38 thoughts on “BREAKING: Hamas Fires Iranian-Made Cruise Missiles for First Time, Five Israelis Killed – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

      1. You have a point, of course. At the same time, I object to the formulation ‘Israelis.’ After all, we’re not talking about Muslim or Christian ‘Israelis’ mounting these attacks. We mean — even if you don’t like the term — Jewish Israelis. Is it really somehow inaccurate to describe them as ‘Jews’? Less inaccurate than to refer to them as ‘Israelis’ — as if these are acts supported by all Israelis, regardless of confession.

        1. Gentile is a term meaning not-Jewish.This is about Israelis and Palestinians, territorial.Is it about religion? Maybe yes too, intertwined. Given the imbalance of power and Israel’s policy of using overwhelming response militarily, Palestinians have to take (& learned to take/sacrifice- not easily by any means) a lot more death and destruction (8 or 10 to 1) when they uprise. Israelis who live safe and secure by and large do not suffer daily and are affected and outraged.

        2. @ Colin Wright
          Israeli means Jewish Israeli, in fact a High Court jugement from 2013 states so, and you also seem to mix up religion and ethnicity: Jews is not comparable to Muslims and Christians here but to Arabs.

  1. ‘Finally, it’s rather shocking that in light of the impending ICC investigation of Israel for war crimes against Palestinians since 2014, Netanyahu hasn’t realized that all of the acts of child murder seen in the past few days will bolster these charges and strengthen the chance for a court case and conviction of Israel’s military and political leadership.’

    You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that a Jewish state could be subject to international law.

  2. not sure what everyone is drinking, but can we look at the facts, arabs initiated violence at mosque, throwing rocks etc at israeli police, hamas in gaza intitiated shooting of rockets at israeli citizens, now that is for some reason all considered a legitimate fight, but when israel dares to defend itself and its citizens, by targeting hamas, jihad members, who deviously locate themselves in heavily populated civilian areas, oh no, we can’t accept that.

    the dispute over building in east jerusalem is a legal matter being dealt with by the courts, all sides should respect due process etc, to use this as justification for violence and targeting of innocent civilians is bizarre.

    israel allows access to al asqa to all arabs etc and generally does not allow jews access although it is judaisms holiest site. Did jews get access to western wall or any other holy sites in old city while under jordanian rule? on the contrary, jordan demolished many synagogues etc. think everyone should remove their preconceived notions and biases and simply examine the facts on the ground

    1. @ ock:

      can we look at the facts,

      We can. But you apparently can’t.

      arabs initiated violence at mosque

      No, Border Police prohibited worshippers from gathering at Damascus Gate. This in turn led to riots and protests. Then police invaded Haram al Sharif. Obviously if Palestinian shock troops had invaded the Jerusalem’s Great Synagogue, Jews would rally from throughout the country to defend it. WHich is precisely what Palestinians did at Al Aqsa.

      hamas in gaza intitiated shooting of rockets at israeli citizens

      Yes, they did after Border Police defiled al Aqsa. Totally understandable.

      israel dares to defend itself

      It is not defending itself. It is engaging in war crimes and genocide. It is inciting violence, provoking Palestinians to respond.

      hamas, jihad members, who deviously locate themselves in heavily populated civilian areas

      Nonsense, nothing devious about it at all. Gaza is a tiny enclave under siege. So Hamas must fight in populated areas to defend its territory from Israeli aggression.

      the dispute over building in east jerusalem is a legal matter

      No, it’s not a legal matter. DIsplacing indigenous residents of occupied territory is a violation of international law. And the courts finding that Judeo-Nazis may steal property from Palestinians who’ve lived in these homes is not jurisprudence. It is the law in service to apartheid.

      all sides should respect due process

      What due process? THere is no due process. Finding that because Jews lived in these homes before 1948 means that Judeo-Nazis who never owned or lived in them may now steal them out from under the noses to the Palestinian residents is “due process?” Puh-leeze!

      israel allows access to al asqa to all arabs e

      No, it doesn’t It routinely restricts access to Haram al Sharif. And did so last week when it blocked buses from traveling to the holy site, forcing worshippers to walk miles to get there.

      generally does not allow jews access

      Another lie. Judeo-Nazis routinely invade the Haram al Sharif where they pray and agitate for its destruction and replacement by the Third Temple.

      You are done in this thread. Do not publish another comment here. And in future do not publish lies and unsubstantiated claims here. Do not publish propaganda here which is easily refuted by facts. I put you on notice. Respect the comment rules, read them–or you will not be here long.

      1. @ SimoHurtta: Thanks for catching that error. I was using this Asia Times article behind a paywall. The article said Hamas had Iranian cruise missiles and mentioned the Khaibar, so I thought it was too. But now that I’ve gotten hold of the full article I can see the author mentioned various Iranian cruise missiles but didn’t definitively say which ones Hamas has.

