Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

VLCCs are already 2/3 the oil traffic, but yeah, rough day to be a small ship with cheap cargo.
 help



Israel is already breaking the ceasefire conditions. Ref: "Netanyahu: Ceasefire doesn’t cover Lebanon" https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/netanyahu-cease...

Israel violated the 2024 ceasefire over 10,000 times [0], not counting all the ones since Feb. 28. I guess this time they're not satisfied with having only 50 "freebies" a day.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Israel%E2%80%93Lebanon_ce...


Have Israel ever respected a ceasefire?

Has Hamas or Hezbollah?

You seem to be implying Israel is no better than a terrorist group.

Not only is it no better, it is significantly worse.

Hamas is the (originally elected by the people) government of Gaza. Hezbollah is a partner of and inside Lebanon's government.

In addition, both parties are who Israel was nominally in a ceasefire with. So extremely relevant to the discussion about Israel and ceasefires and not random whataboutism.

You seem to be implying discussion should be waived away if a counter party is both a government and a terrorist organization.


Not sure why you're replying to me?

I'm not the one comparing Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah.

Though next time I'll put terrorist group in quotes, as everyone has their own opinion.


[flagged]


What's my argument? He's the one that used them for comparison.

[flagged]


Are you sure? The ADL says Jewish Voice for Peace are antisemitic: https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/jewish-voice-peac...

Less times than Israel, and usually in response.

Israel has done more terrorism than Hamas.


Not only that, but Israel financed Hamas to politically destabilize Palestine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas

why is that relevant? Israel is a nation state, the others are 'terrorist groups'. are they equivalent? your response seems to imply that.

Interesting.


Israel is not a nation state but a western colony in Palestine (like Tibet is a Chinese colony, or Algeria was for france).

Hamas is the government in Gaza who the ceasefire was with and whose acts it was contingent on.

Hezbollah is part of the government in Lebanon and who the ceasefire was with and whose acts in was contingent on.

The relevance is pretty obvious.

'why are do you want to include both sides (including the actual governments on both sides) in a discussion about ceasefire' is a wild take.


They have a far better track record. The other side constantly lies and violates every rule.


Textbook whataboutism.

Israel would not be doing this if not for the continuous attacks from those jihadist groups (well funded by Iran). But you know that.

The Nakba was not provoked by jihadist groups, it was provoked by colonial invaders. The victimization narrative never worked.

Ceasefire include removing Hizballa from Lebanon, but facts doesn't matter for terror supporters

Territorial expansion was probably always Israel's goal of this, with a bonus of weakening a regional rival.

In the 75 years of their existence it seems like they suck at expansion.

They should take a page from Indonesia’s book for example. Or turkey.


Indonesia?

Takeover of half of Papua New Guinea, now called irian Jaya. Transmigration, that is, moving Java people there and to Borneo (Kalimantan)in order to flood local populations with Malays.

But this did not make the news that much. Not that interesting I guess…


[flagged]


No…attacks do not follow as a consequence from the action of giving land back. The conclusion from this reasoning would be to forever expand your borders. If it cannot be that the positive action of giving land causes an attack, think about what the real cause may be.

They have given back territory they don’t care about (Sinai), or “given back” territory but kept it under a permanent near-total blockade and military control (Gaza), but never given back territory they do care about and which is the main sticking point of the conflict (East Jerusalem and the West Bank). And they never will unless someone forces them to, which is unlikely.

[flagged]


> 1. Assure there will not be forces

It's not israel's place as the aggressor to "assure" anything. Lebanon (and Palestine) have *at least* as much right to be safe from israel as israel has to be safe from them.

"Assuring" as used by you here should be taken in the same context as a controlling abuser "assuring" their spouse never disobeys them, or afrikaaners "assuring" that South Africans of other races have no power.

> 2. Acquire a bargaining chip ahead of a future peace agreement with Lebanon

Yes, this is territorial expansion as mentioned above.

> 3. Signal to the Iranian axis and the rest of the Middle East that it has won this war

Why would israel signal that Iran has won this war? Seems like they'd want to avoid attention on that.


[flagged]


Do you not read the news? Israel was bombing Lebanon DAILY and occupying parts of southern Lebanon throughout the so called ceasefire. All without Hezbollah firing a single shot in retalliation until Israel and the US attacked Iran DURING NEGOTIATIONS!

If it wasn't for Israel's dogged expansionism, Hezballah would never have been created, Hamas would never have been created and Palestine would still be a liberal democracy.

Hamas was created with Israel support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas

"...In an interview with Israeli journalist, Dan Margalit in December 2012, Netanyahu told Margalit that it was important to keep Hamas strong, as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Netanyahu also added that having two strong rivals, this would lessen pressure on him to negotiate towards a Palestinian state..."


>Palestine would still be a liberal democracy

When was Palestine a liberal democracy?


PA

Their brief democratic period was inconvenient to Israel, which is why when Netanyahu decided to fund Hamas, he first said that Hamas is important to keep Palestine divided.


Man, Hezbollah was, literally, created as an answer to Israel attacks.

> Without attacks from Hezballah and other Iranian backed groups Isreal would not have attacked targets in Lebanon

Israel also bombed southern Syria, to "protect the druze community". Syria has not attacked Israel, there are some random terrorist groups who did, but they attacked Israels' occupying forces in Syria.


Syria tried to genocide the druze. Out in public - and the international community just didn't give a damn. Israel was the only faction to defend minorities against the facist, islamo-supremacist hordes of the current syrian government.

israel is actually genociding Palestinians, so this excuse is pretty laughable. Especially since israel is claiming control over the land, just like they invade Lebanon "for defense", just like they invade Gaza "for defense", and now they attack Iran "for defense".

Wake up: pretty much nobody believes the fascist, judeo-supremacist hordes of the current israeli government.


nobody in your echo chamber you mean?

Of course not, why would I mean that?

Are you sure you aren't in one of your own? Look to UNGA resolutions to see what it looks like outside the chamber.


Forward-defending by making a million people homeless and taking 13% of the country.

I think that expelling all shia muslims from the recently conquered territory is a bit more than defending oneself.

It is. Actions go beyond what is minimally necessary to ensure security but without attacks from Hezbollah there would be no military actions in Lebanon. Israel doesn't attack Jordan or Egypt because they don't host Iranian backed militants who do attack. Lebanon will be in the same position if Hezbollah will be gone (which is not given).

> without attacks from Hezbollah there would be no military actions in Lebanon.

Without attacks from israel, there would be no response from Lebanon, Palestine, Iran, etc.


It's clear that israel is an attacker here, and Iran, Palestine, and Lebanon are defending. Without attacks from israel and other israel backed groups, iran would not have attacked targets in israel. Even the most recent escalation started with israel (and the USA) attacking Iran a few weeks ago, not the other way around.

Your take seems to hinge on holding an unfounded bayesian prior that israel is "the good guy" and therefore everything they do must be "defending". The world does not share this unfounded bayesian prior of yours, and thus remains unconvinced of the resulting conclusions drawn by israel and yourself. You will have to do a better job of convincing others, rather than simply asserting your opinions at them.


I think you are a bit confused as to what the role of a state should be. A state is not set up to appease international bodies, or to be a convenient neighbor or to be likable by throwaway accounts on HN. Its first and only duty is towards its citizens. The same people who pay taxes, vote and serve in the armed forces. And if an Iranian militia sets up post two miles away from your towns, digs cross border attack tunnels to prepare for a raid and shoots missiles and drones at you, you better believe that country is going to respond in force.

Israel had previously turned a blind eye to that after the large big confrontation in 2006, but since October 7th - and conveniently, Hezbollah unilaterally joining the attack on Israel a day later - a switch was flipped and Israel went all out, as was its duty.


If Israel is interested in protecting its citizenry, it should probably stop letting them occupy the territory of its neighbors, or rape prisoners.

Sometimes preventing blowback is the best strategy.


It's easy to read your statement as having been said of Ukraine by Putin. And just as oblivious to why your neighbor isn't your friend, and is setting up defenses, and is fighting back against your attacks and frequent territorial incursions.

Both russia and israel feel they should be able to unilaterally control their neighbors, and both have an equal non-right to do so. Both claim neighboring country land should be theirs, and both use military force and genocide to make that happen. Both even believe it is their religious birthright to do so.

israel and russia: two self-righteous peas in a pod.


They’ll probably receive most if not all of Iran’s focus now.

Perhaps they'll pro-rate it by size.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: