Terrorist attacks in Israel

[Mickie Lane]

Interesting, so Australian. American and British soldiers etc should have let Hitler and Mussolini do whatever they wanted to in Europe and beyond, plus Tojo in the east and the South Pacific too.

Somehow I don't think that would have been a good idea.

Like I said there will never be peace on earth no matter which system is in place.

[Mickie Lane]

Stunner...looks like the wrong fleas have been gettin in your ear. Have never.really respected your footy talk, now we can extend that to country. Best we forget.

Thats fine by me.
Do you really think I give a fark what you think about me?

[Jacks Fur Coat]

Thats fine by me.
Do you really think I give a fark what you think about me?

No and why should you. I care about you though, and want you to have a nice comfy seat while others stand up for the Last Post tomorrow.

[Mickie Lane]

No and why should you. I care about you though, and want you to have a nice comfy seat while others stand up for the Last Post tomorrow.

lol

[Thirteen]

Go Israel, keep crushing the murderers.

Well said Ray. Amen.

They started this war and there is no doubt Israel will finish it.

AM YISRAEL CHAI!

[Thirteen]

Happy Passover from the IDF!

Thanks King. Same to you. I hope you enjoyed your 4 glasses of wine.

[King Salvo]

3 more neutralised

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-811501

[King Salvo]

19 more Senior Nazi Islamic Terrorists Neutralised plus Nazi Hamas leader Haniyeh as well - now for the Tunnel Rat Nazi Sinwar

[4 the all in brawl]

19 more Senior Nazi Islamic Terrorists Neutralised plus Nazi Hamas leader Haniyeh as well - now for the Tunnel Rat Nazi Sinwar

Good riddance to those grubs...BUT!!!!

How many civilians also died in the strike (including women, children and the elderly)????

No one really wins in War......I hate the glorification of it......

[Random Rooster]

Good riddance to those grubs...BUT!!!!

How many civilians also died in the strike (including women, children and the elderly)????

No one really wins in War......I hate the glorification of it......

Nearly 40,000 in Gaza including 15,000 children. Theres still 600,000 Palestinians in Gaza- a real fertile ground for the recruitment of future terrorists. Then there is 450 million Arabs who watch Al Jazeera and see the unfiltered footage of schools, hospitals, designated "safe spaces" being blown up-every single day- no civilian spared. What you think they would be thinking? Ill give you a hint- they don't scare easily

[4 the all in brawl]

Nearly 40,000 in Gaza including 15,000 children. Theres still 600,000 Palestinians in Gaza- a real fertile ground for the recruitment of future terrorists. Then there is 450 million Arabs who watch Al Jazeera and see the unfiltered footage of schools, hospitals, designated "safe spaces" being blown up-every single day- no civilian spared. What you think they would be thinking? Ill give you a hint- they don't scare easily

Crazy numbers.......
Its a never ending cycle, hate breeds hate, the survivors of the next generation (plus countless others from those 450m you refer to) will seek revenge and the violence, carnage, bloodshed and misery will continue....
How many more innocents both Arab and Israeli have to lose their lives for absolutely nothing?

[Random Rooster]

Crazy numbers.......
Its a never ending cycle, hate breeds hate, the survivors of the next generation (plus countless others from those 450m you refer to) will seek revenge and the violence, carnage, bloodshed and misery will continue....
How many more innocents both Arab and Israeli have to lose their lives for absolutely nothing?

Read the following in the SMH today and i agree with most of it. It's written by Dr Rodger Shanahan- an expert witness in Australian terrorism cases and is the author of Islamic State in Australia. As an army officer, his operational experience included Lebanon, Syria and Afghanistan. It may be of interest to you.....

For all the killing, destruction and displacement wrought upon Gaza over the past 10 months, Israel is likely to be less safe when military operations end than when they began. Nobody denies that Israel had a right to defend itself in response to Hamas’s own terrorist bloodletting against Israeli civilians, but vengeance is not a strategy. And too much of the Netanyahu government’s decision-making has been driven by a short-term desire for vengeance rather than a long-term need to provide for Israel’s future security.

At present, Israel is militarily engaged on multiple fronts, and has shown that it has excellent regional intelligence capabilities and the technical means to exploit that intelligence to achieve tactical victories. But those short-term tactical victories have disguised, and in some cases increased, the strategic threat Israel will face in the future.

The most obvious threat will be from Gaza. In the absence of a post-conflict plan for the governance or security of Gaza, tens of thousands dead and many more wounded, and more than half the buildings destroyed or damaged, the physical reconstruction of the Palestinian coastal strip will take a generation. Everyone in Gaza’s population of 600,000 will have been affected by the conflict.

And while Israel’s actions were in response to an attack by Hamas, any blame that may have been aimed at Hamas’s leadership is likely to be directed at Israel instead for the sheer magnitude of destruction they have wrought upon Gaza. To paraphrase a Vietnam War-era quote, there is a sense that the Israeli military and political mindset was that to “save” Gaza it was necessary to destroy it. In reality though, there was never a sense of saving Gaza, only of punishing it.

Once the guns fall silent, Hamas will not have been destroyed. Badly damaged for sure, but militarily destroying an organisation like Hamas is virtually impossible, and certainly an unachievable strategic aim. And with a median age of under 20, Gazans will have long memories of what has happened to them and their families and there will be an almost unlimited ability for groups such as Hamas to recruit new fighters who will have a deep-seated hatred of Israel.

To the north of the country, since Lebanese Hezbollah began its supporting action against Israel following the October 7 attack, the Israeli military has exacted a high cost on the semi-state actor, killing more than 400 of its fighters, including some mid-ranking commanders and a more senior operational commander in Faud Shukr.

But Hezbollah is a robust organisation that knows everyone is a potential martyr and therefore replaceable, so while the deaths of these commanders may provide a short-term fillip for the Israeli government, the strategic impact is limited if it exists at all. Israel’s targeted killing in 1992 of Abbas Musawi, the then secretary-general of Hezbollah, led to the emergence of its present leader Hassan Nasrallah who has overseen the group’s rise to levels of political influence and military strength that dwarfs that achieved under Mussawi. Sometimes targeting the existing leadership simply allows the emergence of more effective replacements.

The present conflict has also taught Hezbollah some important strategic lessons. Despite its losses and the impact on local Lebanese, the constant but relatively low-profile strikes against northern Israel has also imposed a significant economic cost on Israel as tens of thousands of Israelis remain displaced and living in other parts of Israel. And Hezbollah has also tested a range of capabilities that could be used in future conflict, including a drone attack more than 30 kilometres inside Israel that damaged the multimillion-dollar Sky Dew aerial surveillance balloon.

In the case of Iran, Tehran had always preferred to put military pressure on Israel through its proxies and allies, in the belief that a direct attack against Israel would have consequences for Iran that could not be justified. Yet Israel’s April strike against Tehran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus that killed two senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers forced Iran’s hand. It was nevertheless careful to forego the element of surprise so that Israel and its allies had time to establish a layered air defence system that destroyed the majority of the Iranian drones and projectiles before they reached their targets. Having now crossed the threshold of directly attacking Israel, Tehran may be less constrained by it in the future. Or at least Israel can be less sure that Iran feels constrained. Again, Israel’s tactical success in Damascus may have negative strategic implications.


The Houthi movement has also imposed an economic cost on Israel through its targeting of Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea, as well demonstrating an ability to strike directly at the heart of Tel Aviv. And the recent death of a senior Houthi missile commander in a strike in Iraq that killed a number of Iraqi militia operatives highlights the degree to which the present drawn-out conflict has allowed a greater degree of co-operation between disparate members of the so-called Axis of Resistance than existed prior to the Gaza operation.

There is no question that the Netanyahu government had to militarily respond to the Hamas terrorist attack. Yet the strategic aims it set itself, along with the scale and duration of the Gaza operation should have been constructed so that at the end of the military campaign Israel was more secure than it was at the start. Yet in its local and regional response Israel has mistaken tactical acumen for strategic acuity. In trying to destroy Hamas by military means alone and therefore prolonging Gaza’s misery, Israel’s future security is now less certain.

[4 the all in brawl]

Read the following in the SMH today and i agree with most of it. It's written by Dr Rodger Shanahan- an expert witness in Australian terrorism cases and is the author of Islamic State in Australia. As an army officer, his operational experience included Lebanon, Syria and Afghanistan. It may be of interest to you.....

For all the killing, destruction and displacement wrought upon Gaza over the past 10 months, Israel is likely to be less safe when military operations end than when they began. Nobody denies that Israel had a right to defend itself in response to Hamas’s own terrorist bloodletting against Israeli civilians, but vengeance is not a strategy. And too much of the Netanyahu government’s decision-making has been driven by a short-term desire for vengeance rather than a long-term need to provide for Israel’s future security.

At present, Israel is militarily engaged on multiple fronts, and has shown that it has excellent regional intelligence capabilities and the technical means to exploit that intelligence to achieve tactical victories. But those short-term tactical victories have disguised, and in some cases increased, the strategic threat Israel will face in the future.

The most obvious threat will be from Gaza. In the absence of a post-conflict plan for the governance or security of Gaza, tens of thousands dead and many more wounded, and more than half the buildings destroyed or damaged, the physical reconstruction of the Palestinian coastal strip will take a generation. Everyone in Gaza’s population of 600,000 will have been affected by the conflict.

