breppp

And that's the difference between 1937 and the 1920s. In between the Palestinians had committed the 1929 and 1936 massacres which included ethnic cleansing of Jewish communities which predated Arab presence, such as the Jews of Gaza.

Interesting to know that your quote is disputed in the original text, as to say the exact opposite.

"We must seek agreement and understanding with the Arab people only through the Arab worker, and only an alliance of Jewish and Arab workers will establish and maintain an alliance of the Jewish and Arab peoples in Palestine"

That's a Ben Gurion quote, who was a socialist and believed in shared class struggle of Jews and Arabs. The rest of your comment is influenced by other lack of nuance

The Israeli police can contact Google, Meta, etc and get the user details.

The question is whether they deem this case important enough, this is a journalist so there is a higher chance but I don't think this specific journalist carry a lot of weight locally

Azerbaijan is not Afghanistan

Actually Iran denied it attacked Azerbaijan, even though countries around the region know due to radar data.

Also an Iranian cell was caught planning an attack on an oil pipeline in Azerbaijan.

Previously two years ago Iran had attacked Pakistan, a nuclear armed nation. The only thing clear here is what would be the result of a nuclear Iran

Actually no, Iran's missiles aren't that accurate and if you count those that disintegrate on the way, hit open areas or are intercepted you get very few missiles that are able to hit from the very few that are launched.

This can be seen in much less overall damage than the 12 day war or the death count which is lower

As far as I can tell what you see today in your link is a fire caused by the pieces that fall after a successful interception, these are not as dangerous as an actual missile, as they lack a warhead, especially for Israelis that are indoors while in alarms.

In any case, you are arguing something else. It is a fact that the number of ballistic missiles Iran is capable of launching had fallen sharply, this is very easy to see by the reduction of alarms in Israel, which is served by an open API. You are arguing whether missiles ever hit.

Because Iran ability to launch had fallen sharply, less Israeli citizens are hurt and less interceptors are needed. This is also progressive, as the days pass, Iran loses more and more launchers and is less capable of launching more missiles. Therefore even in the unlikely event of an Israeli interceptor crisis, the situation is rather favorable to Israel

That's hardly true, but sure try this one or just google yourself

https://www.skynews.com.au/world-news/global-affairs/iranian...

For example here from March 10 detailing a progressive decline by 92% in ballistic missiles https://www.jpost.com/defense-and-tech/article-889435

Previously I had seen 95% somewhere else but cannot find the link, but that's close enough.

The reason why this is credible is Iran is limited by its amount of launchers, and Israel is very effective at destroying these. With complete air superiority and drones flying over, it's very easy to spot the heat signature for a launcher.

Add to that the launchers that were effectively buried at the start of the war when the openings to Iran's underground missile storage facilities were bombed.

https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-updat...

that's untrue by the way, Israel sold weapons to Iran and supported it with intelligence against Iraq after 1979

which is exactly why european countries threatened by russia are starting to withdraw from the treaty, five had recently announced so

On the other side, iran's launch capability had fallen by 92% since the start of the war

https://www.jpost.com/defense-and-tech/article-889435

Iran is actually attacking their former close friends at the gulf uninvolved civilian population centers more often than it attacks Israel

EDIT: fixed to 92%

no, but if two ships were hit, while one clearly by mistake, it is very early to say the straits are going to be closed as opposed to incorrect targeting

your analogies have went past me though, generally although a common misconception, countries are not people and wars are not comparable to crime

Back then there were only two ships attacked in the straits, and one was an Iranian shadow fleet ship. I am not sure that is "closing the straits" in any shape or form

However Qatar stopped production before the straits were officially closed and their stated reason is "due to military attacks", also Russian or Chinese ships can pass

Qatar is probably intentionally shutting down production of gas and oil in order to pressure the US to stop, independently of Iranian attacks.

In that respect they may be bombed by Iran but they have the same interests

That belief is very common in secular settings. Marx and current day offshoots believed in a war that will bring redemption and utopia, other complete atheists believe in the inevitable environmental disaster (not whether it is happening but the belief that it cannot be prevented or fixed)

lol Let me tell you something even more worrying, Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft already have larger engineering centers in Israel than most of Europe.

And over 90% of their workers served in the IDF! And many more in Israeli Intelligence! and they're also mostly Jewish!

Spooky stuff, our ads will never be safe now

> goal with Google M&A remains the same as always. Take competition off the board. I don't know this company or how they compete with Google, but 80% chance that's the play

I don't think that's true here (what is the competing google product exactly?) or generally in cloud acquisitions, that generally buy into their platform missing features

I'm sorry, not everything that was talked in depth in American media due to someone's propaganda pandering US isolationism can erase 80 prior years of written ideology

This is an overly US centric view which misses a lot of substance.

Bin Laden major start in jihadism was in afghanistan, while there were already US soldiers in his home nation of saudi arabia. for some reason that deployment wasn't deemed important enough to fight.

If you read a bit into the ideological influence of bin laden, such his teachers you would know the ideology is heavily based on the Muslim Brotherhood.

They do not only see a problem with western imperialism, which he incorrectly deduced the US deployment to be.

It also sees a major threat in western culture to Islamic values. The reason why the west needs to be fought in NYC rather than the troops in Arabia is because they felt Islam is under attack culturally. As in, everyone will throw their religion away, families will devolve and immodesty will be rampant.

So it is naive to think that if the US would not be involved in the Middle East then it won't be attacked, and it is replicating the pre-ww2 thought which was mildly unsuccessful

Saying the presence of American troops is the reason Bin Laden was anti-american is ideological flattening of Islamism, a movement from at least the 1920s that sees the entire failure of Islam in modernity as a product of western imperialism (a word that is very abused in their ideas), culture and ideas

Actually during the time when the nobility went to be fighter pilots it was a suicidal role with very low survival rates (ww1)

> In almost all countries, military is seen as a "working class" profession

In western countries that's the case. In autocratic countries it is essential to keep control of the army by placing the equivalent of the royal family in charge.

Also, fighter pilots were historically considered as the successors for cavalry and manned by the nobility, in Arab countries this means the ruling elite

Bahrain has a significant Shia population that feels oppressed and identifies with Iran.

That's not similar to Kuwait, a country that has a recent history of being taken over by its largest neighbor and saved by the US

wrong link?

maybe, but that is a by product of a real function (hedging). The reason prediction markets deal with news is so they can attract gamblers. Also compare marketing efforts of prediction markets and SEC control of real markets

The idea is not economic hedging but gambling and corruption

Last time I checked there is a council of mullahs that elect the Supreme Leader, these mullahs might be elected, although from a very narrow kind of people (Islamic Jurists). But anyone who isn't of the type of mullah the government favors can and is disqualified from running.

Thus it's a bit of a flexible definition of elections

I am guessing this is the case where a pre created narrative ("Killing AI bots") is force fitted into a more nuanced instance of reality. These are probably analysts that use Claude that has an MCP server to some palantir half-assed intelligence product. This is then pushed by non-technical journalists as some doomsday immoral non-human killing machine.

This is similar to the story behind Cambridge Analytica, which was essentially a company using crapware facebook API software to harvest voters data, but the media version of it was "tech companies can change election results" which echoed a season plotline of House of Cards (and older narratives of shadow forces)