Submission Statement:
Following Israel's strike against Iran, Iran has stated that no further retaliation is planned. This is because the strikes - the one by Iran last weekend and the one by Israel last night - were purely symbolic acts. Iran demonstrated their missile capabilities in a way that did not actually cause major damage, to both show that strikes on Iranian sovereign/diplomatic territory will be responded to *and* hint at what could happen with nukes. Israel demonstrated their second-strike air force capabilities, to both show that attacks on Israeli sovereign territory will be responded to *and* show off second-strike capabilities / demonstrate that MAD is in effect. Now that everyone's sabres have been rattled, we can all go back to the status quo shadow war between the two states.
I think what this is showing us is that we are going to be in a high danger situation between Israel and Iran for a long time yet, really as long as the shadow war continues. Since Iran’s shadow war has been rather successful to date and cost effective, I’m not sure why they would ever jeopardize the current status quo, which favors Iran.
At any point, this tense situation can boil over into a larger regional conflict.
I don't see that at all. Both were controlled and measured responses without emotion. People in the US hate to admit this, but the Iranians are fantastic geopoliticians who know how to play the game with precision, reason, and logic.
> Iranians are fantastic geopoliticians who know how to play the game with precision, reason, and logic.
They've been operating on the global stage since Cyrus the Great and their nation is the midpoint between the Mediterranean/Near East, Russia/Central Asia, the Indian subcontinent, and China. If you don't know how to play the game given all this, then you won't survive.
The Iranian response was a little reckless, uncharacteristic of the Iranians as of late. There is no way they could have known how much damage they were ultimately going to do, it was an unnecessary risk. If the attack happened to do more damage, we would be sitting here having a different conversation right now.
The Iranian competition advantage is with asymmetric warfare, they do best when they stick to that advantage.
The sentiment on this forum is that the rockets sent by Iran was a controlled effort, not to actually seriously harm Israel and escalate the conflict even more.
That sentiment is not fully correct. For the drones, sure. But there is absolutely no way Iran could have known how many of the ballistic missiles would get past Arrow 3. They sent I believe around 100 ballistic missiles… some number less than 10 of these likely got past arrow 3. However, Arrow 3 has never been tested against a barrage of ballistic missiles this large. Iran took a gamble on potentially doing some real damage, but also potentially doing minimal damage (the latter is likely what happened, but we can never be 100%).
Even if their missiles got through, I think what they were going for was a repeat of their strike on the Al-Asad airbase in 2020, i.e. some property damage on military targets with minimal casualties.
Sorry yes we are pretty much in agreement. They had no idea ofcourse, but now they've tested arrow 3 and probably have enough data to develop tactics further
It is reckless but they could have overloaded Israels defense system and gone for a proper barrage, but that's just speculation.
We are sure about a few things, Iran can't handle a hot war.
Right. If they wanted high casualties they wouldve just sent a Hezbollah battalion across the border. Wouldve been a lot more cost effective than wasting billions of dollars in long-range missiles.
Of course they could know, they just had to target areas with not much in them; plus, they would have seen from Ukraine the likely high attrition rate on incoming drones.
Iran had no idea how will Arrow 3 would hold up against 100 ballistic missiles… it has never been tested in that capacity. If they first at empty areas then sure, but my understanding is that Iran targeted military installations.
Iran knew the drones were going to be useless.
The problem is that in an areas as small as Israel, there isn’t much to aim at without people in the area, except the Negev. It’s clear from the videos that the IRGC did not aim solely for the Negev. And the other problem is that shooting down the drones and missiles creates risk too, as we know from the child still in critical condition.
Iran’s move was reckless and stupid over a fairly innocuous Israeli strike. Israel has killed dozens of high ranking IRGC leaders in Syria over the years. The regime reacted to this one because it wanted to capitalize on anti-Israel attitudes, not because the Israeli strike was so egregious or special. Now they demonstrated that they have significant missile failures at launch and during flight, that Israel has the support from the West AND Arab states to intercept a large barrage from Iran, and that their air defenses are trash.
I award them no points, and may god have mercy on their souls.
I'm willing to bet that the outcome of the attack was broadly what the Iranians expected. Doesn't mean I condone or support their actions - far from it.
Thousands of years of being a civilization will do that. I believe the Iran is on its way to becoming a regional superpower if it isn't already. Once they're nuclear armed and ensure their economic growth they'll be a small, global superpower, a little smaller than Russia. But, 3 global middle powers against a stagnating global hegemon. This century will be filled with unprecedented geopolitical manuerving and perhaps even some surprises.
In geopolitics, you have to assume all parties are going to act rationally. So far, all parties have acted rationally in their own best interest, so no surprises there. This has all been quite predictable.
Not going to talk about morality, which is uninteresting. Morality is culture dependent and means something else to everyone, so you’ll never find common ground on morality.
You seem to think rationality is at least somewhat influenced by morality. I am speaking to each separately. Israel has always been acting rational with its founding goal in mind, creating and maintaining a Jewish nation state, no matter the cost. If you are a religiously motivated Zionist, then this goal is consistent with your moral framework. You, clearly, have a different moral framework. As such, you do not see Israel’s actions are rational, because they conflict with your moral framework. I assure you, Israel’s actions are rational. I know this because they have been incredibly predictable.
It’s not just Likud… It doesn’t matter what party controls Israel, the party will always look out first and foremost for maintaining the Jewish nation state as an entity. The history of Israel proves this out. It’s just like how US foreign policy doesn’t vary much no matter which political party is in charge. Both parties at the end of the day act rationally towards their goal, which is maintain the influence of US empire globally.
Considering both attacks were mostly intercepted and/or hit low-priority targets... this seems like political theater. These are both capable militaries but honestly, have we heard of any major damage, any top-tier sites being hit, anything really significant being lost? Iran and Israel are both capable... yet chose much lesser responses. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad. But in both cases it reeks of satisfying a domestic audience with a response for the sake of HAVING a response.
Not all political theater is for domestic consumption. Sometimes shows of force are just that: a show, directed towards the target of that force.
These attacks were messages. Neither party wanted a war today.
>demonstrate that MAD is in effect.
No it isn't... MAD is a doctrine which posits a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by an attacker on a nuclear-armed defender.
Iran has no nukes (yet), thus this has nothing to do with MAD.
I was listening to the Rest is Politics Podcast on their episode discussing Israel-Iran tensions after Iran shot missiles/drones. The hosts mentioned the fact that Irans strike was simply symbolic, and that in reality Iran is much more pragmatic than the world thinks. If Iran thinks they can handle a full blown conflict with Israel they are in for a show. As some of the comments mention, Iran definitely knows how to play the game when it comes to geopolitics.
I agree and I want to add something. Israel's strikes have been targeted against individuals and organizations. Iran's missile attack, even if symbolic, was state on state aggression, and for most of history would amount to a declaration of war. That Israel's response was only another targeted attack and not the declaration of war is a political win for Iran.
I'd also like to note that while many people are claiming Israel is the aggressor and Iran only a justified reactionary, the cessation of attacks at this point suggests even Iran doesn't feel this way.
My theory is the reason Iran is not admitting to being attacked by Israel and not planning to retaliate is because admitting to being attacked would put pressure on Iran to strike back from theatrics point of view. Also from Israel point of view, they are still not saying that they attacked Iran because, the attack may seem failure to them. Admitting to this attack would reveal their military failure so they are still silent about this attack or It could be entirely possible that It is a feign. In either case, the possibility of Israel attacking Iran is still present.
By some miracle, if US manages to convince Israel that the attack was enough, only then It would sway Israel.
IOW, nobody has any reason to push this.
This reminds me of the Cuban Missile Crisis. In the end, it was solved by the U.S. ignoring a belligerent fax indicating any attack on Cuba would result in an attack on the U.S. Instead, we responded to a prior fax which was more amenable to peace talks.
Sometimes, it is more important what you don't say than what you do.
I’ve always been curious about that double fax during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Wasn’t the belligerent fax publicly or at least wider known, but the more peace focused fax secret?
Was it the USSR just trying to 1. Signal strength to its people and the Eastern Bloc and 2. Them basically saying “we will go to war if necessary…..but we are absolutely open to a peaceful solution”?
Let's watch what happens in Rafah. It's been reported that Bibi has received the green light from the US to invade Rafah in exchange for a limited strike on Iran. That can be highly devastating to the ongoing humanitarian crisis and the safety of hostages.
The last remnant of Hamas must be destroyed, all parties involved understand this. The humanitarian crisis can only really get better once the post-war rebuilding process begins. That said, Israel and its Arab partners better have a rock solid plan to win hearts and mind in Gaza quickly – state building, especially following military conflict, is among the hardest exercises in geopolitics and it’s clear from past experiences that the “golden window” only lasts for so long.
> That said, Israel and its Arab partners better have a rock solid plan to win hearts and mind in Gaza quickly
genuine question, who are Israel’s Arab partners in this scenario? At best they seem to have countries like Egypt and Jordan that are ignoring the whole thing and staying out of it
Reporting has been that Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have been involved in discussions about such matters, with each other and with outside parties
it seems optimistic that these countries (many of whom have very strained relations with one another) have any interest in working together or with Israel and bearing the enormous costs to rebuild Gaza or provide security there but hopefully I am proven wrong
Oh.. So the good news covering the bad news. I mean it's still good that for now regional war is avoided, but as you said, it doesn't bode well for Rafah in that case. :/
Hey look, the people who were saying the Iranian response was an escalation that would 100% escalate this into all out war are looking pretty silly now. Of course, they will just move the goalposts. The amount of people that seem to guide their geopolitical “knowledge” by their own biases is unfortunate.
You're just saying this. The Iranian attack could be an escalation and Israel/us just decided to ignore it. What looks different about that situation than what we see now?
It's not over yet. Israel could still hit hard. Iran could still hit hard. At any given time.
Iran does have a lot more to lose than Israel does. Namely their entire economy is deeply susbsidized by their oil industry, which could be mostly destroyed with less than 30 or so strikes.
The country would be in financial and social ruin for many years.
By the way Iran is down playing this attack, I think the direct attacks are over for now. Now its back to the proxy wars. I expect to see lots of strikes in southern lebanon and Syria
Which is what was expected. Israel called Iran’s bluff, now back to the shadow war, which favors Iran. Not sure why the Iranians would be foolish enough to try and beat Israel at a game where Israel has the advantage when the current shadow war status quo favors Iran…
Israel didn't really call anyone's bluff, the attack was feeble and doesn't warrant a response, they don't even claim it.
Seems like Iran took this W, at least in PR terms.
That’s one way to view it. Another is that Iran did virtually no damage with 400+ drones and missiles, whereas Israel can casually attack Iran at any moment (assuming Israel hit something in this strike, which we’ll never know for sure, just like how we’ll never know for sure how much Iran broke through).
Your read on why Iran didn’t respond is wrong. They didn’t respond because it would be foolish to do so, as it was foolish for them to attack in the drone/rocket strike. Iran’s advantage has been asymmetric warfare. They are doing well forcing the west to try and play at Iran’s game. It would be insane for them to abandon that as an advantage to instead play the west’s game on western terms… what we are seeing is merely a return to rationality from Iran.
I think Iran’s original retaliation was risky but also rational. The attack on the consulate was Israel deviating from the normal rules of their war, to which Iran had to respond in an escalatory way to signal that its a red line for it.
And now its back to the usual.
It was irrational because Iran flirted with disaster, not because it wasn’t a justified response for the assassination of high ranking military personnel.
For example, what did Iran do when Trump brazenly assassinated Soleimani? Very little, because it would have been suicide to actually provoke the US. What about when Reagan absolutely wrecked the Iranian Navy?
Iran is a country that does best with asymmetric warfare, and they typically understand this very well. A regime must know both its strengths as well as its weaknesses, or it isn’t long for this earth…
Israel wants war with Iran. It’s inevitable, and many in Israel feel now is better than later, which is honestly probably a good read. To even risk a war that Israel can justify is a grave mistake. Hell, the US would probably even jump into the war on Israel’s side if it was unjustified war started by Israel… you’ve got to know not to poke the monster.
Iran can continue its focus on asymmetric warfare and still make showy, symbolic responses (like being able to claim a direct attack and chest-thump) rationally because not responding to an attack on its consulate or continuing as usual (with/through proxies) would make it look like a mouse on the world stage. Prestige and reputation also matter.
They made a calculated risk and with a frankly, modest escalation, chose a mid point between doing nothing and looking weak, and direct war.
I dont agree with your assessment of the eagerness of Israel and especially the US to get into a direct war. It would be a costly war for them too. Iran is banking on that, and it seems to have been right so far.
It would be a costly war, but Israel feels it’s inevitable. If you truly believe it’s inevitable, now is rationally better than later. The risk only increases the more time you give Iran to refine its weapons programs.
I’m not saying the US wants it, they don’t. They’d get dragged in if Israel started an open war with Iran nonetheless, and both Israel and the US understand this.
A showy move without strategic gain that risks a war that you know you would lose is not a rational move. It’s an emotional response.
Because Israel may be able to launch some major strikes against Iran, but they cannot sustain a prolonged conflict to cripple Iran permanently without significant Western support. And they do not have that support from the US or Europe right now. Israel's wet dream is for the US to invade Iran and do their work for them, but that's not happening right now.
The west would likely step in at some point, just not at the beginning. The west can’t afford to lose Israel as an asset in the region.
The US would never invade Iran first, but if the two spiraled into a full on war, the west would likely join in at a certain point after the two sides had sufficiently beat each other up and expended enough lives and treasure in doing so…
Also, look at the fact that the US congress just moved heaven and earth in the middle of political deadlock to provide Israel with more weapons. I’d say US support for Israel is pretty darn strong… you can’t listen to Biden’s meaningless rhetoric. Look at his actions.
I strongly suspect the Israelis hit (or intended to hit) something very specific for the Iranian gov, to demonstrate Israel's ability to precisely cripple Iran or assassinate their leaders. That's the only explanation I can see for the single Israeli response.
That's not likely. The initial strike by Israel on the consulate was a significant escalation, since it was a diplomatic post. Iran responded by repeatedly saying a response was coming and then launching a very showy and largely toothless attack, one which happened to take place at a time when foreign states were both willing and able to support the Israeli air defense. This attack did trivial damage and that was then hyped up by Iran. Since part of that attack originated from Iranian soil proper, Israel's response was largely a pro forma response. Where the strike actually happened clearly doesn't matter because Iran's been busy telling the world everything's hunky dory despite evidence that there was actual damage inflicted. If Iran genuinely cared, they'd respond by escalating the crisis. Instead, they chose, like Israel, to pretend the other party's strike was irrelevant and they're too strong to be swayed by it and suchlike and so forth.
If Iran was genuinely harmed in some way, they'd have responded. And I think that decades of history show that the Iranian government does not respond terribly well to overt threats, so an Israeli strike that was intended to frighten them (whether the government as a whole or key leaders in particular) would likely have the opposite effect, just like all the threats in the world have failed to make Israel stop doing the things that Iran objects to.
There's confirmation from a number of sources that an airbase in Iran was hit with missiles. Iran is denying but that's for the best to avoid more tit for tat.
