Only Israel

It seems that the usual rules don’t apply when it comes to Israel. The atrocity that happened last October was a reasonable justification for turning Gaza into glass, frankly. Rooting out and killing Hamas, crushing it completely would have been a proportionate response, yet before Israel had responded, there were calls for a ceasefire and accusations of genocide (a grossly misused word and certainly not applicable here). What would any other country have done?

Now, as Andrew Neil reminds us, what would any other country have done if they had been on the receiving end of 300 drones and missiles?

Within hours of Iran‘s mass missile and drone attack on Israel overnight on Saturday, the consensus of the global commentariat forming in newspapers and TV channels was that Israel should refrain from retaliation.

Many political leaders, especially those always quick to tell Israel what it should do when attacked, echoed the need for restraint. It is quite remarkable advice for a country which has just been the target of more than 150 Iranian drones armed with explosives, around 30 cruise missiles and about 120 ballistic missiles.

If so many weapons of destruction had rained down on Britain, would we be listening to those urging caution, nodding thoughtfully at such sage advice and agreeing that it would probably be best for all concerned if we just sat on our hands? I suggest that any UK government which went along with that would quickly be driven from power.

Indeed. We would be retaliating in kind as would any other nation on the planet, yet the rules are different for Israel. Apparently, thy aren’t supposed to defend themselves when faced with such aggression.


  1. Anyone remember the American response to the planes flying into the twin towers? Did other Powers That Be urge restraint? Did America heed those calls?

  2. I thought Iran’s attack was a direct response to Israel bombing an Iranian embassy in Syria – arguably an attack of war against both countries. Israel may have every right to defend itself – but so do Iran & Syria.

    I believe that Iran have declared that this response is intended to finalise the matter (that Israel started), provided Israel doesn’t escalate further. Of course, Israel is desperate to drag the USA into a war against their mutual enemy Iran, so who knows what to expect next?

    • The embassy was being used for active warfare – see also hospitals in Gaza. That makes them legitimate military targets. Likewise retaliatory action for the missile attack is fair game.

      • That makes the UK, EU and USA legitimate targets for Russia then. After all, we aren’t just arming Ukraine, we are also providing radar coverage for their attacks on Russian forces and territory, e.g. the Kerch bridge.

        • Are we using consular buildings containing our military personnel from which to conduct the war against Russia? If so, those buildings would be a military target. If not, your analogy doesn’t hold up.

          • Yes, I believe we are. NATO meetings with military personnel co-ordinated with our NATO partners. As much as makes no difference, anyway.

            I am not arguing about Israel’s right to defend itself, but it behoves us to at least be honest about what is happening and what that means.

    • Iran is the major supplier of weapons to both Hamas and Hezbollah. One of the Iranian generals killed in Syria, Mohammad Reza Zahedi, helped plan the October 7 attack, as acknowledged in a statement by the Coalition Council of Islamic Revolution Forces. Iran, particularly its political and military personnel, is a legitimate military target of Israel.

      Notwithstanding the above, given all the rhetoric around Israel’s response to aggressive acts against it, did anyone hear people calling for Iran to show restraint or discussing if the Iranian attack was proportionate?

      • This being the point, of course. The one-sided approach to one country that has been fighting a defensive war on and off for seventy-odd years.

  3. This Iranian missile barrage is a response to Israel talking out 3 of their military commanders in an embassy in Syria.
    Israel say the commanders were part of the Oct 7 attacks.
    They also say they will respond. Probably attack Iranian nuclear facilities would be my guess.

    Round and round and round we go. Until we get dizzy and start to feel sick.
    It’s a never ending carousel of blame, counter blame, attack, retaliation, counter retaliation, misery and death.

    The best we can hope for is that we don’t get dragged into it. But seeing as how we already seem to be, (raf jets helping intercept missiles) it seems a good hope.

  4. Well if what we are told is true and that Israel shot down 99% of the missiles I would say what are they bitching about but we know that is not the truth don’t we.

  5. If Britain was invaded by millions of dangerous men what would our defence forces do?

  6. i’m not familiar with any embassy in Syria being bombed.
    The story I read was about the bombing of a consular building, a military establishment based on the ranks of the occupants.
    Why am I wrong Wildgoose, and why are you right?

    • It was part of the Iranian embassy. Are you suggesting that the presence of military officers is all that is required to make something a legitimate military target? If so, then fair enough. I am not suggesting either of us is “right” or “wrong”. I just want clarity, so that the rules for everybody are clearly understood.

      • I just want clarity, so that the rules for everybody are clearly understood.

        Isn’t that precisely what I’m saying here? Israel has every right to defend itself, yet the media and politicians worldwide are urging them to exercise restraint. I do not see them doing this with any other country that is fighting a defensive war. That was the point I’m making here – the hypocrisy. If anyone should be exercising restraint, it is Iran and its proxies.

        • People fighting a purely defensive war shouldn’t go around attacking additional countries in the hope it will widen the war and thus drag in more participants. Which is what Israel is clearly doing.

          And since the UK acts like a US lapdog that means dragging us in as well. It is possible to support Israel without uncritically agreeing with every stupid thing they do.

          • That’s a somewhat odd comment to make. A defensive war doesn’t preclude offensive action, taking the fighting to the enemy wherever he may be. Which is what Israel did. Iran is the enemy here, regardless of its proxies. We know it, they know it and the rest of the world knows it. Deniability is hardly plausible. Israel’s attack was justified. Any response to the drone attack will also be justified. Again, any other country in the world would have done exactly as they are doing, but when it’s Israel, apparently they must exercise restraint. That’s just hypocrisy.

Comments are closed.