Somewhere John Bolton just got an erection.
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2024
136 points (95.9% liked)
News
23014 readers
6 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
102 missiles
I'm watching live on YouTube, it sounds like a thunderstorm in Tel Aviv right now as they get intercepted.
Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Daniel Hagari said that Iran's attack on Israel "will have consequences."
"We are on high alert both defensively and offensively," Hagari said during a news briefing following the attack. "We will defend the citizens of the State of Israel."
Hagari said the military has "plans" and will strike at the time and place of their choosing.
Hagari said the military has not identified any additional aerial threats from Iran, and reiterated that people can leave shelters. The IDF "carried out a large number of interceptions," Hagari said, adding that parts of central and southern Israel were impacted by missiles.
"At this stage, we are still assessing the situation," Hagari said. "We are not aware of any casualties."
can you post some updates. not able to check anything but Lemmy rn.
There's lots of damage from intercepted missile shrapnel all around Tel Aviv, but it appears they were all shot down.
Now Iran will probably say revenge has taken and move on, but we will see.
Just in case this becomes a problem, the title of the article seems to have changed since I posted this.
Whelp...
If the imperial news is based on "IDF says", then find another source.
This already happened, and was true. I don't understand the comment.
idf could say the sky is blue at this point and id go outside to check for myself.
K, but considering Iran did attack Israel... Yesterday... And the comment was made just moments ago, I myself find the comment to be misplaced.
Am YIsrael Chai
I guess well deserved after what IDF is doing.
unpopular opinion: no one deserves war. Except for a few people at the top, who usually aren't affected by it all that much.
It’s indiscriminate bombing in response to indiscriminate bombing. No one benefits from this.
Perhaps the one nation that is inextricably linked to the west could stop escalating it then aye.
Like we can’t control Iran, but we should be able to reign in Israel’s bloodlust. Alas, if we couldn’t control them in Gaza then I’m afraid that rabid dog is out of control.
You and I will agree that Israel is escalating this near century old conflict and the US needs to stop sending weapons to them, but nothing good will come from more bombs being dropped in the region.
I think this conflict only started when Israel were given someone else land and decided to take more and more.
It looks like Iran is focusing on Targeting military targets, while Israel has been attacking civilian targets, killing already over a thousand in Lebanon. On top still facilitating a genocide in Gaza. The only way for this cycle of violence to end is for Israel to stop the aggression, which I only see as realistic when the US stops sending weapons
Lewis says he believes Iran’s latest strike was designed to show some restraint. The warheads fell primarily on air bases that may have been used in last week’s attacks on Hezbollah’s leadership, he points out. “It’s very typical to see Iranians pick military targets that are linked to the military strike that they’re responding to,” he says.
The strike also appeared to largely avoid civilian areas. The only publicly acknowledged death from the attack so far was a Palestinian man in the West Bank who was apparently struck by a falling missile body. A school in central Israel was also hit, though no casualties were reported.
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/02/nx-s1-5135646/iran-missile-strike-israel-appears-to-hit-some-targets
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-1-2024/
QUESTION: And then both you and the National Security Advisor just a few minutes ago talked about this being a brazen and unacceptable escalation. But does the administration see anything that Israel has done over the course of the last three weeks as escalatory?
MR MILLER: So certainly they have done things to expand the conflict, but if you look at the actions that they have taken, they were bringing terrorists to justice, terrorists who have launched attacks on Israeli civilians. If you look at what Iran did today – we have been warning for some time about the threat posed by Iran arming and funding terrorist groups across the Middle East. And the attack today just demonstrated the danger of those actions. What you saw was Iran launching a state-on-state attack to protect and defend the terrorist groups that it has built, nurtured and that it controls. So there is a difference between the actions that we have seen Israel take to defend its civilians —
QUESTION: Okay, well I’m not suggesting that they’re —
MR MILLER: — and what we’ve – I just – and what we’ve seen Iran take.
QUESTION: I’m not trying to suggest that they are equivalent. I just wanted to make sure that you didn’t see —
MR MILLER: No, you – we have certainly seen Iran – or – we’ve certainly seen Israel expand the nature of its attacks against Hizballah, but it is a very – it is a very different type of attack than what we saw today from a state – a state actor against another state.
...
QUESTION: So given that the Secretary and the National Security Advisor just said that this attack by Iran is sort of definitively escalatory in nature. I know that State – you’ve been telling us, the Secretary even told us that for months they’ve – you’ve been encouraging the Israelis not to respond to attacks and provocations in such a way that escalates anything further. Are – is the Secretary going to offer that same advice to the Israelis now in the wake of these missile strikes?
MR MILLER: I’ll say a couple things about that. First, of course Israel has a right to defend itself, as any nation does. In terms of what Israel’s response will be, of course there must be consequences for Iran for this attack. We’ve made clear that there must be consequences. I’m not going to get into what those consequences are today.
But there are things on which we will be coordinating with our Israeli counterparts, and I think in the immediate aftermath of this attack we are going to coordinate with them on what any response might be. I think it’s important that we are able to defeat this attack through successful work with Israel and with our partners, and we will work with them on what a response might look like. But I’m not at the position, just two and a half hours after this event occurred, to offer what that might look like today.
QUESTION: The Iranian foreign ministry people have said that – now that they gave the U.S. – I don’t who – a head’s up in advance of these missile strikes today through diplomatic channels. Is that true?
MR MILLER: That is absolutely false. We had no kind of warning from the Government of Iran that they were going to launch such an attack. Yeah.
Yes, I'm aware what the position of the US State Department is. They will always defend America and it's Allies regardless of the situation. I don't know why you would just take them at their word instead of look for independent verification. None of this discredit my points in the previous comment, it does show how far Miller will lie about Israeli operations, which have already killed over a thousand civilians in Lebanon.
Iran telegraphed to Arab officials in the region on Monday night that it was going to launch an attack on Israel that would be similar in scale to its April attack when it launched 300 drones and ballistic and cruise missiles at Israel but caused minimal damage, according to Arab officials.
The White House warned earlier on Tuesday that Iran was poised to launch a ballistic missile attack on Israel soon, instantly ratcheting up fears of all-out war in the region.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/01/politics/iran-missile-attack-israel/index.html
Thank you for confirming that Iran did not tell US officials about the attack. Your sources definitely helped me reach the factual conclusion.
And I'm providing substance to the discussion. What did I say that was discrediting something? Unless something in that quote, you feel, attacks one of your points?
No, they did not directly tell the US as far as I can tell. They did so indirectly and with short notice, different from the last time when they gave a 72 hour warning.
Miller states that the Iranian strikes were targeting civilians, while Israel does not target civilians. Both of which are not true.
Notice how Miller, who is representing the US State Department here, frames all of Israel's actions as defensive and just (despite directly bombing a Capitol, killing hundreds of civilians, and starting a ground invasion), while all the actions of any of Israel's enemies are unjust and demands consequences (despite attacking military targets and not civilian targets). The double standards are blatant and intentional, in order to justify the US's continued military support of Israel, despite public opinion, US Law, and International Law.
Yes I understand Iran objectively lied and never told us, directly or indirectly, based on the evidence. The rest of this sounds like your opinion. And as though mistrust should be taken towards our officials.
Well, I believe them, and I agree with their stance on Iran.
This is no longer a factual discussion, and I won't be continuing.
And I picked up on the attempt to incorrectly frame what was said in the quote. Miller did not say all the things you're claiming.
You guessed wrong.