13

9 comments

[–] smallpond 1 points (+1|-0)

I see that as your failure. If Iran destroys an Israeli military base in Syria, one would not include "Iran destroys Israel" in a title. (Though perhaps this Israeli newspaper would).

"Israel" means a lot more than "Israeli military bases in Syria".

[–] chmod [OP] 1 points (+2|-1)

You need to re-read. Not an Israeli military base in Syria. Nowhere does it say anything you are talking about.

Read.

[–] smallpond 0 points (+1|-1) Edited

You're right, I didn't read that carefully enough. For that I apologize.

The article says that the bases were located in the Golan Heights. From Golan Heights:

Between 1967 and the beginning of the Syrian Civil War, the western two-thirds of the Golan Heights had become occupied and administered by Israel,[1][2] whereas the eastern third had remained under control of the Syrian Arab Republic, with the UNDOF maintaining a 266 km2 buffer zone in between, to implement the ceasefire of the Purple Line.[10]

From the article itself:

Residents of both the Israeli and Syrian Golan Heights reported hearing loud, repeated explosions.

Unless you can see something I've missed, the article doesn't state whether the military bases were in the Israeli occupied Golan Heights, the Syrian Golan Heights, or in the buffer zone inbetween.

Despite that the title implies that Iran fired missiles at the geographic region of Israel by stating "Iranian forces fire 20 rockets at Israel". If it turns out the bases were in Syria, "Israel" in the article title can be interpreted as meaning "Israeli forces", but I would still consider it misleading.

Even then I am being overly generous. Reading about the Golan Heights, calling the Israeli occupied portion "Israel" is probably incorrect. Again from Wikipedia:

Construction of Israeli settlements began in the remainder of the territory held by Israel, which was under military administration until Israel passed the Golan Heights Law extending Israeli law and administration throughout the territory in 1981.[11] This move was condemned by the United Nations Security Council in UN Resolution 497,[2][12] which stated that "the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect."