[Matl]

> in the 1980s and 1990s

Except Israel invaded Lebanon before that. It also engaged in assassinations, espionage, terror and sabotage before that. In fact Israelis engaged in those even before the state of Israel was officially pronounced.

I'm not saying the Iranians or Lebanese etc. never play dirty, but this portrayal of them as just irrational and aggressive for no reason whatsoever against their peace loving Israeli neighbors is just dishonest.

For one, neither the Iranians, nor the Lebanese are occupying foreign territory. The same cannot be said for the Israelis.

Israelis will say they invaded Lebanon in the 70s/80s because of the PLO, (no Hezbollah yet) however the PLO was itself a consequence of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.

In conclusion; there's a fairly simple way to disarm the Iranians and strip them and their proxies of any perceived legitimacy they may hold with anyone; stop occupying Palestine.

[gwerbin]

You're doing the same thing you're accusing the other person of.

The PLO was not an inevitable force of nature, it was an organization that consisted of human beings, making conscious decisions.

The British took Palestine from the Ottomans and handed it to the state of Israel. Maybe morally it's an occupation, but if so then the USA is occupying Hawaii.

[FireBeyond]

> Maybe morally it's an occupation, but if so then the USA is occupying Hawaii.

You realize that there's a non-negligible contingent of Hawaiians who absolutely believe this, too?

[gwerbin]

Yes that's why I brought it up. There's actually a substantially better argument for Hawaii because the USA just showed up and conquered the kingdom that was there. Whereas the Ottomans had Palestine for what, 500 years?

[breppp]

It's more complicated than that as the Palestinians are speaking the language of an earlier foreign colonizing empire that replaced another empire that ethnically cleansed the Jews and then colonized the area

[breppp]

> Except Israel invaded Lebanon before that. It also engaged in assassinations, espionage, terror and sabotage before that. In fact Israelis engaged in those even before the state of Israel was officially pronounced.

That is moving the goal posts, as these are not instances of attacking Iran, it's hard to claim Iran never attacked Israel first when it is either financing attacks against Israel or participating in them for the last 45+ years

> Israelis will say they invaded Lebanon in the 70s/80s because of the PLO, (no Hezbollah yet) however the PLO was itself a consequence of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.

Back when the PLO was founded there was no "foreign territory occupied by Israel", only internationally recognized Israeli borders and Gaza/West Bank which were under Egyptian/Jordanian occupation. Two countries that refused to create an independent Palestinian state

[Matl]

> as these are not instances of attacking Iran

No, they're instances of attacking Palestinians.

> it's hard to claim Iran never attacked Israel first when it is either financing attacks against Israel or participating in them for the last 45+ years

The Iranians supported the Palestinians Israel was attacking the same way the Soviets supported the Vietnamese. This was not the Soviets attacking the US, this was the Soviets supporting indigenous forces that the US was attacking. It's the same as the Israelis supporting Kurdish groups in Iran, Turkey etc.

These groups have their own motives and agency, the Lebanese opposed to Israel are not mere 'proxies' of Iran, neither are the Palestinians. They're opposed to Israel for their own reasons, namely Israel occupies their land.

If you're so concerned about Iran being able to come in and support them, then stop occupying foreign land and the whole reason Iran is able to make inroads with your neighbors disappears.

You won't do that of course, because Israel is the one who first conducted attacks on Iran directly. Therefore it does not get to play the card of being attacked. It invaded Syria too for no reason whatsoever, other than taking more land.

> Back when the PLO was founded there was no "foreign territory occupied by Israel", only internationally recognized Israeli borders and Gaza/West Bank which were under Egyptian/Jordanian occupation.

Which is why the PLO has a bloody conflict with Jordan, which you conveniently omit. It's almost as if they were opposed to being occupied, period.

When Israel invaded Lebanon back in the 70s/80s, it already took control of Gaza and the West Bank by that point.

> Two countries that refused to create an independent Palestinian state

I love this talking point. So because someone else was horrible to the Palestinians, that justifies Israel being horrible to them too?

[breppp]

> Which is why the PLO has a bloody conflict with Jordan, which you conveniently omit. It's almost as if they were opposed to being occupied, period.

The PLO tried to takeover Jordan after Jordan stopped occupying the West Bank, I don't see how that makes sense chronologically. You could also point at Palestinian attempts at taking over Lebanon, but that doesn't really support your argument that Palestinians are aggressive due to being under occupation

Regarding the Iranians comparison with the Soviets, The Soviets were an aggressive actor and that's why the world was on the brink of nuclear war numerous times in the 20th century, causing both sides to regulate. Iran had never really toned down its aggressive behavior towards Israel, culminating in the October 7th massacre and ended eventually with Iran in complete ruins

[Matl]

You're completely delusional. The Soviets were not an especially 'aggressive actor' compared to the West. You seem to forget that Western colonialism was why Vietnam started fighting in the first place.

If there's something you could count against the Soviets, it would be their support for Israel and arms supplies because they naively believed Israel would be a socialist state aligned with them.

And Iran was neither behind Ocrober 7, nor is it 'in complete ruins'.