![www.dailymail.co.uk](/forums/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2F1s%2F2024%2F04%2F14%2F13%2F83616895-0-image-a-59_1713098533996.jpg&hash=85c8f1a0615ef0daea9c0b154454601c&return_error=1)
Moment Iran began its 300-missile attack on Israel is revealed
Footage released by Iranian state TV shows huge clouds of smoke and blinding flashes as hundreds of missiles were fired in retaliation to a drone strike at the beginning of April.
It's a consulate- it's still protected under the principle of inviolability or incapable of being violated. I'm basing this off of what the EU Commission said:Israel took responsibility for striking the Iranian Consulate ... not the embassy building itself - an important distinction. They struck an Annex Building which was conducting a meeting of 'like-minds' ... military minds (their INT is great).
This article Canadian Embassy Damaged notes the fact that it was an annex to the Iranian Embassy (considered Iranian soil BTW) that was struck.
It's on the main drag in Damascus. Our Canadian embassy suffered some broken windows from the consussion which is not unusual when bombs go off close by (that does NOT make this strike a targetting of the Canadian Embassy nor of the Iranian Embassy itself where the diplomats play). I've been in our Embassy there often (it's shuttered now with a caretaker on staff).
The Iranian Consulate Annex building (considered Iranian soil again ... ) was struck by Israel as they were targetting the 4 Iranian IRGC MILITARY Generals meeting there. Military targets are legitimate targets IAW International Law. Iran and it's proxies (the 3H Club: Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas) have been conducting strikes against Israel for eons, but especially so since 7th October 2023, when the Iranian-funded and their IRGC-backed Hamas terrorists entered Israel and conducted a massacre of innocent women, men, and children. That action by them was, and is, legally considered "an Act of War".
Israel has the right to self defence. Israel has the right to target those who are conducting and funding and sustaining and advising the 3H-Clubs which are conducting this war on behalf of their State-Sponsor (Iran). Iran can call it an act of aggression yet Israel can legally call it an act of self-defence too. And by any other name, even a "Preemptive Strike" can be claimed.
Israel, thus far, has shown great restraint. As have those nations, including the Arab nations (thank you to the Saudis & Jordan), whose airspace was illegally violated last night by Iran - all of whom successfully engaged last night to destroy the incoming before 99.9% of it was able to strike anything. That illegal violation of their airspaces could also be legally considered by them to be an "Act of War" by Iran. Just saying.
I can tell you this: IMO if my country was taking incoming from 4 different countries in the middle of the night, my EXPECTATION and demand would be that my country act to protect me and to retaliate. That's why governments exist: to protect their citizens. I don't expect Israel to be held to a higher standard.
I'm military; I've been to the Canadian Embassy in Damascus on business runs (diplomatic comms - delivering/receiving their messages/mail coming in through Israel on Canadian flights or to/from our embassy in Israel or Lebanon).It's a consulate- it's still protected under the principle of inviolability or incapable of being violated. I'm basing this off of what the EU Commission said:
"In this highly tense regional situation, it is imperative to show utmost restraint," Peter Stano, a spokesperson for the executive European Commission, said in a post on X.
"The principle of the inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises and personnel must be respected in all cases and in all circumstances in accordance with international law."
The generals were inside the consulate- how were they military targets if consulates are considered protected under international law?
Not sure if Israel can claim this as an act of self-defense when this took place in a country (Syria) not participating in this conflict. And without its consent nor approval. That violates Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. If Israel didn't do this, Iran wouldn't have brought out its drones. I hope both sides show restraint once again.
That’s some win. If it happens here I would hope and pray we wouldn’t take that so called “win”.Iran's Operation may have been a calculated attempt to both save face and contain escalation,
rather than an all-out attack intended to deal a decisive blow to Israel.
War with Iran
would probably mean war with Russia and China.
What happened to skilled diplomats?
JMO
"President Biden warns PM Netanyahu
US will NOT support Israel's counterattack on Iran
amid fears of all-out war:
President tells PM
in late-night call
'you got a win, take the win'
after IDF shot down 'nearly all' incoming drones and missiles."
![]()
Biden tells Netanyahu US will NOT support Israeli counterattack
Biden spoke with Netanyahu after Iran bombarded Israel with hundreds of missiles and drones on Saturday in response to a drone strike in Syria that killed 12 Iranians.www.dailymail.co.uk
That’s some win. If it happens here I would hope and pray we wouldn’t take that so called “win”.
Well as more info has come to light, turns out, they didn't bomb any embassy. It was the IGRC HEADQUARTERS located in an old butcher shop between the Iranian and Canadian embassies.They hit the Canadian embassy while they were about it https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-embassy-damascus-damaged-1.7168176
Although the Canadian embassy "ceased operations in 2012", there is a "locally engaged staff member", fortunately not on the premises at the time. Had he or she been there, then that would have just been too bad? Collateral damage? Or would you say there were "bad guys" operating from the old Canadian embassy too?
btw I live in Western Europe and I'm certainly not the only one worried about WW3 starting off in that region.
MOO
That gave me chills!Former Israeli PM Naftali Bennett tweeted this in regards to the Iranian strikes-
“Some points regarding the overnight Iranian missile attack on Israel:
1. Contrary to what pundits are saying, this wasn’t designed merely as “bells and whistles” with no damage. When you shoot 350 flying objects timed to hit Israel at the same moment, when you use three fundamentally different weapon types—cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and UAVs, you’re looking to penetrate Israel’s defenses and kill Israelis.
2. The US administration is telling us: “This is a victory, you’ve already won by thwarting the missiles. No need for any further action.”No, it’s NOT a victory. Yes, it’s a remarkable success of Israel’s air defense systems, but it’s not a victory. When a bully tries to hit you 350 times and only succeeds seven time, you’ve NOT won. You don’t win wars just by intercepting your enemy’s hits, nor do you deter it. Your enemy will just try harder with more and better weapons and methods next time. How DO you deter? By exacting a deeply painful price.
3. It’s incorrect to say “nobody got hurt”. There’s a 7 year-old Israeli-Arab girl called Amina Elhasuny fighting for her life. That’s who coward Khamenei hit.
4. The Islamic Republic of Iran made a big mistake. For the past 30 years it’s been wreaking havoc on the region—through its proxies. A terror-octopus whose head is Tehran, and its tentacles are in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Gaza. How convenient. The Mullahs send others to conduct horrendous terror attacks, and die for them. Other people’s blood. Israel’s strategic mistake for the past 30 years was to play along this strategy. We always fought the Octopus’ arms, but hardly exacted a price from its Iranian head. This should change now:Hezbollah or Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel? Tehran pays a price.
5. The enemy is the Iranian REGIME, not the wonderful Iranian people. The Iranian regime reminds me of the Soviet regime in 1985: corrupt to the core, old, incompetent, despised by its own people, and destined to collapse. The sooner the better. The West can accelerate the regime’s inevitable collapse with a set of soft and clever actions, short of military force. Remember, USSR collapsed without any need for a direct American attack. Let’s do this.
6. Israel is fighting everybody’s war. In Gaza, Lebanon and Tehran. We’re considered “the small satan” by radical Islam. America is the big one. I’ll be clear: if these crazy fanatic Islamic terrorists get away with murder by hiding among civilians, this method will be adopted by terrorists worldwide. We’re not asking anyone to fight for us. We’ll do the job. But we do expect our allies to have our back, especially when it’s tough—and now it’s tough. Be on the right side and help us defeat these horrible and savage regimes.”
Where's the source for this?Well as more info has come to light, turns out, they didn't bomb any embassy. It was the IGRC HEADQUARTERS located in an old butcher shop between the Iranian and Canadian embassies.
It blew some windows out of the Canadian embassy. It was a precise hit, masterfully done. Killed the orchestrator of 10/7.
U.S. forces in the region have already been attacked scores of times since October. I guess Iran means that they will step up the attacks??Iran sent a message to the Biden administration through several Arab countries earlier this week: if the U.S. gets involved in the fighting between Israel and Iran, U.S. forces in the region will be attacked, three U.S. officials told Axios.
Israel did not hit the Iranian Embassy.It's a consulate- it's still protected under the principle of inviolability or incapable of being violated. I'm basing this off of what the EU Commission said:
"In this highly tense regional situation, it is imperative to show utmost restraint," Peter Stano, a spokesperson for the executive European Commission, said in a post on X.
"The principle of the inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises and personnel must be respected in all cases and in all circumstances in accordance with international law."
The generals were inside the consulate- how were they military targets if consulates are considered protected under international law?
Not sure if Israel can claim this as an act of self-defense when this took place in a country (Syria) not participating in this conflict. And without its consent nor approval. That violates Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. If Israel didn't do this, Iran wouldn't have brought out its drones. I hope both sides show restraint once again.
Where's the source for this?
I can find no verification that an annex even existed prior to 4/1.Israel took responsibility for striking the Iranian Consulate ... not the embassy building itself - an important distinction. They struck an Annex Building which was conducting a meeting of 'like-minds' ... military minds (their INT is great).
This article Canadian Embassy Damaged notes the fact that it was an annex to the Iranian Embassy (considered Iranian soil BTW) that was struck.
It's on the main drag in Damascus. Our Canadian embassy suffered some broken windows from the consussion which is not unusual when bombs go off close by (that does NOT make this strike a targetting of the Canadian Embassy nor of the Iranian Embassy itself where the diplomats play). I've been in our Embassy there often (it's shuttered now with a caretaker on staff).
The Iranian Consulate Annex building (considered Iranian soil again ... ) was struck by Israel as they were targetting the 4 Iranian IRGC MILITARY Generals meeting there. Military targets are legitimate targets IAW International Law. Iran and it's proxies (the 3H Club: Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas) have been conducting strikes against Israel for eons, but especially so since 7th October 2023, when the Iranian-funded and their IRGC-backed Hamas terrorists entered Israel and conducted a massacre of innocent women, men, and children. That action by them was, and is, legally considered "an Act of War".
Israel has the right to self defence. Israel has the right to target those who are conducting and funding and sustaining and advising the 3H-Clubs which are conducting this war on behalf of their State-Sponsor (Iran). Iran can call it an act of aggression yet Israel can legally call it an act of self-defence too. And by any other name, even a "Preemptive Strike" can be claimed.
Israel, thus far, has shown great restraint. As have those nations, including the Arab nations (thank you to the Saudis & Jordan), whose airspace was illegally violated last night by Iran - all of whom successfully engaged last night to destroy the incoming before 99.9% of it was able to strike anything. That illegal violation of their airspaces could also be legally considered by them to be an "Act of War" by Iran. Just saying.
I can tell you this: IMO if my country was taking incoming from 4 different countries in the middle of the night, my EXPECTATION and demand would be that my country act to protect me and to retaliate. That's why governments exist: to protect their citizens. I don't expect Israel to be held to a higher standard.