Suspected Israeli warplanes bombed Iran's embassy in Syria on Monday, a marked escalation in a war pitting Israel against its regional adversaries, and Tehran said the strike killed seven military advisers including three senior commanders.
Reuters reporters at the site in the Mezzeh district of Damascus saw emergency workers clambering atop rubble of a destroyed building inside the diplomatic compound, adjacent to the main embassy building. Emergency vehicles were parked outside. An Iranian flag hung from a pole by the debris.
Okay, isn't bombing an embassy an absolutely insane escalation? Even throughout WW1, WW2, or any other war in the past century, no country was crazy enough to undermine the sanctity of diplomacy like this and antagonize everyone.
The only other time this has happened in history was when NATO bombed a Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, and even here the US — the most war-mongering nation on the planet — apologized, said it was a mistake (though it definitely wasn't — it was removed from the list of prohibited targets beforehand and struck 3 separate times), and paid for it to be rebuilt. Israel is completely unhinged.
Yes. This is generally agreed upon as being a terminal escalation.
Attacking diplomatic missions very quickly turns into no diplomacy between the two countries. This doesn’t leave many options other than military actions on the table.
Shit like this keeps happening and Iran just shows incredible amounts of restraint.
Meanwhile, the "only democracy in the Middle East" is allowed to act like a rabid dog.
It has ramped up those strikes in parallel with its campaign against Iran-backed Palestinian group Hamas, which ignited the Gaza war with an Oct. 7 attack on Israel that killed about 1,200 people and took 253 hostage, according to Israeli tallies.
No, Israel has had an active blockade on Gaza since 2007. A blockade is an act of war.
Israel has maintained effective control over Gaza since their military occupation ended almost 20 years ago, and they have really been making the Palestinians suffer.
Based on these considerations, some experts have found that “siege” better describes the situation.
However, the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights has said “the majority of international opinion” holds that Israel maintains effective control, even without armed forces present. While legal experts acknowledge that the lack of a military presence does not follow the “traditional approach” to analyzing effective control, they find that military presence is an “evidentiary test only.” They point to authorities such as the Israeli High Court, which have held that occupation status hinges on the exercise of effective control. They, therefore, find that technology has made it possible for Israel to use ongoing force to exercise effective control—imposing authority and preventing local authorities from exercising control—without a military presence.
Specifically, experts from the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory found “noting” positions held by the UN Security Council, UNGA, a 2014 declaration adopted by the Conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, the ICRC, and “positions of previous commissions of inquiry,” that Israel has “control exercised over, inter alia, [Gaza’s] airspace and territorial waters, land crossings at the borders, supply of civilian infrastructure, including water and electricity, and key governmental functions such as the management of the Palestinian population registry.” They also point to “other forms of force, such as military incursions and firing missiles.”
