Iran has launched drone attack against Israel - April 13, 2024

[Dotta]

"War cabinet said ​

set on ‘forceful’ response to Iran, ​

but one that won’t spark wider war.​

Analysts quoted as saying Israel’s response to Tehran could be ​

‘as soon as Monday’; ​

Gallant reportedly told US counterpart Israel has ​

‘no choice’ ​

but to respond to ballistic missiles."​

https://www.timesofisrael.com/war-cabinet-said-set-on-forceful-response-to-iran-but-one-that-wont-spark-wider-war/

 

[Vern]

I can find no verification that an annex even existed prior to 4/1.

I think that's propaganda/lie to make it look like Israel hit the embassy.
Consular "sections" of an embassy are part of all then and located inside the embassy itself.
But even IF that were the case that it was simply an "annex", it loses diplomatic protections as soon as a war room is set up with military leaders. Especially designated terrorists.

The embassy is the Embassy building proper (where the diplomats play). "Consular Grounds" include the outbuildings (Annexs) located on the property along with the "Embassy Building" itself. They hit one of those buildings (an outbuilding/annex). It may very well have been a former butcher shop that Iran had procured and then included as part of their "Consular Grounds".

It absolutely does lose it's protected status as soon as it is used for military purposes (this includes meetings of the Command echelon [ie: IRGC Generals]).

Their play for sympathy is by stating, "Israel attacked the Iranian Consulate" thereby allowing/hoping the ill-informed get the impression that Israel struck their Embassy (it seems many certainly are under that impression too judging by twitter). Well, no - they didn't, Israel actually hit an Annex on their Consular Grounds (possibly which was once a butcher shop, but has now been obtained by Iran) and is considered part of their "Iranian Consulate".

It's why I linked the article that makes it clear that Israel struck an Annex within the Consular Grounds and noted that the distinction between the two, Embassy vs Consulate, was important.

I haven't been in those parts for two decades now, so cannot say whether this building (the apparent old butcher shop - they are all over the place in Damascus - every street has 1 or 10 of them!) was part of Consulate back then or whether it was still operating as a shop. But, obtaining adjacent buildings and increasing consular grounds when "room for growth" is required isn't unusual for nations to do.

 

[justtrish]

I can find no verification that an annex even existed prior to 4/1.

I think that's propaganda/lie to make it look like Israel hit the embassy.
Consular "sections" of an embassy are part of all then and located inside the embassy itself.
But even IF that were the case that it was simply an "annex", it loses diplomatic protections as soon as a war room is set up with military leaders. Especially designated terrorists.

We've seen this trick before, so it's not surprising.

Bad guys claim xyz to gather support for their "cause" and show they are just victims and this big bad bully is all at fault. Then the truth comes out and it (bad guys version of events) is fabricated entirely or the data is manipulated and not 100% truth. The media runs with it and then has to edit stories or issue corrections later, but what people remember is what was initially said to paint the bad bad guys as victims in their own games and bad decisions.

Israel is NOT reckless and I have no doubt they knew exactly who was there and struck with precision so to limit risk to innocent civilians.

Maybe Iran's generals should stay in Iran instead of meeting Hezbollah in Syria to discuss bringing weapons into Syria to supply terrorists with more ammunition to attack Israel and maybe Israel wouldn't be seeking to blow them up.

 

[Jillyg]

The embassy is the Embassy building proper (where the diplomats play). "Consular Grounds" include the outbuildings (Annexs) located on the property along with the "Embassy Building" itself. They hit one of those buildings (an outbuilding/annex). It may very well have been a former butcher shop that Iran had procured and then included as part of their "Consular Grounds".

It absolutely does lose it's protected status as soon as it is used for military purposes (this includes meetings of the Command echelon [ie: IRGC Generals]).

Their play for sympathy is by stating, "Israel attacked the Iranian Consulate" thereby allowing/hoping the ill-informed get the impression that Israel struck their Embassy (it seems many certainly are under that impression too judging by twitter). Well, no - they didn't, Israel actually hit an Annex on their Consular Grounds (possibly which was once a butcher shop, but has now been obtained by Iran) and is considered part of their "Iranian Consulate".

It's why I linked the article that makes it clear that Israel struck an Annex within the Consular Grounds and noted that the distinction between the two, Embassy vs Consulate, was important.

I haven't been in those parts for two decades now, so cannot say whether this building (the apparent old butcher shop - they are all over the place in Damascus - every street has 1 or 10 of them!) was part of Consulate back then or whether it was still operating as a shop. But, obtaining adjacent buildings and increasing consular grounds when "room for growth" is required isn't unusual for nations to do.

The embassy is the Embassy building proper (where the diplomats play). "Consular Grounds" include the outbuildings (Annexs) located on the property along with the "Embassy Building" itself. They hit one of those buildings (an outbuilding/annex). It may very well have been a former butcher shop that Iran had procured and then included as part of their "Consular Grounds".

It absolutely does lose it's protected status as soon as it is used for military purposes (this includes meetings of the Command echelon [ie: IRGC Generals]).

Their play for sympathy is by stating, "Israel attacked the Iranian Consulate" thereby allowing/hoping the ill-informed get the impression that Israel struck their Embassy (it seems many certainly are under that impression too judging by twitter). Well, no - they didn't, Israel actually hit an Annex on their Consular Grounds (possibly which was once a butcher shop, but has now been obtained by Iran) and is considered part of their "Iranian Consulate".

It's why I linked the article that makes it clear that Israel struck an Annex within the Consular Grounds and noted that the distinction between the two, Embassy vs Consulate, was important.

I haven't been in those parts for two decades now, so cannot say whether this building (the apparent old butcher shop - they are all over the place in Damascus - every street has 1 or 10 of them!) was part of Consulate back then or whether it was still operating as a shop. But, obtaining adjacent buildings and increasing consular grounds when "room for growth" is required isn't unusual for nations to do.

Could you link to that article again? Or the post?

 

[Vern]

Could you link to that article again? Or the post?

Sure. Link is in the first permalinked post below:

Iran has launched drone attack against Israel - April 13, 2024

Israel took responsibility Gallant says Israel 'exacts heavy price' from enemies; while Iran says Israel will 'regret this crime' 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...

www.websleuths.com

Iran has launched drone attack against Israel - April 13, 2024

Israel took responsibility Gallant says Israel 'exacts heavy price' from enemies; while Iran says Israel will 'regret this crime' 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...

www.websleuths.com

 

[kittythehare]

I can find no verification that an annex even existed prior to 4/1.

I think that's propaganda/lie to make it look like Israel hit the embassy.
Consular "sections" of an embassy are part of all then and located inside the embassy itself.
But even IF that were the case that it was simply an "annex", it loses diplomatic protections as soon as a war room is set up with military leaders. Especially designated terrorists.

Briefing Security Council on Reported Israeli Attacks against Iran’s Diplomatic Premises in Syria, Top UN Official Urges Efforts to Prevent Further Escalation | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases

In a meeting urgently convened today following reports of Israeli attacks on Iran’s diplomatic premises in Syria, a senior United Nations official told the Security Council that the inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises and personnel must be respected and further escalation must be...

press.un.org

 

[Dotta]

"Iran threatens to use 'weapons it has never used' if Israel retaliate."​

Iran threatens to use 'weapons it has never used' if Israel retaliate

Israel earlier vowed that it will respond to Iran's unprecedented drone and missile attack, amid fears that the Middle East is teetering on the edge of an all-our war.

www.dailymail.co.uk

"Russia pledges fighter jets, drones and air defenses to Iran."​

Russia pledges fighter jets, drones and air defenses to Iran

A strategic alliance between the two hostile nations has experts fearing Iran is growing in capabilities as it barrels towards war and the crisis in the Middle East deepens.

www.dailymail.co.uk

"Itamar Ben-Gvir,
Israel's national security minister -
urged Israel to 'go berserk'
despite mounting fears that the Middle East could be dragged into all-out war."

Ben-Gvir: Israel must show it is 'prepared to go berserk' on Iran

The country's war cabinet met on Sunday and again today to discuss the Israeli response to Tehran launching 300 missiles and drones on Saturday, the majority of which were intercepted by Israel.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[kittythehare]

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.

Israel's strike against the Iranian consulate in Damascus was a use of force against both Syria and Iran and a violation against Article 2 (4) of the UN charter's prohibition on use of force.

Purposes and Principles of the UN (Chapter I of UN Charter) | Security Council

Articles 1 and 2 of the Charter of the United Nations outline the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

www.un.org

 

[Dotta]

Israel's strike against the Iranian consulate in Damascus was a use of force against both Syria and Iran and a violation against Article 2 (4) of the UN charter's prohibition on use of force.

Purposes and Principles of the UN (Chapter I of UN Charter) | Security Council

Articles 1 and 2 of the Charter of the United Nations outline the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

www.un.org

Yep.
I try to imagine my country in Europe sending missiles to another European country
to attack some other country's Consulate

Sorry, but my imagination does not stretch that far
Utter madness!!!

JMO

 

[kittythehare]

Yep.
I try to imagine my country in Europe sending missiles to another European country
to attack some other country's Consulate

Sorry, but my imagination does not stretch that far
Utter madness!!!

JMO

Unreal.

Middle East crisis live: Israel violated international law with attack on Iranian consulate in Syria, says UN expert report

UN expert report says ‘retaliatory military attacks between Israel and Iran violate the right to life and must cease immediately’

www.theguardian.com

 

[kittythehare]

Bombs and viruses: The shadowy history of Israel’s attacks on Iranian soil

From cyberattacks and assassinations to drone strikes, Israel-linked plots have targeted Iran for years.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[kittythehare]

srael considers a strike against Iran that ‘does not lead to war’​

Israel has informed U.S. officials about its options for a strike against Iran in response to Iran’s retaliation against Israel last weekend for Israel’s bombing of Iran’s consulate in Damascus on April 1, NBC reported on Tuesday.

According to NBC, U.S. sources said that Israel could target Iranian assets in the region outside of Iranian soil. The sources were quoted as saying that Washington does not wish to take part in Israeli actions, but that Israel will coordinate with the U.S.

Meanwhile, Israel’s Channel 12 said that Israel seeks to conduct a “determinant strike” that “doesn’t lead to war.”

Israel’s ‘Walla’ news website said that “we should not expect large-scale attacks on Iranian assets,” adding that Iran’s interests in the region are many, which gives Israel “several ways to act.”

‘Operation al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 193: Israel ‘considers’ strike against Iran, continues to deny entry of aid into Gaza

Israel says it is considering a strike against Iran “that would not lead to a war” as it continues to restrict aid access to the Strip. Meanwhile, settlers in the West Bank escalated attacks against villages, killing two Palestinians.

mondoweiss.net

 

[kittythehare]

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iaea-chief-worried-israel-could-strike-iran-nuclear-facilities-2024-04-15/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_campaign=Daily-Briefing&utm_term=041624&user_email=13309d7a155fede95a334f29d26c4ab500ce5665b9a45e5ed58a07ea9f1429c7

 

[justtrish]

Yep.
I try to imagine my country in Europe sending missiles to another European country
to attack some other country's Consulate

Sorry, but my imagination does not stretch that far
Utter madness!!!

JMO

I think context is important when thinking about this. If another European country was allowing terrorists to reside in their borders and launch attacks on your country AND also allowed another European country to use it's Embassy for planning arms exchanges with the terrorists.

The purpose of the attack was not just to attack some other country's consulate because they wanted to take it out or hurt the workers or civilians. They had intel (that clearly was correct based on who died) that meetings were taking place with terrorists about moving weapons from Iran to Syria for terrorists to use against Israel, the US assets in the area, AND commercial ships.

@Vern who I trust to understand these things better than I do or any article written would, due to her job and experiences in Embassies around the world, has already posted that these types of meetings are NOT to be happening in an Embassy or Consulate. WHY would Iran be holding meetings with Hezbollah in their embassy in Syria?? Why is nobody asking that question? Maybe they were counting on nobody noticing those meetings and looking the other way. I think they saw the chance to take out high level terrorists and leaders of a military that were supporting it and arming them. I would hope that if your country knew the same was going on in a nearby country where terrorists were meeting with military leaders in an Embassy or consulate discussing getting more weapons to be used against your country, then they would act in order to keep your country safe too.

 

[branmuffin]

My opinion is the exact opposite.

Hamas and the Houthis and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations that have been trying to destroy Israel, backed by Iran and its oil money.

October 7th couldn’t have happened without backing from Iran.

This is a war that was not started by Israel and yet Israel has no choice but to fight back.
Much as America had no choice after September 11th, which I lived through.

IMO if anyone else here has survived a terrorist attack as we did in Manhattan on September 11th 2001, in which ten people I knew died, it would seem more obvious that no country can win the war on terrorism by backing down.

IMO

Somehow I don't think Iran was testing Israel but testing the US.

 

[Eli9]

Somehow I don't think Iran was testing Israel but testing the US.

Plus the resolve of other regions like Jordan and Saudi. MOO

 

[justtrish]

Somehow I don't think Iran was testing Israel but testing the US.

Hopefully, Iran took notice of who was involved in shooting down their drones and intercepting their missiles. I think other countries in the region know what Iran is doing and has been doing and they don't support it. Iran is arming terrorists and when countries in the region sit by and watch, who's to say they won't be next?

 

[Dotta]

I think context is important when thinking about this. If another European country was allowing terrorists to reside in their borders and launch attacks on your country AND also allowed another European country to use it's Embassy for planning arms exchanges with the terrorists.

The purpose of the attack was not just to attack some other country's consulate because they wanted to take it out or hurt the workers or civilians. They had intel (that clearly was correct based on who died) that meetings were taking place with terrorists about moving weapons from Iran to Syria for terrorists to use against Israel, the US assets in the area, AND commercial ships.

@Vern who I trust to understand these things better than I do or any article written would, due to her job and experiences in Embassies around the world, has already posted that these types of meetings are NOT to be happening in an Embassy or Consulate. WHY would Iran be holding meetings with Hezbollah in their embassy in Syria?? Why is nobody asking that question? Maybe they were counting on nobody noticing those meetings and looking the other way. I think they saw the chance to take out high level terrorists and leaders of a military that were supporting it and arming them. I would hope that if your country knew the same was going on in a nearby country where terrorists were meeting with military leaders in an Embassy or consulate discussing getting more weapons to be used against your country, then they would act in order to keep your country safe too.

Let's just hope that this terrible conflict will not be a start of WW3,
dragging others into the abyss.

I pray for the hostages who are still rotting in the tunnels - either dead or alive.
I don't think other front with war with Iran will bring them to their despairing families

JMO

 

[justtrish]

Let's just hope that this terrible conflict will not be a start of WW3,
dragging others into the abyss.

I pray for the hostages who are still rotting in the tunnels - either dead or alive.
I don't think other front with war with Iran will bring them to their despairing families

JMO

I don't know anyone that wants WW3.

I hope Iran takes it's weapons and goes home. I'm sure there are more pressing issues they could be working on in Iran instead of arming terrorists in the region. Iran is behind much of the chaos in the region and if they are allowed to continue on as they have been, it will lead to WW3. Not standing up to them, is not going to prevent it. Backing down from terrorists and the sponsors of it doesn't work. Standing up to them is scary, but so it doing nothing. Allowing them to continue to arm terrorists just means more terrorists with weapons and terrorists don't just decide to be nice because other countries are cooperating with their plans.

 

[Arkay]

Somehow I don't think Iran was testing Israel but testing the US.

Plus the resolve of other regions like Jordan and Saudi. MOO

I think Iran was testing all of it..all these countries…remember that Iran calls Israel the “Little Satan,” but names America as the “Great Satan.”

I well recall the American hostages that Iran kept for 444 or so days, and released during Reagan’s inauguration ceremony.

The regime of the ayatollahs has despised us since they overthrew the Shah.

I never remember which nations are Shiite and which are Sunni, but I know it is a factor in which Mideast countries align with one another.

JMO