• @SulaymanF
    link
    07 months ago

    I’m not defending the attack on the embassy

    And yet you are.

    International law says embassies are sacrosanct. Even if there was commander and generals in there, you cannot attack first and argue self defense without a credible threat of “imminent” danger. Israel had none and has not even argued for this claim. We went over this when the US illegally assassinated Suleimani.

    • @disguy_ovahea
      link
      -17 months ago

      No. I’m not. I’m debating the point that Israel attacked “first,” just as you said, in a 40 year long conflict.

      • @SulaymanF
        link
        2
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That’s not what you said, you said Israel could claim justification for bombing an embassy because enemies were in it. Then you made a vague comment about how long the conflict is, as if that excuses it. If that is true, then all israeli embassies are fair game because Mosaad is in them and US embassies as well since they openly have CIA officers in them.

        Firing missiles into a country to blow up an embassy of another country is a “first” no matter what justification you or Israel can come up with.

        • @disguy_ovahea
          link
          -1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I said “one could claim it was retaliation” referring to the Houthi Red Sea attacks. My point is this has been going back and forth for 40 years.

          • @SulaymanF
            link
            07 months ago

            So the guy with a week old account is condescending. I’m pretty sure I’ve read and taught more history than you. Peace.

        • @disguy_ovahea
          link
          07 months ago

          Your account was 7 days old once too. Thanks for the warm welcome.