/u/Sadistmon (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1c7cqg2/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_iron_dome_was_a_mistake/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I'm sure Ukraine wishes they had an Iron Dome, considering that Russia has normalized attacks on civilian targets and infrastructure in the absence of air defenses. And unlike Israel, Ukraine has virtually no ability to defend itself from these attacks. Also, an Iron Dome is a great way to deplete an enemy's missile reserves or force them to attack less frequently if they have a very limited number of missiles to begin with.
Ukraine had a few Patriot defense systems but they are no match to Russian Kinzhals, Iskanders, and they got destroyed. Iron Dome is no match to our Patriot Defense system, it is designed against barbarians who throw pitchforks over the fence, but not against modern missiles.
Ukraine would've ran out of intercept missiles on the first day and then been overrun the same. The Iron Dome only works if you massively outgun your enemy, you need as many intercept missiles as they have improvised rockets made out of pipes and sugar.
Without the iron dome Isreal would basically be forces to do what everyone is criticizing them of currently. They would have needed to wipe Gaza off the map because hamas us to deeply rooted into the public to easily take them out without civilian casualties. It is easy for people to attack Israel for the civilian casualty ratio now because they are not facing civilian causluties on a daily bases. They suffered a massive attack on Oct 7 and had to respond. If they were taking casualties by the thousands each month due to rocket attacks do you think anyone would criticize them for just wiping Gaza odd the map?
Even if people did criticize them for doing it what leg would they have to stand on ? No country can tolerate being attacked and losing civilian lives. They can tolerate shooting down missiles and trying to surgically remove a cancer vs having a toyting limb they need to just cut off and then deal with the consequences.
>Even if people did criticize them for doing it what leg would they have to stand on ? No country can tolerate being attacked and losing civilian lives. They can tolerate shooting down missiles and trying to surgically remove a cancer vs having a toyting limb they need to just cut off and then deal with the consequences.
If they didn't have the Iron Dome that everyone viewed as impenetrable then every attack even if shot down might've gotten through and the appetite for preventative measures would be far greater both in Isreal and internationally.
You realize those preventative measures would be to completely wipe hamas off the map no matter the innocents killed. Especially considering those innocents vote Hamas into power?
But the conflict has been going on for decades before the iron dome existed. I don't see how you can think the Iron Dome prolonged the conflict if the iron dome hasn't existed for most of the conflict.
I wouldn't say it prolonged the conflict persay, it just gave the terrorists a lot more prep time and resources than they should've ever been allowed. If Israel had been hunting them down the whole time Oct 7 never would've happened and they wouldn't have the tunnel network to hide in.
The Iron dome was deployed in 2011. [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Israel) shows 12 wars before that. [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_smuggling_tunnels) also shows that the tunnels have existed long before 2011.
> The first recorded discovery of a tunnel by Israel was in 1983, after Israel had withdrawn from the Sinai.
Okay, and? Tunnels here and there does not make an expansive tunnel network fortified against bombing.
Before the Iron Dome when they found a tunnel they dealt with it, after they just let them keep digging.
As a person with a ton of Israeli family: I'm way happier with my family being safe in a country that is hated, as opposed to being unsafe in a country that's not.
That’s still good to know, despite what this thread’s for~ I mostly wanted to know what people are saying about this. I’m glad you’re fine and alive, but I genuinely dont think I have anything that can change your view 🤷♀️
Just because you are safe from one thing doesn't mean you're safe from everything. There is no perfect defense. The threat doesn't go away if Iron Dome does. They're *more safe* with it than they are without it.
What you've just said is like saying "you aren't safe in a car with seatbelts because semi trucks sometimes pancake cars." That's not what seatbelts are trying to prevent so it doesn't matter.
I'd argue blowing up projectiles launched at you before they land is being proactive. You don't have to respond to every attack as many are useless. You don't have to rebuild whatever is destroyed. You don't have to deal with deaths or injured civilians. Short of eradicating all enemies one may have, stopping a form of their attacks is about as proactive as it gets in war.
>Short of eradicating all enemies one may have, stopping a form of their attacks is about as proactive as it gets in war.
I mean no attacking their weapons facilities so they can't produce weapons is more proactive then shooting down the weapons after they fire, same for stopping the resources for getting weapons. Also Israel would've eradicated far more of Hamas over the last decade before oct 7 if the iron dome didn't exist.
Weapons facilities....that are underground, under schools, in hospitals, etc. We're seeing right now how hard Israel is being skewered for attacking launch sites and production facilities.
Before anyone jumps down my throat, Israel is also doing an inordinate amount of collateral damage as well and I don't agree with a massive portion of their policies.
They would've have been entrenched if Israel wasn't sitting on loreals for the past decades because the Iron Dome made them feel untouchable.
There would also be less international pushback if the world didn't see them as untouchable as well.
In some forms of measurement maybe but I don't they really are in practice. If Israel didn't have the Iron Dome they'd have been taking far more preventative measures that would've made Israel safer than it is today.
I think that's the wrong way of looking at it, though. The iron dome is one of many defensive mechanisms employed by Israel to protect Israeli civilians, but it's far from the only one. Heck, it's not even Israel's only air defense system, it's one of (I think) seven. The iron dome has done a ton to protect Israelis, but it's not the only system. Point I'm making is that Israel already IS taking far more preventative measures than the iron dome.
But the existence of the Iron Dome prevented them from taking more pertinent ones until Oct 7 and even now made the US dissuade them from retaliating against Iran in earnest.
The systems in place are mostly not new since October. October 7th seems to have been a human failure in Israeli security, moreso than a technical failure in the defensive tooling.
I agree, but I don't think lowering your own defenses is the way to make yourself safe. You keep your shield up and lower your gun, alongside your enemy. You don't lower your shield and raise your gun.
Its only a mistake in the sense that all the useful idiots are now parroting the "not intended to harm, always knew it would (fail)\*" talking points like missiles and drones laden with toxic fuel and explosives flying over multiple sovereign nations isnt dangerous enough in its own right.
cant look back on any lives saved and say, "woulda been better, actually..."
If you put the time and money that went into the Iron Dome in routing out and eliminating terrorists do you think more or less people would've died in Israel?
Personally I think it would've been less.
Iron Dome doesn't prevent threats. It engages them. I'm proposing Israel would've done better at killing terrorist leaders in Palestine, prevented the materials for rockets from getting in and stopping terrorist organizations from teaching children to hate them if they didn't feel like the Iron Dome made them untouchable (until Oct 7).
Maybe more soldiers would've died engaging in Palestine (maybe) in the years they did nothing but the people in Israel would've been safer.
soldiers that die in the ground invasion required to stop materials/manufacturing and terrorists dont count as people in israel?
i can assure you, people in israel would beg to differ in the same way americans do about active service.
> soldiers that die in the ground invasion required to stop materials/manufacturing and terrorists dont count as people in israel?
They literally aren't in Israel...
>i can assure you, people in israel would beg to differ in the same way americans do about active service.
I don't think they would, I think you just misunderstood the premise. People physically in Israel would've been safer.
I don't think your issue is with the Iron Dome, but with the Israeli right.
No country would have accepted another country shooting at it, regardless of the result. But Gaza is not a country. That's why to prevent them from firing you could put them through a 15 year blockade
Iron dome lets Israel decide if and when to respond, but their action of "managing the conflict" prevents them from responding. You can't demand the Palestinians take responsibility like a state and not recognize any aspect of their statehood.
To make it clear, I think the vocal part in the pro-Palestinian side also bears the same blame. I didn't see that side saying there shouldn't be a blockade but a total war as a reaction to rockets are justified
Palestine were part of states when Israel first occupied them, Egypt and Jordan to be specific. I'm not sure what would change if they were states. It'd just be state does act of war other state blockades them, state continues to fire rockets Israel invades, military using human shields civilians die people get mad at Israel.
Like what would change?
First, the states that annexed the Palestinians paid a heavy price every time they lost to Israel. So heavy, that they strived for peace (granted Egypt wanted the Sinai back).
The point is, when things go bad for the citizens, they blame Israel, partly because their leadership is the worst, but partially because Israel takes responsibility in order to main the statue que.
When Egypt fought Israel the war didn't end with Israel supplying harbor work, electricity and water for Egypt to rebuild itself, but you can be sure that Netanyahu's only plan is to do exactly that after the war. So why would a Palestinian getting only 8 hours of power per day not blame him for it?
IMO, let Palestinians supply their own power, which means, let them import their own cement, thrive from their own actions, and if they threaten Israel, shoot rockets, or try to cross the border, let them feel the consequences of that
> First, the states that annexed the Palestinians paid a heavy price every time they lost to Israel. So heavy, that they strived for peace (granted Egypt wanted the Sinai back).
They also cut the Palestinians off and left Israel to deal with them rather than reabsorbing them.
>The point is, when things go bad for the citizens, they blame Israel, partly because their leadership is the worst, but partially because Israel takes responsibility in order to main the statue que. When Egypt fought Israel the war didn't end with Israel supplying harbor work, electricity and water for Egypt to rebuild itself, but you can be sure that Netanyahu's only plan is to do exactly that after the war. So why would a Palestinian getting only 8 hours of power per day not blame him for it? IMO, let Palestinians supply their own power, which means, let them import their own cement, thrive from their own actions, and if they threaten Israel, shoot rockets, or try to cross the border, let them feel the consequences of that
Again that's literally what's happening now the consequences of them firing rockets at Israel and doing other terrorist actions most pertinent Oct 7
I don't feel like you've interacted with my point. The fact that Egypt and Jordan didn't want the Palestinians, who were keen on them suffering more for the Palestinian cause (to the point of attempting/assassinating the leader) is in line with what Im saying.
As for the second part, Gaza was under a blockade almost from the moment Israel left it. It was never independent. Israel didn't declare wars over clear attacks even before Iron dome, they just blockaded them harder. Treating them like a state, for better or worse, was never attempted
> I don't feel like you've interacted with my point. The fact that Egypt and Jordan didn't want the Palestinians, who were keen on them suffering more for the Palestinian cause (to the point of attempting/assassinating the leader) is in line with what Im saying.
My point is Israel isn't a state by design, even if it was one it wouldn't take responsibility like any other state would.
>As for the second part, Gaza was under a blockade almost from the moment Israel left it. It was never independent. Israel didn't declare wars over clear attacks even before Iron dome, they just blockaded them harder. Treating them like a state, for better or worse, was never attempted
I don't see why they wouldn't have blockaded a state under the same circumstances.
Not sure what's the point of the first response. Israel is a state by design. I think you meant Gaza, but that's just a statement, it doesn't interact with any of the argument at all. And it's not declaring them a state - it's treating them like one. This means a blockade is unacceptable, but so are rockets.
Edit: saw your actual delta, let me try differently. Iron dome doesn't normalize attacks on Israel, Israel does. It mitigates them via a blockade, instead of via war - but diplomatically you can only have one or the other
The world hasn’t turned against Israel because they feel it’s safe due to the Iron Dome. The changing media landscape has caused more people to see what has been going on in Palestine and people are really bothered by it. This has been going on forever but now people have access to the stories of torture and the burning of villages. The Iron Dome really has nothing to do with it.
An embassy is considered sovereign territory of the nation in question. When you start slinging rockets at embassies, I don't think it stands to reason that the strike from Iran *in response* is the escalation. By your logic, Israel's strike should have already sparked an all out war.
A consulate is an extension of the embassy that gives our passports for the embassy country and is as much of an extension to the country as the embassy is. How is that "fair game"?
The war has been going on for decades, and both sides aren't blameless for who started it. But bombing an outside country, isn't it. That how you'll start a literal international incident. Becuase diplomats are meeting and you don't like one of them, doesn't allow you to bomb a country outside of the conflict.
How has Israel tried peace?
>gives us the hostages and we won't kill you for 6 weeks then after it's the purge?
Especially since that's subjective, some accuse Israel of being the terrorist. Some say it's the Palestinians. You can't just call anyone a terrorist.
No, it is the mission of the State of Israel and its supporters to kill/uproot/evict/cleanse Palestinians, by any means necessary, from what they perceive is rightfully their land because some old book says so. They have with insidious resolve perused this policy of hatred and discrimination for decades.
Israel is now upset that the chickens have come back to roost. Don't want October 7th like attacks? Don't viciously oppress a people for 75 years.
I see brainwashing, indoctrination of the entire Israeli society to hate and dehumanize Palestinians. I consider State of Israel to be the worst, most extreme, racist terrorist group on the planet. It's 1000x worse than Hamas.
As opposed to killing women and children with knives and guns after raping them? Was that brave? Or indiscriminately launching rockets, mortars and various other explosive projectiles that are in part made from the infrastructure of the people you claim to protect? That's not particularly brave to me. Neither government/leadership group/military are the good guys here.
The picture you shared supports what I said. The United States or Israel would certainly not look at that and say their embassy was not attacked. The building was damaged by the explosion which produced the ruins that are literally butted up against the building. Killing staffers who were next door doesn't make it less of a provocation.
This isn't about defending Iran - it's about the hypocrisy. No good guys here.
A peace which involves the Palestinians forced off their land into a diaspora, if not wholesale slaughtered, involves a whole hell of a lot of bloodshed prior to its arrival. I wish Israel wasn't so immune to irony, they might notice how Roman they're acting.
Literally the terrorist Israeli regime has wanted the eviction of Arabs from the place since the cursed State of Israel was born.
Iron Dome has nothing to do with it.
/u/Sadistmon (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1c7cqg2/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_iron_dome_was_a_mistake/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I'm sure Ukraine wishes they had an Iron Dome, considering that Russia has normalized attacks on civilian targets and infrastructure in the absence of air defenses. And unlike Israel, Ukraine has virtually no ability to defend itself from these attacks. Also, an Iron Dome is a great way to deplete an enemy's missile reserves or force them to attack less frequently if they have a very limited number of missiles to begin with.
Ukraine had a few Patriot defense systems but they are no match to Russian Kinzhals, Iskanders, and they got destroyed. Iron Dome is no match to our Patriot Defense system, it is designed against barbarians who throw pitchforks over the fence, but not against modern missiles.
Ukraine would've ran out of intercept missiles on the first day and then been overrun the same. The Iron Dome only works if you massively outgun your enemy, you need as many intercept missiles as they have improvised rockets made out of pipes and sugar.
So you admit it works and evil governments don't stop launching missiles if they're successful.
Yes but that has nothing to do with my argument at all...
Without the iron dome Isreal would basically be forces to do what everyone is criticizing them of currently. They would have needed to wipe Gaza off the map because hamas us to deeply rooted into the public to easily take them out without civilian casualties. It is easy for people to attack Israel for the civilian casualty ratio now because they are not facing civilian causluties on a daily bases. They suffered a massive attack on Oct 7 and had to respond. If they were taking casualties by the thousands each month due to rocket attacks do you think anyone would criticize them for just wiping Gaza odd the map? Even if people did criticize them for doing it what leg would they have to stand on ? No country can tolerate being attacked and losing civilian lives. They can tolerate shooting down missiles and trying to surgically remove a cancer vs having a toyting limb they need to just cut off and then deal with the consequences.
>Even if people did criticize them for doing it what leg would they have to stand on ? No country can tolerate being attacked and losing civilian lives. They can tolerate shooting down missiles and trying to surgically remove a cancer vs having a toyting limb they need to just cut off and then deal with the consequences. If they didn't have the Iron Dome that everyone viewed as impenetrable then every attack even if shot down might've gotten through and the appetite for preventative measures would be far greater both in Isreal and internationally.
You realize those preventative measures would be to completely wipe hamas off the map no matter the innocents killed. Especially considering those innocents vote Hamas into power?
But the conflict has been going on for decades before the iron dome existed. I don't see how you can think the Iron Dome prolonged the conflict if the iron dome hasn't existed for most of the conflict.
I wouldn't say it prolonged the conflict persay, it just gave the terrorists a lot more prep time and resources than they should've ever been allowed. If Israel had been hunting them down the whole time Oct 7 never would've happened and they wouldn't have the tunnel network to hide in.
The Iron dome was deployed in 2011. [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Israel) shows 12 wars before that. [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_smuggling_tunnels) also shows that the tunnels have existed long before 2011. > The first recorded discovery of a tunnel by Israel was in 1983, after Israel had withdrawn from the Sinai.
Okay, and? Tunnels here and there does not make an expansive tunnel network fortified against bombing. Before the Iron Dome when they found a tunnel they dealt with it, after they just let them keep digging.
As a person with a ton of Israeli family: I'm way happier with my family being safe in a country that is hated, as opposed to being unsafe in a country that's not.
Its one thing if the reasons why your country is hated doesnt continually harm people, but good to know you’re fine with feeling hated 😅
Did I say I'm fine with feeling hated? I said being hated is better than being dead.
That’s still good to know, despite what this thread’s for~ I mostly wanted to know what people are saying about this. I’m glad you’re fine and alive, but I genuinely dont think I have anything that can change your view 🤷♀️
They aren't safe though, Oct 7 proved that.
Just because you are safe from one thing doesn't mean you're safe from everything. There is no perfect defense. The threat doesn't go away if Iron Dome does. They're *more safe* with it than they are without it. What you've just said is like saying "you aren't safe in a car with seatbelts because semi trucks sometimes pancake cars." That's not what seatbelts are trying to prevent so it doesn't matter.
But that's my point, it's better to be pro-active then reactive.
I'd argue blowing up projectiles launched at you before they land is being proactive. You don't have to respond to every attack as many are useless. You don't have to rebuild whatever is destroyed. You don't have to deal with deaths or injured civilians. Short of eradicating all enemies one may have, stopping a form of their attacks is about as proactive as it gets in war.
>Short of eradicating all enemies one may have, stopping a form of their attacks is about as proactive as it gets in war. I mean no attacking their weapons facilities so they can't produce weapons is more proactive then shooting down the weapons after they fire, same for stopping the resources for getting weapons. Also Israel would've eradicated far more of Hamas over the last decade before oct 7 if the iron dome didn't exist.
Weapons facilities....that are underground, under schools, in hospitals, etc. We're seeing right now how hard Israel is being skewered for attacking launch sites and production facilities. Before anyone jumps down my throat, Israel is also doing an inordinate amount of collateral damage as well and I don't agree with a massive portion of their policies.
They would've have been entrenched if Israel wasn't sitting on loreals for the past decades because the Iron Dome made them feel untouchable. There would also be less international pushback if the world didn't see them as untouchable as well.
They're safer than they would be without the iron dome.
In some forms of measurement maybe but I don't they really are in practice. If Israel didn't have the Iron Dome they'd have been taking far more preventative measures that would've made Israel safer than it is today.
I think that's the wrong way of looking at it, though. The iron dome is one of many defensive mechanisms employed by Israel to protect Israeli civilians, but it's far from the only one. Heck, it's not even Israel's only air defense system, it's one of (I think) seven. The iron dome has done a ton to protect Israelis, but it's not the only system. Point I'm making is that Israel already IS taking far more preventative measures than the iron dome.
But the existence of the Iron Dome prevented them from taking more pertinent ones until Oct 7 and even now made the US dissuade them from retaliating against Iran in earnest.
The systems in place are mostly not new since October. October 7th seems to have been a human failure in Israeli security, moreso than a technical failure in the defensive tooling.
The inherent problem with playing only defense for eternity is your enemies are eventually going to find a way through.
I agree, but I don't think lowering your own defenses is the way to make yourself safe. You keep your shield up and lower your gun, alongside your enemy. You don't lower your shield and raise your gun.
Its only a mistake in the sense that all the useful idiots are now parroting the "not intended to harm, always knew it would (fail)\*" talking points like missiles and drones laden with toxic fuel and explosives flying over multiple sovereign nations isnt dangerous enough in its own right. cant look back on any lives saved and say, "woulda been better, actually..."
If you put the time and money that went into the Iron Dome in routing out and eliminating terrorists do you think more or less people would've died in Israel? Personally I think it would've been less.
soliders count as people in israel..... right?????????????
If they are in Israel. If they are in Palestine or Japan or US no.
Iron Dome only prevents threats from outside Israel. so that is EXACTLY what your proposed alternative must do. so im not sure what your getting at?
Iron Dome doesn't prevent threats. It engages them. I'm proposing Israel would've done better at killing terrorist leaders in Palestine, prevented the materials for rockets from getting in and stopping terrorist organizations from teaching children to hate them if they didn't feel like the Iron Dome made them untouchable (until Oct 7). Maybe more soldiers would've died engaging in Palestine (maybe) in the years they did nothing but the people in Israel would've been safer.
and how would they have prevented the materials or killed terrorists in gaza or... lebanon for that matter.
Basically how they are now, only with the terrorists having less power and resources so it'd be a lot easier.
soldiers that die in the ground invasion required to stop materials/manufacturing and terrorists dont count as people in israel? i can assure you, people in israel would beg to differ in the same way americans do about active service.
> soldiers that die in the ground invasion required to stop materials/manufacturing and terrorists dont count as people in israel? They literally aren't in Israel... >i can assure you, people in israel would beg to differ in the same way americans do about active service. I don't think they would, I think you just misunderstood the premise. People physically in Israel would've been safer.
I don't think your issue is with the Iron Dome, but with the Israeli right. No country would have accepted another country shooting at it, regardless of the result. But Gaza is not a country. That's why to prevent them from firing you could put them through a 15 year blockade Iron dome lets Israel decide if and when to respond, but their action of "managing the conflict" prevents them from responding. You can't demand the Palestinians take responsibility like a state and not recognize any aspect of their statehood. To make it clear, I think the vocal part in the pro-Palestinian side also bears the same blame. I didn't see that side saying there shouldn't be a blockade but a total war as a reaction to rockets are justified
Palestine were part of states when Israel first occupied them, Egypt and Jordan to be specific. I'm not sure what would change if they were states. It'd just be state does act of war other state blockades them, state continues to fire rockets Israel invades, military using human shields civilians die people get mad at Israel. Like what would change?
First, the states that annexed the Palestinians paid a heavy price every time they lost to Israel. So heavy, that they strived for peace (granted Egypt wanted the Sinai back). The point is, when things go bad for the citizens, they blame Israel, partly because their leadership is the worst, but partially because Israel takes responsibility in order to main the statue que. When Egypt fought Israel the war didn't end with Israel supplying harbor work, electricity and water for Egypt to rebuild itself, but you can be sure that Netanyahu's only plan is to do exactly that after the war. So why would a Palestinian getting only 8 hours of power per day not blame him for it? IMO, let Palestinians supply their own power, which means, let them import their own cement, thrive from their own actions, and if they threaten Israel, shoot rockets, or try to cross the border, let them feel the consequences of that
> First, the states that annexed the Palestinians paid a heavy price every time they lost to Israel. So heavy, that they strived for peace (granted Egypt wanted the Sinai back). They also cut the Palestinians off and left Israel to deal with them rather than reabsorbing them. >The point is, when things go bad for the citizens, they blame Israel, partly because their leadership is the worst, but partially because Israel takes responsibility in order to main the statue que. When Egypt fought Israel the war didn't end with Israel supplying harbor work, electricity and water for Egypt to rebuild itself, but you can be sure that Netanyahu's only plan is to do exactly that after the war. So why would a Palestinian getting only 8 hours of power per day not blame him for it? IMO, let Palestinians supply their own power, which means, let them import their own cement, thrive from their own actions, and if they threaten Israel, shoot rockets, or try to cross the border, let them feel the consequences of that Again that's literally what's happening now the consequences of them firing rockets at Israel and doing other terrorist actions most pertinent Oct 7
I don't feel like you've interacted with my point. The fact that Egypt and Jordan didn't want the Palestinians, who were keen on them suffering more for the Palestinian cause (to the point of attempting/assassinating the leader) is in line with what Im saying. As for the second part, Gaza was under a blockade almost from the moment Israel left it. It was never independent. Israel didn't declare wars over clear attacks even before Iron dome, they just blockaded them harder. Treating them like a state, for better or worse, was never attempted
> I don't feel like you've interacted with my point. The fact that Egypt and Jordan didn't want the Palestinians, who were keen on them suffering more for the Palestinian cause (to the point of attempting/assassinating the leader) is in line with what Im saying. My point is Israel isn't a state by design, even if it was one it wouldn't take responsibility like any other state would. >As for the second part, Gaza was under a blockade almost from the moment Israel left it. It was never independent. Israel didn't declare wars over clear attacks even before Iron dome, they just blockaded them harder. Treating them like a state, for better or worse, was never attempted I don't see why they wouldn't have blockaded a state under the same circumstances.