And while Israel’s actions were in response to an attack by Hamas, any blame that may have been aimed at Hamas’s leadership is likely to be directed at Israel instead for the sheer magnitude of destruction they have wrought upon Gaza. To paraphrase a Vietnam War-era quote, there is a sense that the Israeli military and political mindset was that to “save” Gaza it was necessary to destroy it. In reality though, there was never a sense of saving Gaza, only of punishing it.

Once the guns fall silent, Hamas will not have been destroyed. Badly damaged for sure, but militarily destroying an organisation like Hamas is virtually impossible, and certainly an unachievable strategic aim. And with a median age of under 20, Gazans will have long memories of what has happened to them and their families and there will be an almost unlimited ability for groups such as Hamas to recruit new fighters who will have a deep-seated hatred of Israel.

To the north of the country, since Lebanese Hezbollah began its supporting action against Israel following the October 7 attack, the Israeli military has exacted a high cost on the semi-state actor, killing more than 400 of its fighters, including some mid-ranking commanders and a more senior operational commander in Faud Shukr.

But Hezbollah is a robust organisation that knows everyone is a potential martyr and therefore replaceable, so while the deaths of these commanders may provide a short-term fillip for the Israeli government, the strategic impact is limited if it exists at all. Israel’s targeted killing in 1992 of Abbas Musawi, the then secretary-general of Hezbollah, led to the emergence of its present leader Hassan Nasrallah who has overseen the group’s rise to levels of political influence and military strength that dwarfs that achieved under Mussawi. Sometimes targeting the existing leadership simply allows the emergence of more effective replacements.

The present conflict has also taught Hezbollah some important strategic lessons. Despite its losses and the impact on local Lebanese, the constant but relatively low-profile strikes against northern Israel has also imposed a significant economic cost on Israel as tens of thousands of Israelis remain displaced and living in other parts of Israel. And Hezbollah has also tested a range of capabilities that could be used in future conflict, including a drone attack more than 30 kilometres inside Israel that damaged the multimillion-dollar Sky Dew aerial surveillance balloon.

In the case of Iran, Tehran had always preferred to put military pressure on Israel through its proxies and allies, in the belief that a direct attack against Israel would have consequences for Iran that could not be justified. Yet Israel’s April strike against Tehran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus that killed two senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers forced Iran’s hand. It was nevertheless careful to forego the element of surprise so that Israel and its allies had time to establish a layered air defence system that destroyed the majority of the Iranian drones and projectiles before they reached their targets. Having now crossed the threshold of directly attacking Israel, Tehran may be less constrained by it in the future. Or at least Israel can be less sure that Iran feels constrained. Again, Israel’s tactical success in Damascus may have negative strategic implications.


The Houthi movement has also imposed an economic cost on Israel through its targeting of Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea, as well demonstrating an ability to strike directly at the heart of Tel Aviv. And the recent death of a senior Houthi missile commander in a strike in Iraq that killed a number of Iraqi militia operatives highlights the degree to which the present drawn-out conflict has allowed a greater degree of co-operation between disparate members of the so-called Axis of Resistance than existed prior to the Gaza operation.

There is no question that the Netanyahu government had to militarily respond to the Hamas terrorist attack. Yet the strategic aims it set itself, along with the scale and duration of the Gaza operation should have been constructed so that at the end of the military campaign Israel was more secure than it was at the start. Yet in its local and regional response Israel has mistaken tactical acumen for strategic acuity. In trying to destroy Hamas by military means alone and therefore prolonging Gaza’s misery, Israel’s future security is now less certain.

Thanks RR, interesting read, and a good analysis, I cannot see a lot of SMH articles behind the firewall now......

[Jacks Fur Coat]

This one is a big'un for us domestically and certainly politically for the Albanese govt.

What do you think about the relatively huge intake of Gazan residents into Australia since the 7th Oct massacre in Israel? Worse still, the fact that a some of them were approved in less than an hour, and most within 24 hours. Usually proper security checks would take much longer and be more appropriately rigorous.

Pistol Pete and the Coalition hammered the Govt in Question Time last week on this, and Albanese and his lackeys refused to answer the direct questions. It was labelled Visas for Votes which appears to be the motivation to shore up their seats in western Sydney with large Muslim populations. But at what cost?

Other countries have taken a few hundred or none in many cases. Yet we have taken nearly 3 fricken thousand!! The other Middle East countries have taken in....zero!

And more than half of Gazans admit they support the 7th Oct massacre. And many celebrated in the street (similar to a few here).

This seems incredible on face value, but it is sadly real. Do we really want more people who have been born and raised to hate Jews and western values in this country?

The left wing ideologies are tanking here now, but surely our national security should be the main game in town?

[Mickie Lane]

You will never see it this way Jax but if the coalistion countries mainly America & Israel would stop invading the Middle Eastern countries & causing so much destruction then there wouldn't be all these displaced Arabs that need to get out.