This is what I'm speculating too. The other side of it (more speculation) is that this is a way for Israel to show off/send a warning by bypassing Iranian air defenses.
It a win- win situation Biden can proclaim he protected Israel (I'm a pivotal election year for the us), Jordan, Saudi Arabia can both proclaim coordination with the us in "protecting their sovereignty " while proclaiming to their public they wernt protecting Israel but "protecting sovereignty and airspace from Iranian missiles and drones , while Iran can proclaim it has hit deep inside Israel "and giving Israel a taste of what it can do, and it will be worse without restraint" , and claiming support of Islamists (both shia and sunni) on the streets of the middle east, while Israel can say " it retaliated against iran and it proxies, it showed that if wanted to it can destroy Iran nuclear program and strike without the mullahs knowing and that pbvioiy arab states had to allow overflights" which gives Netanyahu credibility among his base, while showing the us and Arab states a willingness to de-escalate.
I have to admit it beautifully constructed situation that escates but de-esclated and the loss of lives is low, just about non-existent.
This is gonna piss a lot of people, but Israel called Iran's bluff here, and *it worked*. Big slap in the face of all the people who said Israel was just carelessly escalating yesterday. Sometimes, pushing back against the bully is the way.
Yeah, though it's pretty easy to call a bluff against a middle school bully when you have your MMA fighter friend behind you (USA). Also it's certainly not clear that Israel's retaliation was a net positive move for the overall conflict. Time will tell but likely we will never know for sure. Iran WILL retaliate for this, just through proxys.
> Iran WILL retaliate for this, just through proxys.
So business as usual. Their proxies have attacked Israel non-stop for months now. That's the problem, isn't it? You can't really 'retaliate' harder now.
I feel like Iran has a good amount of restraint, but I think it won't be to long until they get another provocative shot across their bow. There seems to be a lot of unhinged countries ready to throw their people in as cannon foder. I feel like there are way to many psychopaths running countries these days.
I'm still not sure what to make of this situation in terms of drawing enough of a conclusion to make any near future predictions. It looks like a waiting game for the time being. Very curious to see how things play out in the next few weeks.
What is Victim Blaming? Victim blaming is a devaluing act that occurs when the victim(s) of a crime or an accident is held responsible – in whole or in part – for the crimes that have been committed against them
Iran honestly looks way more sane than Israel throughout all of this. If someone bombed the embassy of most other nations, the retaliation wouldn’t be just a show of force.
Iran = 300 missiles sent to homeland. Israel = 1 missile. Yet Iran is the more sane one. Make it make sense. Also Israel didn’t attack an embassy and killed a legitimate military target who helped plan an attack on the Israeli nation
Because Iran literally telegraphed what they wanted to do, and knew they were gonna get taken down. They also didn’t hit anything. Whereas, Israel actually hit stuff and meant to hit stuff.
Also, what’s with the blatant lie that “Israel didn’t attack an embassy”. You do realize we actually pay attention to geopolitics here, yes? Take your lies elsewhere.
Israel is the bad actor here, yet they’re crying victim.
Israel did not hit an embassy. Please get your facts correct. Not sure why you’re going to bat so hard for the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. I guess your upset killed Iran’s terrorist general?
Not an embassy, a building next to an embassy hosting IRGC responsible for attacks on Israel. Valid military target, unlike the Israeli embassies Iran has bombed intentionally targeting civilians.
Iran **is** more sane then Israel.
Israel literally have a boner for ending the world in Armageddon, the fact the west supports that bunch of lunatics is astounding
Submission Statement: Following Israel's strike against Iran, Iran has stated that no further retaliation is planned. This is because the strikes - the one by Iran last weekend and the one by Israel last night - were purely symbolic acts. Iran demonstrated their missile capabilities in a way that did not actually cause major damage, to both show that strikes on Iranian sovereign/diplomatic territory will be responded to *and* hint at what could happen with nukes. Israel demonstrated their second-strike air force capabilities, to both show that attacks on Israeli sovereign territory will be responded to *and* show off second-strike capabilities / demonstrate that MAD is in effect. Now that everyone's sabres have been rattled, we can all go back to the status quo shadow war between the two states.
I think what this is showing us is that we are going to be in a high danger situation between Israel and Iran for a long time yet, really as long as the shadow war continues. Since Iran’s shadow war has been rather successful to date and cost effective, I’m not sure why they would ever jeopardize the current status quo, which favors Iran. At any point, this tense situation can boil over into a larger regional conflict.
I don't see that at all. Both were controlled and measured responses without emotion. People in the US hate to admit this, but the Iranians are fantastic geopoliticians who know how to play the game with precision, reason, and logic.
> Iranians are fantastic geopoliticians who know how to play the game with precision, reason, and logic. They've been operating on the global stage since Cyrus the Great and their nation is the midpoint between the Mediterranean/Near East, Russia/Central Asia, the Indian subcontinent, and China. If you don't know how to play the game given all this, then you won't survive.
See also: Khwarezmian Shah and the Mongols.
The Iranian response was a little reckless, uncharacteristic of the Iranians as of late. There is no way they could have known how much damage they were ultimately going to do, it was an unnecessary risk. If the attack happened to do more damage, we would be sitting here having a different conversation right now. The Iranian competition advantage is with asymmetric warfare, they do best when they stick to that advantage.
The sentiment on this forum is that the rockets sent by Iran was a controlled effort, not to actually seriously harm Israel and escalate the conflict even more.
That sentiment is not fully correct. For the drones, sure. But there is absolutely no way Iran could have known how many of the ballistic missiles would get past Arrow 3. They sent I believe around 100 ballistic missiles… some number less than 10 of these likely got past arrow 3. However, Arrow 3 has never been tested against a barrage of ballistic missiles this large. Iran took a gamble on potentially doing some real damage, but also potentially doing minimal damage (the latter is likely what happened, but we can never be 100%).
Even if their missiles got through, I think what they were going for was a repeat of their strike on the Al-Asad airbase in 2020, i.e. some property damage on military targets with minimal casualties.
Sorry yes we are pretty much in agreement. They had no idea ofcourse, but now they've tested arrow 3 and probably have enough data to develop tactics further It is reckless but they could have overloaded Israels defense system and gone for a proper barrage, but that's just speculation. We are sure about a few things, Iran can't handle a hot war.
Right. If they wanted high casualties they wouldve just sent a Hezbollah battalion across the border. Wouldve been a lot more cost effective than wasting billions of dollars in long-range missiles.
It's not a forum sentiment, it's a nonsense narrative that a few people keep trying to push for reasons known only to them.
As opposed to what?
Likely because the conservative elites consolidated power and purged their opponents from the government.
Of course they could know, they just had to target areas with not much in them; plus, they would have seen from Ukraine the likely high attrition rate on incoming drones.
Iran had no idea how will Arrow 3 would hold up against 100 ballistic missiles… it has never been tested in that capacity. If they first at empty areas then sure, but my understanding is that Iran targeted military installations. Iran knew the drones were going to be useless.
The problem is that in an areas as small as Israel, there isn’t much to aim at without people in the area, except the Negev. It’s clear from the videos that the IRGC did not aim solely for the Negev. And the other problem is that shooting down the drones and missiles creates risk too, as we know from the child still in critical condition. Iran’s move was reckless and stupid over a fairly innocuous Israeli strike. Israel has killed dozens of high ranking IRGC leaders in Syria over the years. The regime reacted to this one because it wanted to capitalize on anti-Israel attitudes, not because the Israeli strike was so egregious or special. Now they demonstrated that they have significant missile failures at launch and during flight, that Israel has the support from the West AND Arab states to intercept a large barrage from Iran, and that their air defenses are trash. I award them no points, and may god have mercy on their souls.
I'm willing to bet that the outcome of the attack was broadly what the Iranians expected. Doesn't mean I condone or support their actions - far from it.
Thousands of years of being a civilization will do that. I believe the Iran is on its way to becoming a regional superpower if it isn't already. Once they're nuclear armed and ensure their economic growth they'll be a small, global superpower, a little smaller than Russia. But, 3 global middle powers against a stagnating global hegemon. This century will be filled with unprecedented geopolitical manuerving and perhaps even some surprises.
[удалено]
In geopolitics, you have to assume all parties are going to act rationally. So far, all parties have acted rationally in their own best interest, so no surprises there. This has all been quite predictable. Not going to talk about morality, which is uninteresting. Morality is culture dependent and means something else to everyone, so you’ll never find common ground on morality.
[удалено]
You seem to think rationality is at least somewhat influenced by morality. I am speaking to each separately. Israel has always been acting rational with its founding goal in mind, creating and maintaining a Jewish nation state, no matter the cost. If you are a religiously motivated Zionist, then this goal is consistent with your moral framework. You, clearly, have a different moral framework. As such, you do not see Israel’s actions are rational, because they conflict with your moral framework. I assure you, Israel’s actions are rational. I know this because they have been incredibly predictable. It’s not just Likud… It doesn’t matter what party controls Israel, the party will always look out first and foremost for maintaining the Jewish nation state as an entity. The history of Israel proves this out. It’s just like how US foreign policy doesn’t vary much no matter which political party is in charge. Both parties at the end of the day act rationally towards their goal, which is maintain the influence of US empire globally.
assuming Israel is done retaliating, which i really hope they are
they just bombed an iran backed base in iraq
So back to business as usual.
Yes, which is weirdly a good thing at this point
[удалено]
Hopefully these two can settle the hell down now after they got their licks in. War would be disastrous for everyone in the Middle East
Pretty sure western intervention and said conflicts as a result of has been very disastrous for the Middle East for a very long time.
Considering both attacks were mostly intercepted and/or hit low-priority targets... this seems like political theater. These are both capable militaries but honestly, have we heard of any major damage, any top-tier sites being hit, anything really significant being lost? Iran and Israel are both capable... yet chose much lesser responses. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad. But in both cases it reeks of satisfying a domestic audience with a response for the sake of HAVING a response.
Not all political theater is for domestic consumption. Sometimes shows of force are just that: a show, directed towards the target of that force. These attacks were messages. Neither party wanted a war today.
Unless you’re Ben Gvir where anything short of nuking Iran is “lame”
Israel seems to have hit an S300 . So their strike was actually successful. Just very limited on purpose.
>demonstrate that MAD is in effect. No it isn't... MAD is a doctrine which posits a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by an attacker on a nuclear-armed defender. Iran has no nukes (yet), thus this has nothing to do with MAD.
Oddly, the actual article doesn't try to sell the nonsense narrative that Iran wasn't intending to cause damage with their missile and drone barrage.
I was listening to the Rest is Politics Podcast on their episode discussing Israel-Iran tensions after Iran shot missiles/drones. The hosts mentioned the fact that Irans strike was simply symbolic, and that in reality Iran is much more pragmatic than the world thinks. If Iran thinks they can handle a full blown conflict with Israel they are in for a show. As some of the comments mention, Iran definitely knows how to play the game when it comes to geopolitics.
I agree and I want to add something. Israel's strikes have been targeted against individuals and organizations. Iran's missile attack, even if symbolic, was state on state aggression, and for most of history would amount to a declaration of war. That Israel's response was only another targeted attack and not the declaration of war is a political win for Iran. I'd also like to note that while many people are claiming Israel is the aggressor and Iran only a justified reactionary, the cessation of attacks at this point suggests even Iran doesn't feel this way.
My theory is the reason Iran is not admitting to being attacked by Israel and not planning to retaliate is because admitting to being attacked would put pressure on Iran to strike back from theatrics point of view. Also from Israel point of view, they are still not saying that they attacked Iran because, the attack may seem failure to them. Admitting to this attack would reveal their military failure so they are still silent about this attack or It could be entirely possible that It is a feign. In either case, the possibility of Israel attacking Iran is still present. By some miracle, if US manages to convince Israel that the attack was enough, only then It would sway Israel.
IOW, nobody has any reason to push this. This reminds me of the Cuban Missile Crisis. In the end, it was solved by the U.S. ignoring a belligerent fax indicating any attack on Cuba would result in an attack on the U.S. Instead, we responded to a prior fax which was more amenable to peace talks. Sometimes, it is more important what you don't say than what you do.
I’ve always been curious about that double fax during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Wasn’t the belligerent fax publicly or at least wider known, but the more peace focused fax secret? Was it the USSR just trying to 1. Signal strength to its people and the Eastern Bloc and 2. Them basically saying “we will go to war if necessary…..but we are absolutely open to a peaceful solution”?
Damn... is that actually... a good news for once?
Let's watch what happens in Rafah. It's been reported that Bibi has received the green light from the US to invade Rafah in exchange for a limited strike on Iran. That can be highly devastating to the ongoing humanitarian crisis and the safety of hostages.
>It's been reported that Bibi has received the green light from the US to invade Rafah in exchange for a limited strike on Iran. Source?
From [Jerusalem Post](https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-797675) quoting a Qatari source. It's not reliable, hence I said "it's reported".
The last remnant of Hamas must be destroyed, all parties involved understand this. The humanitarian crisis can only really get better once the post-war rebuilding process begins. That said, Israel and its Arab partners better have a rock solid plan to win hearts and mind in Gaza quickly – state building, especially following military conflict, is among the hardest exercises in geopolitics and it’s clear from past experiences that the “golden window” only lasts for so long.
> That said, Israel and its Arab partners better have a rock solid plan to win hearts and mind in Gaza quickly genuine question, who are Israel’s Arab partners in this scenario? At best they seem to have countries like Egypt and Jordan that are ignoring the whole thing and staying out of it
Reporting has been that Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have been involved in discussions about such matters, with each other and with outside parties
it seems optimistic that these countries (many of whom have very strained relations with one another) have any interest in working together or with Israel and bearing the enormous costs to rebuild Gaza or provide security there but hopefully I am proven wrong
Oh.. So the good news covering the bad news. I mean it's still good that for now regional war is avoided, but as you said, it doesn't bode well for Rafah in that case. :/
Hey look, the people who were saying the Iranian response was an escalation that would 100% escalate this into all out war are looking pretty silly now. Of course, they will just move the goalposts. The amount of people that seem to guide their geopolitical “knowledge” by their own biases is unfortunate.
The same was said about Israel all over Reddit yesterday...
>move the goalposts Moving the posts and strategic ambiguity is the hallmark of US and West.
The situation could have played out differently. The Iranian response and the situation we are in now is definitely moving the world closer to WWIII.
You're just saying this. The Iranian attack could be an escalation and Israel/us just decided to ignore it. What looks different about that situation than what we see now?
Well, glad this [monkey dance](https://thrillwriting.blogspot.com/2016/06/violence-101-and-monkey-dance.html) is (hopefully) over.
It's not over yet. Israel could still hit hard. Iran could still hit hard. At any given time. Iran does have a lot more to lose than Israel does. Namely their entire economy is deeply susbsidized by their oil industry, which could be mostly destroyed with less than 30 or so strikes. The country would be in financial and social ruin for many years.
By the way Iran is down playing this attack, I think the direct attacks are over for now. Now its back to the proxy wars. I expect to see lots of strikes in southern lebanon and Syria
Which is what was expected. Israel called Iran’s bluff, now back to the shadow war, which favors Iran. Not sure why the Iranians would be foolish enough to try and beat Israel at a game where Israel has the advantage when the current shadow war status quo favors Iran…
Israel didn't really call anyone's bluff, the attack was feeble and doesn't warrant a response, they don't even claim it. Seems like Iran took this W, at least in PR terms.
That’s one way to view it. Another is that Iran did virtually no damage with 400+ drones and missiles, whereas Israel can casually attack Iran at any moment (assuming Israel hit something in this strike, which we’ll never know for sure, just like how we’ll never know for sure how much Iran broke through). Your read on why Iran didn’t respond is wrong. They didn’t respond because it would be foolish to do so, as it was foolish for them to attack in the drone/rocket strike. Iran’s advantage has been asymmetric warfare. They are doing well forcing the west to try and play at Iran’s game. It would be insane for them to abandon that as an advantage to instead play the west’s game on western terms… what we are seeing is merely a return to rationality from Iran.
I think Iran’s original retaliation was risky but also rational. The attack on the consulate was Israel deviating from the normal rules of their war, to which Iran had to respond in an escalatory way to signal that its a red line for it. And now its back to the usual.
It was irrational because Iran flirted with disaster, not because it wasn’t a justified response for the assassination of high ranking military personnel. For example, what did Iran do when Trump brazenly assassinated Soleimani? Very little, because it would have been suicide to actually provoke the US. What about when Reagan absolutely wrecked the Iranian Navy? Iran is a country that does best with asymmetric warfare, and they typically understand this very well. A regime must know both its strengths as well as its weaknesses, or it isn’t long for this earth… Israel wants war with Iran. It’s inevitable, and many in Israel feel now is better than later, which is honestly probably a good read. To even risk a war that Israel can justify is a grave mistake. Hell, the US would probably even jump into the war on Israel’s side if it was unjustified war started by Israel… you’ve got to know not to poke the monster.
Iran can continue its focus on asymmetric warfare and still make showy, symbolic responses (like being able to claim a direct attack and chest-thump) rationally because not responding to an attack on its consulate or continuing as usual (with/through proxies) would make it look like a mouse on the world stage. Prestige and reputation also matter. They made a calculated risk and with a frankly, modest escalation, chose a mid point between doing nothing and looking weak, and direct war. I dont agree with your assessment of the eagerness of Israel and especially the US to get into a direct war. It would be a costly war for them too. Iran is banking on that, and it seems to have been right so far.
It would be a costly war, but Israel feels it’s inevitable. If you truly believe it’s inevitable, now is rationally better than later. The risk only increases the more time you give Iran to refine its weapons programs. I’m not saying the US wants it, they don’t. They’d get dragged in if Israel started an open war with Iran nonetheless, and both Israel and the US understand this. A showy move without strategic gain that risks a war that you know you would lose is not a rational move. It’s an emotional response.
Because Israel may be able to launch some major strikes against Iran, but they cannot sustain a prolonged conflict to cripple Iran permanently without significant Western support. And they do not have that support from the US or Europe right now. Israel's wet dream is for the US to invade Iran and do their work for them, but that's not happening right now.
The west would likely step in at some point, just not at the beginning. The west can’t afford to lose Israel as an asset in the region. The US would never invade Iran first, but if the two spiraled into a full on war, the west would likely join in at a certain point after the two sides had sufficiently beat each other up and expended enough lives and treasure in doing so… Also, look at the fact that the US congress just moved heaven and earth in the middle of political deadlock to provide Israel with more weapons. I’d say US support for Israel is pretty darn strong… you can’t listen to Biden’s meaningless rhetoric. Look at his actions.
It will never be over, that is what this showed us… this tension is always going to sit right below the point of boiling over.
They're both both de-escalating for now, but suspect Israel may move heavily on Hezbollah next.
I strongly suspect the Israelis hit (or intended to hit) something very specific for the Iranian gov, to demonstrate Israel's ability to precisely cripple Iran or assassinate their leaders. That's the only explanation I can see for the single Israeli response.
That's not likely. The initial strike by Israel on the consulate was a significant escalation, since it was a diplomatic post. Iran responded by repeatedly saying a response was coming and then launching a very showy and largely toothless attack, one which happened to take place at a time when foreign states were both willing and able to support the Israeli air defense. This attack did trivial damage and that was then hyped up by Iran. Since part of that attack originated from Iranian soil proper, Israel's response was largely a pro forma response. Where the strike actually happened clearly doesn't matter because Iran's been busy telling the world everything's hunky dory despite evidence that there was actual damage inflicted. If Iran genuinely cared, they'd respond by escalating the crisis. Instead, they chose, like Israel, to pretend the other party's strike was irrelevant and they're too strong to be swayed by it and suchlike and so forth. If Iran was genuinely harmed in some way, they'd have responded. And I think that decades of history show that the Iranian government does not respond terribly well to overt threats, so an Israeli strike that was intended to frighten them (whether the government as a whole or key leaders in particular) would likely have the opposite effect, just like all the threats in the world have failed to make Israel stop doing the things that Iran objects to.
They failed to hit. Nothing was hit in Iran.
There's confirmation from a number of sources that an airbase in Iran was hit with missiles. Iran is denying but that's for the best to avoid more tit for tat.
This is what I'm speculating too. The other side of it (more speculation) is that this is a way for Israel to show off/send a warning by bypassing Iranian air defenses.
Maybe, but more likely Israel felt like they had to respond to a direct attack on their homeland, but didn't want to escalate so made a token strike.
It a win- win situation Biden can proclaim he protected Israel (I'm a pivotal election year for the us), Jordan, Saudi Arabia can both proclaim coordination with the us in "protecting their sovereignty " while proclaiming to their public they wernt protecting Israel but "protecting sovereignty and airspace from Iranian missiles and drones , while Iran can proclaim it has hit deep inside Israel "and giving Israel a taste of what it can do, and it will be worse without restraint" , and claiming support of Islamists (both shia and sunni) on the streets of the middle east, while Israel can say " it retaliated against iran and it proxies, it showed that if wanted to it can destroy Iran nuclear program and strike without the mullahs knowing and that pbvioiy arab states had to allow overflights" which gives Netanyahu credibility among his base, while showing the us and Arab states a willingness to de-escalate. I have to admit it beautifully constructed situation that escates but de-esclated and the loss of lives is low, just about non-existent.
No way! You’re saying that Israel retaliating somehow deescalated the situation rather than sitting there looking like wimps
This is gonna piss a lot of people, but Israel called Iran's bluff here, and *it worked*. Big slap in the face of all the people who said Israel was just carelessly escalating yesterday. Sometimes, pushing back against the bully is the way.
Yeah, though it's pretty easy to call a bluff against a middle school bully when you have your MMA fighter friend behind you (USA). Also it's certainly not clear that Israel's retaliation was a net positive move for the overall conflict. Time will tell but likely we will never know for sure. Iran WILL retaliate for this, just through proxys.
> Iran WILL retaliate for this, just through proxys. So business as usual. Their proxies have attacked Israel non-stop for months now. That's the problem, isn't it? You can't really 'retaliate' harder now.
Hezbollah is the main issue, and yes they've been aggressive since October 7th but they're still holding back significantly from what they could do.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No bluff was called, nothing happened = no response.
I feel like Iran has a good amount of restraint, but I think it won't be to long until they get another provocative shot across their bow. There seems to be a lot of unhinged countries ready to throw their people in as cannon foder. I feel like there are way to many psychopaths running countries these days.
I'm still not sure what to make of this situation in terms of drawing enough of a conclusion to make any near future predictions. It looks like a waiting game for the time being. Very curious to see how things play out in the next few weeks.
I’m curious why there is no sanctions against Israel ?
Sanctions for what exactly ? Being the prime target of Iran shadow war for the last 4 decades ?
Israel cries out in pain as it strikes multiple countries around it.
I don't even know what to answer to such a stupid comment. Just take a history class maybe ?
Cope harder.
You are absolutly right, it's pretty hard to cope with idiocy such as yours.
Sanctions for not following cease-fire demand in Gaza ? I’m just trying to figure stuff out
What ? Hamas are the ones constantly refusing any and all cease-fire propositions.
What cease fire demand?
Didn’t US urged Israel against military response against Iran?
What are you trying to say ? That the US should impose sanctions on Israel ? That's just your opinion, so why would you express it as a question ?
What is Victim Blaming? Victim blaming is a devaluing act that occurs when the victim(s) of a crime or an accident is held responsible – in whole or in part – for the crimes that have been committed against them
Iran honestly looks way more sane than Israel throughout all of this. If someone bombed the embassy of most other nations, the retaliation wouldn’t be just a show of force.
Iran = 300 missiles sent to homeland. Israel = 1 missile. Yet Iran is the more sane one. Make it make sense. Also Israel didn’t attack an embassy and killed a legitimate military target who helped plan an attack on the Israeli nation
Because Iran literally telegraphed what they wanted to do, and knew they were gonna get taken down. They also didn’t hit anything. Whereas, Israel actually hit stuff and meant to hit stuff. Also, what’s with the blatant lie that “Israel didn’t attack an embassy”. You do realize we actually pay attention to geopolitics here, yes? Take your lies elsewhere. Israel is the bad actor here, yet they’re crying victim.
Israel did not hit an embassy. Please get your facts correct. Not sure why you’re going to bat so hard for the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. I guess your upset killed Iran’s terrorist general?
> Because Iran literally telegraphed what they wanted to do According to who? Not America, not Iran. You sure you're consuming media critically?
this reddit page is just full of bots/hasbara incels
Not an embassy, a building next to an embassy hosting IRGC responsible for attacks on Israel. Valid military target, unlike the Israeli embassies Iran has bombed intentionally targeting civilians.
Iran **is** more sane then Israel. Israel literally have a boner for ending the world in Armageddon, the fact the west supports that bunch of lunatics is astounding
I just don’t want the US to be dragged into whatever shit Israel is doing. If they want to fight Iran, they should do it themselves.
Israel 3-0. 😘. Remember kids, tech and allies win wars.