[News] Middle East conflict

[Is it PotG?]

You asked me that at the beginning of December

Can't see how, Starmer only agreed with last night's action on the wireless this morning.

 

[Zeberdi]

Yes it is. They have absolutely no need to get involved. It's an aggression inspired by Iran who have ensured that Yemen is an ungovernable basket case, and it has been way before 7 October.

There is absolutely no way Israel is going to stop its current actions just because Hilda's new 42'' 4k telly is going to be two weeks late because it has to go via Cape Town.

Sorry - no need for who to get involved? The Houthis?

Didn’t you read my earlier post? - I said Saudi Arabia has already been involved in a civil war against Iran backed Houthis since 2016 and why the Saudis back the Yemen government forces - However this immediate crisis involving us, started not by Houthi rebels disrupting shipping but because Houthis started firing rockets into Israel from Yemen. We went in to protect Israel and in response, British owned ships and other Western owned shipping became targets.

You might as well say there is no need for Hezbollah to ‘get involved. All these groups are Iran proxies - of course they will get involved if they perceive Israel to be committing an agenda of displacing millions of Gazan civilians from their homes at worst committing genocide on a people living under occupation.

Btw, it is not ‘the Palestinians’ who have been ‘ramping up‘ aggression against Israel (at least no more than Israelis) it is Hamas.

 

[Zeberdi]

Can't see how, Starmer only agreed with last night's action on the wireless this morning.

I’m not sure why you keep directing this question at me personally and then trolling me with laughter emojis when I make a response in good faith - your question to me above was phrased more generally than your last comment I quoted here, and didn’t refer specifically to ‘last night’s action’ - so I thought you meant the ‘action’ of him supporting the war generally - I didn’t hear Starmer’s response to our Yemen attacks but my answer is still the same, and even more pertinent now it has escalated into more direct involvement on our part.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Sorry - no need for who to get involved? The Houthis?

Didn’t you read my earlier post? - I said Saudi Arabia has already been involved in a civil war against Iran backed Houthis since 2016 - However this immediate crisis involving us, started not by Houthi rebels disrupting shipping but because Houthis started firing rockets into Israel from Yemen. We went in to protect Israel and in response, British owned ships and other Western owned shipping became targets.

You might as well say there is no need for Hezbollah to ‘get involved. All these groups are Iran proxies - of course they will get involved if they perceive Israel to be committing an agenda of displacing millions of Gazan civilians from their homes at worst committing genocide on a people living under occupation.

Btw, it is not ‘the Palestinians’ who have been ‘ramping up‘ aggression against Israel (at least no more than Israelis) it is Hamas.

Firstly, the Houthis firing rockets at Israel IS them getting involved. I used the phrase 'get involved'. YOU have decided what you think I meant by that, but it's not what I said. They had no reason, bar Iranian backed aggression, to attack Israel. Israel is not attacking Iran or Yemen.

And no, I probably haven't read your post. I've already said I personally find you too verbose and I've no idea which paragraph of the 392 posts you've so far made on this thread you're referring to

 

[Zeberdi]

Firstly, the Houthis firing rockets at Israel IS them getting involved. I used the phrase 'get involved'. YOU have decided what you think I meant by that, but it's not what I said. They had no reason, bar Iranian backed aggression, to attack Israel. Israel is not attacking Iran or Yemen.

And no, I probably haven't read your post. I've already said I personally find you too verbose and I've no idea which paragraph of the 392 posts you've so far made on this thread you're referring to

Er - Israel is attacking an Iran-backed Jihadist group in Gaza - These groups are coalescing support for Hamas as pointed out several times way back in October. That was one of the major risks of this becoming a regional conflict - traditionally these groups operated independently both physically and on ideology but that has been changing. The recent Hamas leader killed in Beirut had been busy doing exactly that in the ME for months - Iran has been trying to destabilise the whole region ever since Saudi Arabia started normalising relations with Israel. The civil war in Yemen is part and parcel of Iran and Saudis fighting for influence in the ME. None of this is whateaboutery.


Tbh your recent moderating interventions and subsequent comments have made it perfectly clear we disagree on many things about this conflict so I will leave it at that.

 

[Is it PotG?]

I’m not sure why you keep directing this question at me personally and then trolling me with laughter emojis when I make a response in good faith - your question to me above was phrased more generally than your last comment I quoted here, and didn’t refer specifically to ‘last night’s action’ - so I thought you meant the ‘action’ of him supporting the war generally - I didn’t hear Starmer’s response to our Yemen attacks but my answer is still the same, and even more pertinent now it has escalated into more direct involvement on our part.

On a similar line to another poster, it's very difficult to engage in any type of dialogue when your posts are edited three or four times after the initial post and subsequent reaction.

 

[beorhthelm]

Sorry - no need for who to get involved? The Houthis?

Didn’t you read my earlier post? - I said Saudi Arabia has already been involved in a civil war against Iran backed Houthis since 2016 - However this immediate crisis involving us, started not by Houthi rebels disrupting shipping but because Houthis started firing rockets into Israel from Yemen. We went in to protect Israel and in response, British owned ships and other Western owned shipping became targets.

odd version of events there. we didnt start targeting sites in Yeman when they were lobbing rockets at Israel. we started after they targeted our Navy, which are there because they were shooting at civilian ships. this is what the Navy is for, protecting commerce and interests overseas. Houthi's definatly started this either way.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Er - Israel is attacking an Iran-backed Jihadist group in Gaza - These groups are coalescing support for Hamas as pointed out several times way back in October. That was one of the major risks of this becoming a regional conflict - traditionally these groups operated independently both physically and on ideology but that has been changing. The recent Hamas leader killed in Beirut had been busy doing exactly that in the ME for months - Iran has been trying to destabilise the whole region ever since Saudi Arabia started normalising relations with Israel. The civil war in Yemen is part and parcel of Iran and Saudis fighting for influence in the ME. None of this is whateaboutery.


Tbh your recent moderating interventions and subsequent comments have made it perfectly clear we disagree on many things about this conflict so I will leave it at that.

Firstly, if Israel is attacking an Iran-backed Jihadist group I would imagine all of us would be 100% behind it. The objections are surely around attacks on civilians, hospitals etc which have literally nothing to do with Iran.

Iran and Hamas are a marriage of convenience anyway. 7 October was completely independent of Iran and likely surprised and annoyed them.

 

[Zeberdi]

Firstly, if Israel is attacking an Iran-backed Jihadist group I would imagine all of us would be 100% behind it. The objections are surely around attacks on civilians, hospitals etc which have literally nothing to do with Iran.

Iran and Hamas are a marriage of convenience anyway. 7 October was completely independent of Iran and likely surprised and annoyed them.

Staying with your original point that Houthis didn’t ‘need to be involved’ in Israel’s war - Of course Israel is prima facie is attacking Hamas in Gaza and Hamas is an Iranian backed jihadist group that has the support of other jihadists groups now in the region, including Hezbollah, the Palestinian Jihadists, the Islamic Jihadists and the Houthis to name a few. Israel’s whole declared raison d’etre and self-justification for continuing to kill civilians at the level they have been doing is to ‘destroy Hamas whether we think that a sham or not designed to obscure a genocidal agenda. As far as the Houthis are concerned, they became involved and aligned with Hamas once the war in Gaza started, threatening to attack specifically Israel bound shipping unless Israel allows food and humanitarian aid into Gaza.

odd version of events there. we didnt start targeting sites in Yeman when they were lobbing rockets at Israel

That is not what I said - I said the current crisis in the Red Sea began when Houthis started firing rockets into Israel from Yemen in response to what was going on in Gaza and attacking Israeli bound ships (the way they have for years attacked Saudia Arabian targets). We then have intervened as part of an international coalition for days by intercepting missiles and taking down drones, specifically by deploying one of our destroyers to the area. In response to that, Houthis escalated their attacks on all shipping in the region not just that bound for Israel - shipping throughout the Red Sea area and through the Suez was diverted for safety - we responded accordingly by taking action against Houthi military targets in Yemen.

Now we have a situation where there’s every indication limited strikes on Yemen could escalate the ME conflict even further - an alternative would have been trying to push Israel into some kind of humanitarian pause in the fighting and to allow aid into Gaza

Strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen could undermine US aim to contain war

War spreading in the Middle East is not just a risk - it has already happened, writes the BBC's international editor.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Guinness Boy]

Staying with your original point that Houthis didn’t ‘need to be involved’ in Israel’s war - Of course Israel is prima facie is attacking Hamas in Gaza and Hamas is an Iranian backed jihadist group that has the support of other jihadists groups now in the region, including Hezbollah, the Palestinian Jihadists, the Islamic Jihadists and the Houthis to name a few. Israel’s whole declared raison d’etre and self-justification for continuing to kill civilians at the level they have been doing is to ‘destroy Hamas whether we think that a sham or not designed to obscure a genocidal agenda. As far as the Houthis are concerned, they became involved and aligned with Hamas once the war in Gaza started, threatening to attack specifically Israel bound shipping unless Israel allows food and humanitarian aid into Gaza.


That is not what I said - I said the current crisis in the Red Sea began when Houthis started firing rockets into Israel from Yemen in response to what was going on in Gaza and attacking Israeli bound ships (the way they have for years attacked Saudia Arabian targets). We then have intervened as part of an international coalition for days by intercepting missiles and taking down drones, specifically by deploying one of our destroyers to the area. In response to that, Houthis escalated their attacks on all shipping in the region not just that bound for Israel - shipping throughout the Red Sea area and through the Suez was diverted for safety - we responded accordingly by taking action against Houthi military targets in Yemen.

Maersk, Evergreen et al started to reroute shipping out of the Red Sea due to a 'highly escalated security situation' in December, way before any Western Navy action in that area.

They may have said they were attacking goods bound for Israel but it's pretty hard for them to know if they were or not. They effectively changed trading conditions and risked more crippling inflation here and elsewhere from December 19th last year.

Container ships abandon Red Sea as allies scramble to fend off attacks

Maersk becomes latest group to divert vessels due to threat of Iranian-backed rebel attacks on Suez route

www.ft.com

 

[Zeberdi]

Maersk, Evergreen et al started to reroute shipping out of the Red Sea due to a 'highly escalated security situation' in December, way before any Western Navy action in that area.

They may have said they were attacking goods bound for Israel but it's pretty hard for them to know if they were or not. They effectively changed trading conditions and risked more crippling inflation here and elsewhere from December 19th last year.

Container ships abandon Red Sea as allies scramble to fend off attacks

Maersk becomes latest group to divert vessels due to threat of Iranian-backed rebel attacks on Suez route

www.ft.com

Not true - The US (and French and Israeli forces) were shooting down Houthi missiles and drones in the Red Sea heading for Israel long before Maersk pulled out and have been doing since 19 October as I said above.

December 19 finally formulated the international taskforce but Maersk was the tipping point.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-says-it-shot-down-missiles-drones-red-sea-potentially-heading-toward-israel-2023-10-19/

The back ground which if you have time is very useful - I’ve posted this link but will post it again - Hamas and the Houthis have every reason to be aligned militarily - what is happening in Yemen and with the Houthis now supporting Hamas has everything to do with the extremist ideologies pushing their agendas in Gaza.

https://ict.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Shay_Between-Gaza-and-Sanaa_2023_05_11-FINAL.pdf

 

[armchairclubber]

 

[beorhthelm]

disappointing nonsense. Houthi's are not defending anyone firing missles at ships, they are trying to goad a response and got one. just pawns for Iran.

 

[chip]

That's like your tag line which could be expressed as unless you believe you are false. Are you a religionist? Around 400000 dead as a result of their civil war and poor people all over suffering as a result of their actions.

 

[sydney]

You're aware that on the subject of magic Grandpa, you're in a minority, right? I'm from a Labour family, brought up on a council estate. I never met a working class person who didn't think he was an utter dick head (& a sick joke in the Labour party until he bizarrely fluked the leadership).

yes and one may wonder how such a man would become opposition leader....anyway thats another story , US and British forces bombing mainland Yemen has now made US and British interests legitimate targets....this is escalating nicely , millions rallying in Tehran....best make sure your front door is locked , your government is once again stitching you up without your consent.

 

[sydney]

The ‘Israel-Hamas War‘ (or ‘ MIDDLE EAST CRISIS’ as it is now being referred to) has become a regional conflict as many of us warned it could right at the beginning of this thread.

Did the Government seriously just leave it up to the press to announce to the British public that our forces are now actively engaged in bombing another country? And contrary to convention, without even going through Parliament?

Ten countries involved in air strikes on Yemen’s Houthis – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

Middle East latest: Hezbollah vows to continue resistance after ceasefire

Hezbollah has vowed to continue its resistance and support Palestinians on the day its ceasefire deal with Israel came into effect. Thousands of Lebanese rushed to return to the south of the country as fighting paused - prompting the Israelis to impose a curfew.

news.sky.com

Seems the US (and at least 6 other countries) have committed to this with an equal distain for democratic accountability in bypassing Congress - what concerns me personally is the language of the War on Terror and the rhetoric of escalation and posturing we are seeing instead of the calling on Israel for a humanitarian ceasefire and restraint we were hearing just a few weeks ago.

US defence secretary Lloyd Austin (from his hospital bed!) has released a statement about the strikes – saying the US is prepared to take “follow-on” action to protect US. Rishi Sunak has released a similar statement regarding the protection of British forces.

