7 ms·

Israel is threatened with destruction right now, for example by Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria. In 2006, Hezbollah fired rockets and missiles at Israeli population

Israel is threatened with destruction right now, for example by Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria. In 2006, Hezbollah fired rockets and missiles at Israeli population centers. Hamas in Gaza has fired rockets at Israeli civilians literally every year since 2001: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_... Top Iranian officials are constantly going on-record about their intention to destroy Israel: https://apnews.com/article/a033042303545d9ef783a95222d51b83 https://apnews.com/article/a033042303545d9ef783a95222d51b83 Iran is a nation with over x7 the population of Israel, which is also trying to develop nuclear weapons. It's very easy to dismiss existential concerns when you live in Europe that has been one of the most peaceful regions on Earth for the past 30 years. Try doing that as an Israeli civilian in a bomb shelter, hearing Hezbollah/Hamas rockets explode in your city. That's the reality for millions of Israeli civilians today.

accounted 6y ago
Isreal bombards Gaza with missiles and chemical weapons, and continuously fires at Syria taking advantage of the "moderate rebels" it and its allies sponsor. Meanwhile, they continue to evict 60 year old men from their homes and arrest children. Not to mention Isreal has nuclear weapons but refuses to comply with any international treaties. "In the fighting, 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462 civilians, were killed while on the Israeli side 67 soldiers and six civilians were killed." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56249927 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56249927 "It is among just four countries that have never joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, a landmark international accord meant to stop the spread of nuclear arms." https://apnews.com/article/secret-israel-nuclear-construction-ecd8b6f3ffb329aa1fc566b9f9336038 https://apnews.com/article/secret-israel-nuclear-constructio... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/1/15/israel-evicting-palestinian-family-to-replace-them-with-settlers https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/1/15/israel-evicting-pal...
- NeverFade 6y ago
  I'm sorry that I'm not going to respond to outright false claims, such that Israel used "chemical weapons" in Gaza, especially when you are at the same breath apparently defending Syria, which has been proved to use chemical weapons against civilians multiple times.
  - monocasa 6y ago
    Is white phosphorus a chemical weapon? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-intelligence-classified-white-phosphorus-as-chemical-weapon-516523.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-intelli... Did Israel use white phosphorus on civilian targets in gaza? https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2009/01/israel-used-white-phosphorus-gaza-civilian-areas-20090119/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2009/01/israel-used-w... Doesn't seem "outright false" to me.
    - reissbaker 6y ago
      Under international law white phosphorous is considered an incendiary weapon, not a chemical weapon. There is a list of chemical weapons and white phosphorous is not on that list, although it is often incorrectly claimed to be so. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions Key quote: The Chemical Weapons Convention, sometimes invoked in discussions of WP usage, is meant to prohibit weapons that are "dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare" (Article II, Definitions, 9, "Purposes not Prohibited" c.). The convention defines a "toxic chemical" as a substance "which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals" (CWC, II). An annex lists chemicals that are restricted under the convention, and WP is not listed in the Schedules of chemical weapons or precursors. The fact that an American intelligence analyst once during the Gulf War miscategorized WP as a "chemical weapon" when Saddam Hussein used it doesn't change its listing under international law. So, yes, the claim is false.
      - monocasa 6y ago
        Your 'key quote' misses the next section, which makes my case. > No it's not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application that does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement. > If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the convention legitimate use. > If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that, of course, is prohibited, because the way the convention is structured or applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons. ~ Peter Kaiser, spokesman for the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Dropping white phosphorus during the daytime (when the illumination features of WP aren't needed) on a school in a dense urban environment is pretty clearly the case where it's considered to be a chemical weapon. The annex lists chemicals understood to be chemical weapons under the convention, but it doesn't purport to be a complete list, only a set of some examples.
helge9210 6y ago
> when you live in Europe that has been one of the most peaceful regions on Earth for the past 30 years Transnistria, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine. Not really peaceful. > Try doing that as an Israeli civilian in a bomb shelter, hearing Hezbollah/Hamas rockets explode in your city. As an Israeli civilian I say: if you hear rockets explode you chose a wrong city to live at. You have to understand that Gaza is kind of concentration camp and significant portion of Gaza population are arabs forcefully displaced from villages in Gaza-Ashdod-BeerSheba triangle. Do you expect them to just agree with "facts on the ground" and do nothing?
- NeverFade 6y ago
  > Transnistria, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine. All these are on the edge of Europe. Europe as a whole, including Western, Central, Northern, and even most of Eastern Europe, has been incredibly peaceful. > As an Israeli civilian I say: if you hear rockets explode you chose a wrong city to live at. Ah, so it's perfectly acceptable to you when rockets hit some Israeli cities, where the poorer Israelis live. You are fine with that, because you can afford to live in Tel-Aviv, and you're always happy to virtue-signal at the expense of your fellow citizens who aren't as fortunate as yourself. Most nations have a strong sense of solidarity among their civilians. No poor Texan looked at 9/11 and said "those rich elites in NYC deserved it!". Neither will liberals in NYC accept it if some poor Texan border town is bombed by a Mexican militia. Your attitude is morally despicable and simply indefensible.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    Given the incredibly polarized state of American politics and society over the past decade, especially the last five years, I don't think that comparison is as true as it was twenty years ago. Probably not the most cogent comparison these days.
    - NeverFade 6y ago
      American society has polarized, it is true. Still, I believe only a tiny fringe minority will openly claim indifference to the WTC attacks because they haven't affected them personally. Much less show any support for the terrorists who committed these attacks.
bosswipe 6y ago
Iran is way more "threatened with destruction" by Israel/Saudi/US than the other way around.

accounted 6y ago

Isreal bombards Gaza with missiles and chemical weapons, and continuously fires at Syria taking advantage of the "moderate rebels" it and its allies sponsor. Meanwhile, they continue to evict 60 year old men from their homes and arrest children. Not to mention Isreal has nuclear weapons but refuses to comply with any international treaties. "In the fighting, 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462 civilians, were killed while on the Israeli side 67 soldiers and six civilians were killed." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56249927 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56249927 "It is among just four countries that have never joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, a landmark international accord meant to stop the spread of nuclear arms." https://apnews.com/article/secret-israel-nuclear-construction-ecd8b6f3ffb329aa1fc566b9f9336038 https://apnews.com/article/secret-israel-nuclear-constructio... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/1/15/israel-evicting-palestinian-family-to-replace-them-with-settlers https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/1/15/israel-evicting-pal...

NeverFade 6y ago
I'm sorry that I'm not going to respond to outright false claims, such that Israel used "chemical weapons" in Gaza, especially when you are at the same breath apparently defending Syria, which has been proved to use chemical weapons against civilians multiple times.
- monocasa 6y ago
  Is white phosphorus a chemical weapon? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-intelligence-classified-white-phosphorus-as-chemical-weapon-516523.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-intelli... Did Israel use white phosphorus on civilian targets in gaza? https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2009/01/israel-used-white-phosphorus-gaza-civilian-areas-20090119/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2009/01/israel-used-w... Doesn't seem "outright false" to me.
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    Under international law white phosphorous is considered an incendiary weapon, not a chemical weapon. There is a list of chemical weapons and white phosphorous is not on that list, although it is often incorrectly claimed to be so. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions Key quote: The Chemical Weapons Convention, sometimes invoked in discussions of WP usage, is meant to prohibit weapons that are "dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare" (Article II, Definitions, 9, "Purposes not Prohibited" c.). The convention defines a "toxic chemical" as a substance "which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals" (CWC, II). An annex lists chemicals that are restricted under the convention, and WP is not listed in the Schedules of chemical weapons or precursors. The fact that an American intelligence analyst once during the Gulf War miscategorized WP as a "chemical weapon" when Saddam Hussein used it doesn't change its listing under international law. So, yes, the claim is false.
    - monocasa 6y ago
      Your 'key quote' misses the next section, which makes my case. > No it's not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application that does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement. > If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the convention legitimate use. > If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that, of course, is prohibited, because the way the convention is structured or applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons. ~ Peter Kaiser, spokesman for the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Dropping white phosphorus during the daytime (when the illumination features of WP aren't needed) on a school in a dense urban environment is pretty clearly the case where it's considered to be a chemical weapon. The annex lists chemicals understood to be chemical weapons under the convention, but it doesn't purport to be a complete list, only a set of some examples.

helge9210 6y ago

> when you live in Europe that has been one of the most peaceful regions on Earth for the past 30 years Transnistria, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine. Not really peaceful. > Try doing that as an Israeli civilian in a bomb shelter, hearing Hezbollah/Hamas rockets explode in your city. As an Israeli civilian I say: if you hear rockets explode you chose a wrong city to live at. You have to understand that Gaza is kind of concentration camp and significant portion of Gaza population are arabs forcefully displaced from villages in Gaza-Ashdod-BeerSheba triangle. Do you expect them to just agree with "facts on the ground" and do nothing?

NeverFade 6y ago
> Transnistria, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine. All these are on the edge of Europe. Europe as a whole, including Western, Central, Northern, and even most of Eastern Europe, has been incredibly peaceful. > As an Israeli civilian I say: if you hear rockets explode you chose a wrong city to live at. Ah, so it's perfectly acceptable to you when rockets hit some Israeli cities, where the poorer Israelis live. You are fine with that, because you can afford to live in Tel-Aviv, and you're always happy to virtue-signal at the expense of your fellow citizens who aren't as fortunate as yourself. Most nations have a strong sense of solidarity among their civilians. No poor Texan looked at 9/11 and said "those rich elites in NYC deserved it!". Neither will liberals in NYC accept it if some poor Texan border town is bombed by a Mexican militia. Your attitude is morally despicable and simply indefensible.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  Given the incredibly polarized state of American politics and society over the past decade, especially the last five years, I don't think that comparison is as true as it was twenty years ago. Probably not the most cogent comparison these days.
  - NeverFade 6y ago
    American society has polarized, it is true. Still, I believe only a tiny fringe minority will openly claim indifference to the WTC attacks because they haven't affected them personally. Much less show any support for the terrorists who committed these attacks.

bosswipe 6y ago

Iran is way more "threatened with destruction" by Israel/Saudi/US than the other way around.