbase in USA don’t think USA could have complained it should be off limits.
I think there needs to be some restrictions on supply routes in non-participating countries or every war quickly becomes a world war only restrained by the capability of the offended nation to decide whether the juice is worth the squeeze.
Was it justified for the Germans to march through Belgium on their way to France in WWI?
@Surf Level of care is totally a propaganda thing that can never be known. Of course Israel had great intelligence those hospitals had Hamas command centers, I guess we just have to trust them that they are taking a level of care in restraining themselves.
I don’t think that true. US could have leveled the entire neighborhood of Bin Laden raid and pretty clearly objectively chose to use more care to protect civilians
but maybe that just was just because he was in a nuclear armed nation that we were not at war with
Sure but the motivation is irrelevant, you said level of care “can never be known” which I think is objectively false.
Israel is putting little or no care to protecting civilians in Gaza vs US put high level of care into Bin Laden raid is a useful and knowable distinction in my opinion.
If Israel could have been pressured to execute a bunch of Bin Laden raids over next decade or even targeted drone assassinations instead of leveling Gaza that would have been a massively better outcome.
Of course the motivation is not irrelevant. My point was that level of care in terms of collateral damage when mistakes are (or maybe are not) made is hard to know. Level of care in terms of bombing.
Sure when a military operation is highly surgical, done by boots on the ground, and completely successful it might be different. These things are incredibly rare in history
I think that starting to be more knowable now too though. Like Bush/Obama era drones we killing a dozen civilians for one legitimate target and more recently you hearing about ones with the kinetic blade missiles that might kill just one or two. It doesn’t mean those strikes are without issues but it’s better than killing a dozen people IMO
So I don’t think Iran should get much credit for keeping the peace
https://x.com/faytuks/status/1779615911235780980?s=46&t=N0_fcOKIYYmlCS2e4YShsQ