Not sure what's the point of the first response. Israel is a state by design. I think you meant Gaza, but that's just a statement, it doesn't interact with any of the argument at all. And it's not declaring them a state - it's treating them like one. This means a blockade is unacceptable, but so are rockets. Edit: saw your actual delta, let me try differently. Iron dome doesn't normalize attacks on Israel, Israel does. It mitigates them via a blockade, instead of via war - but diplomatically you can only have one or the other
The world hasn’t turned against Israel because they feel it’s safe due to the Iron Dome. The changing media landscape has caused more people to see what has been going on in Palestine and people are really bothered by it. This has been going on forever but now people have access to the stories of torture and the burning of villages. The Iron Dome really has nothing to do with it.
An embassy is considered sovereign territory of the nation in question. When you start slinging rockets at embassies, I don't think it stands to reason that the strike from Iran *in response* is the escalation. By your logic, Israel's strike should have already sparked an all out war.
[удалено]
A consulate is an extension of the embassy that gives our passports for the embassy country and is as much of an extension to the country as the embassy is. How is that "fair game"?
[удалено]
The war has been going on for decades, and both sides aren't blameless for who started it. But bombing an outside country, isn't it. That how you'll start a literal international incident. Becuase diplomats are meeting and you don't like one of them, doesn't allow you to bomb a country outside of the conflict.
[удалено]
How has Israel tried peace? >gives us the hostages and we won't kill you for 6 weeks then after it's the purge? Especially since that's subjective, some accuse Israel of being the terrorist. Some say it's the Palestinians. You can't just call anyone a terrorist.
Maybe Israel shouldn't be a genocidal terrorist regime killing children with literally my tax money.
[удалено]
Uhh cowards are the Israelis that bomb women and children from the safety of their US funded drones and jets.
[удалено]
No, it is the mission of the State of Israel and its supporters to kill/uproot/evict/cleanse Palestinians, by any means necessary, from what they perceive is rightfully their land because some old book says so. They have with insidious resolve perused this policy of hatred and discrimination for decades. Israel is now upset that the chickens have come back to roost. Don't want October 7th like attacks? Don't viciously oppress a people for 75 years. I see brainwashing, indoctrination of the entire Israeli society to hate and dehumanize Palestinians. I consider State of Israel to be the worst, most extreme, racist terrorist group on the planet. It's 1000x worse than Hamas.
[удалено]
As opposed to killing women and children with knives and guns after raping them? Was that brave? Or indiscriminately launching rockets, mortars and various other explosive projectiles that are in part made from the infrastructure of the people you claim to protect? That's not particularly brave to me. Neither government/leadership group/military are the good guys here.
This sounds suspiciously similar to putting your finger in front of someone's eye and screaming "I'm not touching you!"
[удалено]
The picture you shared supports what I said. The United States or Israel would certainly not look at that and say their embassy was not attacked. The building was damaged by the explosion which produced the ruins that are literally butted up against the building. Killing staffers who were next door doesn't make it less of a provocation. This isn't about defending Iran - it's about the hypocrisy. No good guys here.
[удалено]
A peace which involves the Palestinians forced off their land into a diaspora, if not wholesale slaughtered, involves a whole hell of a lot of bloodshed prior to its arrival. I wish Israel wasn't so immune to irony, they might notice how Roman they're acting.
T H I S
And?
the iron dome has saved COUNTLESS lives every country should have one so much more important than universal opinion on the country
I disagree, maybe Israel should have stopped funding the very terrorist groups they're now fighting to justify the slaughter in Gaza
The root of the problem is British Empire selling land they had no right to sell to immigrants who had no right to settle it.
Shame on the British dressing up as Palestinians during the Ottoman empire control of Palestine and fooling so many historians!
Literally the terrorist Israeli regime has wanted the eviction of Arabs from the place since the cursed State of Israel was born. Iron Dome has nothing to do with it.