HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Israel claims responsibil...

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 12:58 AM

Israel claims responsibility for airstrikes near Damascus, saying it foiled 'large-scale attack'

Source: CNN

The Israeli military Saturday said it foiled an imminent large-scale attack by Iranian forces and Shiite militia on targets in northern Israel, with a series of airstrikes carried out near the Syrian capital Damascus.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) claimed responsibility for the airstrikes, saying it was necessary to thwart multiple attacks by what it called killer, or kamikaze, drones, of a kind not previously used by Iranian forces against Israel.

Unlike more standard attack drones, which fire missiles towards their targets, the killer drone acts as its own missile by flying into the target itself.

When asked by CNN how immediate the IDF assessed the threat to be, IDF foreign press spokesman Jonathan Conricus described it as "imminent, as in real-time."

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/24/middleeast/israel-airstrike-syria/index.html

11 replies, 1334 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply Israel claims responsibility for airstrikes near Damascus, saying it foiled 'large-scale attack' (Original post)
brooklynite Aug 25 OP
crazytown Aug 25 #1
DavidDvorkin Aug 25 #2
crazytown Aug 25 #3
nycbos Aug 25 #10
procon Aug 25 #4
Lonestarblue Aug 25 #6
EX500rider Aug 25 #8
former9thward Aug 25 #11
TomVilmer Aug 25 #5
PerceptionManagement Aug 25 #7
The Liberal Lion Aug 25 #9

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 01:18 AM

1. International Law?

Syria ia a sovereign country. Does a state of war exist between them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 01:35 AM

2. Yes, actually, it does

But is that necessary if a state has sufficient reason to believe that an attack is about to be launched against it from a neighbor's terrritory?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DavidDvorkin (Reply #2)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 01:41 AM

3. A legal preemptive strike?

That was a matter of debate in the run-up to Iraq in 2003, I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 08:20 PM

10. Has been since 1973.

They only singed a case fire agreement. So the war never technically ended like the Korean War.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 02:48 AM

4. How many times has Israel used this excuse

to launch preemptive attacks? Smacks of Cheney's 1% Doctrine used during the Bush administration to formulate military action and foreign policy based on political goals rather than geopolitical realities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to procon (Reply #4)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 07:16 AM

6. Many times.

They keep doing it because their right-wing government needs the world to believe that they are constantly in danger and need to shove more and more Palestinians off their land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lonestarblue (Reply #6)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 11:59 AM

8. They are in constant danger....Iran is moving missiles ect into Syria to attack Israel..

...on top of the thousands of missiles they have shipped into Lebanon for Hezbollah to use against Israel...and then weapons into Gaza also. Official chant at government rallies in Iran is "Death to Israel", the Israelis would have to be stupid not to take the danger seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lonestarblue (Reply #6)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 10:21 PM

11. Palestinians have nothing to do with the Syria Israel war.

Look at a map...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 03:39 AM

5. UN in 2003: An unilateral and lawless use of force

Kofi Annan to the UN General Assembly in 2003:

"... Some say this understanding is no longer tenable, since an “armed attack” with weapons of mass destruction could be launched at any time, without warning, or by a clandestine group.

Rather than wait for that to happen, they argue, States have the right and obligation to use force pre-emptively, even on the territory of other States, and even while weapons systems that might be used to attack them are still being developed.

According to this argument, States are not obliged to wait until there is agreement in the Security Council. Instead, they reserve the right to act unilaterally, or in ad hoc coalitions.

This logic represents a fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability have rested for the last 58 years.

My concern is that, if it were to be adopted, it could set precedents that resulted in a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force, with or without justification. ..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 11:31 AM

7. nuclear apartheid attacks another neighbor

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sun Aug 25, 2019, 12:17 PM

9. In this age of lying liars and the liars who lie for them

it's hard to know if Israel is telling the truth especially considering how much trump is trying to egg the US into fighting a war against Iran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread