The Timing and Excuse for War

Joined
22 Jul 2023
Messages
5,450
Reaction score
144
Country
United Kingdom
It is widley believed that Germany wanted war well before the outbreak of WWI in order to disrupt the French/Russian alliance, and to have an equal share of 'a place in the sun', i.e. a colonial empire. But they didn't want to be seen as the aggressor. They need an excuse to be seen as defending against an aggressor. They were earnestly encouraging Austro-Hungary to demand unreasonable demands from Serbia.

The recent incursion by Hamas, and others was a catastrophic, yet difficult to understand, failure by Israeli intelligence, and its military. If Israel has intelligence for the current location of Hamas in Gaza, as they claim, how come it didn't have intelligence on the planned raid by over 1,000 Hamas and others? It doesn't add up.
The incursion ocurred in the weakest point of the defence between Palestine and Israel, yet it appears to have been so poorly defended. 300 Israeli soldiers were killed in that incursion by Hamas, and they were so ill prepared.

The current Israeli government are very much right-wing hardliners. Is it possible, even probable that this Hamas incursion was allowed to happen in order for the Hardline Right wing Israeli government to unleash a disproportinate response on Palestine. Was it a timely enterprise? Is Iran on the verge of a sustainable nuclear weapon, and Israel has decided to act unilaterally, in a now-or-never, pre-emptive strike?
If that is the case, Israel will continue its destruction of Gaza, and West BAnk until Iran has little choice but to act.
Or Israel will make an excuse anyway, to attack Iran.
 
default.jpg
 
Can anyone explain how Israel can detect rockets fired from Gaze City, in time for them to be intercepted over a hospital in Gaza City. yet are unable to detect several motorized parachutes entering its airspace?

Perhaps someone would like to explain how several boats were able to circumnavigate the border crossing without detection.

Perhaps someone would like to explain how, despite Hamas launching a barrage of rockets, the IDF did not respond to the attack on the ground until 8.5 hours after the beginning of the incursion? Some Israelis had to wait up until 20 hours after the start of the Hamas incursion.

It seems to me not only a catastrophic failure of intelligence, but also a shocking lethargy by the IDF in responding to the ground attack.

Israel has previously threatened pre-emptive strikes on Iran.
Last week, Israeli newspapers broke the news that their government was considering a plan to take out Iranian nuclear facilities.
In Israel, the news has sparked a real debate about how to deal with Iran. Yedioth Ahronoth’s Amos Shavit believes there is no other way than military action:
The issue is complex and the risks are so great that Israel cannot assume them....One of the effective ways to indirectly harm Iran was to remove the Gaza Strip terror regime, which is premised on Iranian support. Such a move, even without curbing the Iranian bomb directly, would have greatly undermined Tehran’s status and its ability to harm Israel. Yet the defense minister made sure that the opportunity to undertake such a move is missed.”
ombing Iran's nuclear facilities is effectively equivalent to starting a war. The implications of such a decision are liable to be dramatic and painful for the entire Israeli public.

It is clear that the continued destuction of Gaza is higly likely to involve Iran, and israel has its excuse to start a full scale Middle East war, without being seen as the aggressor, both internationally and domestically.
Hence the US diplomatic efforts to calm the situation. No-one wants a full scale war, which would play into the potential plans of Russia and China.
 
The current Israeli government are very much right-wing hardliners. Is it possible, even probable that this Hamas incursion was allowed to happen in order for the Hardline Right wing Israeli government to unleash a disproportinate response on Palestine
No
 
Being locked out of another thread for supposed ad hominem attacks, especially when I must be the most abused poster on here, the one about whom is the most lies and dishonest claims, means I am denied a voice because I don't comply with the 'group think'.

I get it that this is a club, and if one member's opinion is refuted, disproven, or exposed, then everyone else pitches in with ad hominem attacks.
It is when I am the one that is locked out of the thread for supposed ad hominem attacks, that really illustrates the preference displayed by mods to some posters.

Why can't others discuss the issue without resorting to ad hominem attacks and old arguments.
All the responses so far have been ad hominem attacks or the re-raising of old arguments.
Deja vu anyone?
 
Why can't others discuss the issue without resorting to ad hominem attacks and old arguments.
All the responses so far have been ad hominem attacks or the re-raising of old arguments.


You start a thread, and get a single image response, and then ask others to "explain" the opposing view to yours.
Are you sure you didn't just come here for an arguement?

Deja vu anyone?
 
Another 700 deaths in Gaza last night.
The EU is split on the issue of a ceasefire.
Spain and Ireland want a ceasefire but the usual suspects Germany and Austria don't want one.
Germany strongly supports Israel, which is understandable, they seem to want the Palestinians to pay the price for their crimes against the Jews.
 
Yes it was allowed to happen they had been warned the week before by egypt ,
Egyptian intelligence agency better than Israels i very much doubt it which is why within a very short time afterwards the Israelis were able to hit several top Hamas leaders obviously their intelligence agencies knew exactly where they where
 
Back
Top