US, British militaries launch massive retaliatory strike against Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen

U.S. and British militaries are bombing more than a dozen sites used by the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen, in a retaliatory strike.

apnews.com

Of course if Israel stopped bombing Gaza, the Houthis would stop firing rockets at Israel and drones over the Red Sea would be less disruptive, the US and UK forces wouldn’t need defending and Israel’s war wouldn’t spread to Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Syria - too simple? So now the US and UK are now directly involved in a proxy war with Iran.

Is anyone else seeing the ‘mission creep here? How it is becoming re-purposed as a ‘War on Terror’?

ISIS , COVID , UKRAINE GAZA all massive money spinners , MASSIVE.

if its not one thing its another , certain governments are out of control , the notion that they serve the people is long dead and buried.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Iran and Hamas are a marriage of convenience anyway. 7 October was completely independent of Iran and likely surprised and annoyed them.

According to a report I read on the BBC a while back, Western intelligence agencies believe Iran trained Hamas fighters for the attack as well as helped Hamas plan it. So I doubt Iran was "surprised" !

 

[armchairclubber]

That's like your tag line which could be expressed as unless you believe you are false. Are you a religionist? Around 400000 dead as a result of their civil war and poor people all over suffering as a result of their actions.

I'll humour you on this occasion. Please forgive me if I don't indulge on further occasion.

No I am not a "religionist"

Though I'd suggest this whole conflict and its escalation is caused by "religionists"

Bidens consience and understanding of his own religion appears to affirm him in being of mind that it is both necessary and meritorious to support Israel and profit from arms trade in their Genocide againt Palestine and further escalations in the Middle East.

I think you'd agree with me that undeniably both Netenyahu (&State of Israel) and Hamas have "religionist" outlooks.

I'm unsure exactly of the religious perspective of both Sunak & Starmer (the limp double act) though they certainly appear to be in full support of Biden and the State of Israel.

From my own perspective I think it's more than possible to be of any faith here and yearn to see an immediate ceasefire, an end to this Genocide and working toward peace, just as it is possible to not be of faith and yearn to see the same.

I'll not apologise for posting a journalistic viewpoint that may challenge or conflict with that of mainstream or a biased media.

I've already made clear on this thread that I'd like to see an immediate ceasefire and an end to the Genocide taking place before, as others and myself have warned and foreseen, things escalate to other regions of the Middle East.

Having said all this, I have a strong suspicion you'll not listen to a word I have said, so I'll allow you to pigeon hole me into whichever category you feel appropriate

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'll humour you on this occasion. Please forgive me if I don't indulge on further occasion.

No I am not a "religionist"

Though I'd suggest this whole conflict and its escalation is caused by "religionists"

Bidens consience and understanding of his own religion appears to affirm him in being of mind that it is both necessary and meritorious to support Israel and profit from arms trade in their Genocide againt Palestine and further escalations in the Middle East.

I think you'd agree with me that undeniably both Netenyahu (&State of Israel) and Hamas have "religionist" outlooks.

I'm unsure exactly of the religious perspective of both Sunak & Starmer (the limp double act) though they certainly appear to be in full support of Biden and the State of Israel.

From my own perspective I think it's more than possible to be of any faith here and yearn to see an immediate ceasefire, an end to this Genocide and working toward peace, just as it is possible to not be of faith and yearn to see the same.

I'll not apologise for posting a journalistic viewpoint that may challenge or conflict with that of mainstream or a biased media.

To give just one example, over the last couple of days the BBC have chosen to broadcast only Israels defence at the ICJ of the accusation of commiting genocide, without broadcasting the prosecution case.

#ICJ4Israel: the evidence is all in. Why did the BBC broadcast only Israel's side? [STRONG LANGUAGE] - Vox Political

Western media organisations appear to have shown unacceptable bias in […]

voxpoliticalonline.com

I've already made clear on this thread that I'd like to see an immediate ceasefire and an end to the Genocide taking place before, as others and myself have warned and foreseen, things escalate to other regions of the Middle East.

Having said all this, I have a strong suspicion you'll not listen to a word I have said, so I'll allow you to pigeon hole me into whichever category you feel appropriate

I disagree on your statement about the BBC. I've been following the arguements from both sides via the BBC news website and it has seemed very balanced reporting. I'm obviously hoping for an SA win regardless of reporting.

 

[armchairclubber]

I disagree on your statement about the BBC. I've been following the arguements from both sides via the BBC news website and it has seemed very balanced reporting. I'm obviously hoping for an SA win regardless of reporting.

Fair enough, is it not true that they only broadcast the defense initially? They may be more impartial now, happy to withdraw my comment if so.
Please see link.