  3. Richard:

    The borderline antisemitism aside, in the interests of there being light as well as heat, what is your understanding of the exact sequence of events Monday?

    I understand there were goings-on in Jerusalem, and then Israel started bombing Gaza.

    In between, what actual acts of aggression came out of Gaza? The dread incendiary balloons — everyone seems to agree about that. What else? Fired by whom?

    1. Given that his name is Silverstein, and that he can speak and read Hebrew, I’m going to take a real wild guess and say that he’s Jewish. So, uh, you might want to try a different tact than accusing him of antisemitism.

  4. “Seven of the deaths were members of a single family, including three children, who died in a mysterious explosion in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun. It was not clear if the blast was caused by an Israeli airstrike or errant rocket.”

    Richard, your own linked citation doesn’t blame Israel for the death of this poor family in Beit Hanoun, yet you do, a glaring contradiction.

    BTW. Greta said, “Iran is not in Gaza and both Hezbollah and Hamas are resistance groups as well as members of the government”, yet according to Richard’s ‘source’, Iran is very much in Gaza, or at least her cruise missiles are.

    I have my doubts about Hamas use of a cruise missile against Israel
    Why would Hamas use precise missile technology to bomb Rishon Le Tzion? Why not target cental Tel Aviv? The Kirya?
    Makes no sense to me, but maybe Richard’s ‘source’ has a better explanation.

    Assuming Richard’s source is correct and Hamas is using cruise weapons against high-value targets in Israel, why haven’t these accurate missiles hit their mark?

    1. @ Mighty: Here is a comment rule which you now must follow: do not publish more than three comments during any 24 hr period.

      It is ludicrous to claim that an entire family was wiped out during a period of intense Israeli air strikes, yet Israel wasn’t at fault. This is outrageous and heartless. I don’t care if you want to defend Israel. But when people are dying, you may not attempt to deflect blame from the authors of these murders: Israel.

      As for your doubts, I could care less. I assure you my source knows whereof he speaks. WHereas you…not so much.

      You’re asking why cruise missiles which have destroyed homes throughout Israel and killed 2 Israelis “haven’t hit their mark?” Again, are you daft? Of course they’ve hit their mark. But you neglect the fact that half of Israel is now in bomb shelters, which prevent tens, if not hundreds of deaths from these missiles.

      Do not publish another comment in this thread.

      1. Of course they’ve hit their mark.

        Then Hamas and IJ are flagrantly committing War Crimes.
        Fair statement?

        Richard. Why not once, just once, commit to print that these two Palestinian groups are war criminals.

        1. @ Veni: You haven’t been reading my blog. I’ve often noted that both Israeli and Palestinians will likely be charged with war crimes if there are any indictments filed. But I’ve also added a major caveat: that the crimes of the Israelis are far more egregious than those of the Palestinians, such as they are.

  5. I don’t like the implication here that suggests Iran is instigating the fighting right now through Hamas. They are in the midst of restoring the nuclear deal and lifting sanctions on their country. Why would they jeopardize that now by starting a military conflict with Israel through its proxies? If this reporting is true, you know the AIPAC lobby is going to use it to incite the Biden administration to pull out of the talks in Vienna and scrap the deal all together, possibly adding harsher sanctions on top of it. Why risk this now when they are so close to getting what they want through diplomacy? It makes no sense to me. I get that they want revenge for the assassination of Soleimani and the attacks on their nuclear program, but this is the worst time to do it. Why not wait to see if the talks work or fail first? A deal appears to be so close. Why throw it all away? I refuse to believe they would act so irrationally, considering that they have primarily been acting very strategically in the past. It’s more likely Hamas has decided to act on their own. At least, that’s the hope here. The alternate is going to end really badly for the world.

    1. Liam, you cannot assume that Iran’s government is monolithic.

      From what I understand, Iran’s government is deeply polarized, and the factions there oppose each other with a vigor we are not accustomed to in the West.

      It’s well known that the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei and his personal army, the IRGC, strongly oppose the nuclear deal.

      1. @ Mighty:

        It’s well known that the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei…strongly oppose[s] the nuclear deal.

        NOnsense. Khamenei controls Iran’s foreign and security policy. There would be no negotiations in Vienna unless he approved them. There could have been no JCPOA in 2015 without his approval. Of course, he is skeptical of US intentions and actions. And is suspicious about whether the US is sincere in seeking to return to the deal and remove sanctions. But that’s different than “strongly opposing the nuclear deal.” Your understanding of Iran’s internal dynamics is piss-poor.

        You are done in this thread.

    2. @ Liam: Iran is no different than Israel. When its interests are damaged it reacts. When its nuclear scientists are assassaniated; its missles bases destroyed; its ships mined and damaged; its military commander in chief assassinated–it reserves the right to respond. Iran is also a proud nation. It will not stand back and be steamrollered by Israel. Iran has as much right to act in its own defense as Israel or the US does. And Iran knows that just as the US stood back and said nothing when Israel attacked it, that the US will have no right to complain about its weapons being used in this current round of fighting.

      I would suggest instead of trying to impose your own judgement on Iran, that you try to understand how Iran’s leadership might look on matters.

      1. The problem is that most of congress and the Israeli lobbying groups are just looking for anything they could use to sabotage the nuclear deal and agitating Hamas to attack now gives them that talking point. It shouldn’t make a difference in the negotiations since nations have a right to respond to provocations. However, when your country has been dealing with crippling sanctions for years and the threat of upheaval instigated by outside agitators, there is something to be said for instituting a policy of restraint during sensitive times.

        The US is not a trustworthy actor, that much is true. Any deal that they agree to with the Biden administration can easily be undone by the next Republican president, as we saw under Trump. However, it just does not seem strategically smart to me to pick a fight now unless there is an internal determination that the talks in Vienna are doomed to fail. Outward indications seem to suggest that there will be a breakthrough soon. Not to mention that, in the event of a full scale military conflict, Iran does not have the upper hand over Israel unless it rallies the rest of the region to its side. I just don’t see how their actions here make sense.

        I don’t see this as an imposition of judgement on my behalf. I see it as being incredibly confused and wondering what the end game is here. Maybe they are privy to information we aren’t or have made calculations we aren’t aware of internally, but from the outside looking in, it’s baffling that they would push this now.

        1. From the outside looking at this it seems to me that what should be taken into account, if you put yourself in Iran’s shoes, is that any deal with a US administration can not be firm/depended on. Trump has taught a lesson. Thus, this and continuing on their nuclear program (incl. threats).

          1. Then why even engage in talks with the US to restore the nuclear deal in Vienna if you simply can’t trust them to follow through on their commitments? If that were the determination, why even bother putting on a show? If the goal was to just go for the military option, which is something that the Revolutionary Guard has wanted all along, why not just do that and stop the charade of useless meetings with various world leaders to press for a resolution to the stalemate?

            It feels like if that were the path they wanted to go, which they would have every right to do, by the way, they’d end the talks and just use their troops. It doesn’t exactly help their credibility if they are, on the one hand, trying to come to agreement on curbing their nuclear program, but then on the other hand, pressing military options that threaten the success of such an accord.

            Again, there may be internal deliberations that we aren’t privy to, but I really don’t feel like they can have their cake and eat it too. The US will never allow it. Either they go the diplomacy route or the military route. Trying to have it both ways only ensures a failure of both. Maybe we’ll find out what they are thinking soon enough, but with Israel trying so hard to sabotage the diplomatic route, it should send a signal to Iran that this is the best option to take if there are such aggressive attempts to thwart it. Of course, I could be wrong and that the US has never been serious about reaching a deal, which in that case, let the chips fall as they may. However, if there are genuine offers of peace, I don’t see why Iran would risk sabotaging them.

          2. Troops? To do what? They are into asymmetrical warfare. They have interests, just as Israel and Saudi Arabia have their own. I don’t believe they want war, but they will show their power.They are willing to curb their nuclear program.But They are standing up for themselves.

            Iran shows that they have a right, a collective will, and power of their own.Their dignity needs to be respected. They are showing they can do damage.They have been restrained given that they are being squeezed.They again prove they can go nuclear.

            The US does not (to my knowledge) want to merely return to the previous deal.There is the need pushed by some here and in Israel to get a better (wider) deal (see Trump and those prior who complained loudly about the original deal) when initially it was just about the development nuclear weapons. Iran agreed and abided. They are now not getting the relief promised so Iran has a right to ratchet up their program and the pressure. They say they are still wiling to comply with the original agreement. *They are not happy that Trump administration reneged on the deal and then killed one of their generals in Iraq. But it does prove to them that the temperature changes here with administrations.

            1.Iran has a legitimate issue about Israel’s undeclared nukes. 2.Iran has a legitimate claim to a sphere of influence in the area.

            Iran has great pride, culture and history. Internally religiously politically we have no more right to change them than China or anyone else, including Saudi Arabia. Look at who we aid militarily! Israel, the Saudi’s.

  6. Gross negligence by International community for decades … turning point the assassination of PM Yitzak Rabin … destroyed Oslo Accord… rise of extremism in Israel … Peres, Sharon, Barak, Netanyahu … the global community and the UNSC need to ACT … words won’t suffice. 
    Israel has used 9/11 to call Palestinian fight for independence … terrorism … stupidity by US – George Bush- NATO to become more aggressive … a lot needs to change … a culture to fight for Peace … media play a role in bias and propaganda … hopefully Israel overplayed its hand for the world to see … house of cards 😡 anger 
    Role Turkey maybe crucial … calls to leave NATO!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *