Iran attacks Israel attacks Iran

[Bevo 13468]

14 minutes ago, ztejas said:

You don't know what three ten thousand is? What are you, a moron?

You must not have hit your 40s. (No) reading glasses and iPhones will do that to you - 3zeros 4zeros - they all look the same.

Edited April 15 by Bevo

[elfenix 34161]

1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

SIAP…it’s the truth. I hate it for the Iranian people. They had a good life until the Shah fell. 
 

 

nicole would think life was pretty good under a notorious murder regime

[FartingMonk 3606]

10 minutes ago, elfenix said:

 

nicole would think life was pretty good under a notorious murder regime

Don't worry she's half despot

[atomheartbevo 89304]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Europe isn’t especially violent or war-prone but Europeans and their spin-off/mentee cultures are very, very good at war.

This is a big part of why Israel’s existence drives the Islamic world nuts, not really religion or even land for co-religionists. Jews left the Near East as tribesmen and came back organized as a Western nation with Western ways of war, thought, and social organization. Their existence in the middle of the Near East is a constant reminder of what the Islamic world believes is their humiliation at the hands of the West, which is supposed to be inferior. That’s why there’s so many comparisons to the Crusaders. 

Israel has 9 million people, and Iran has 88 million, so that drives them a little nuts as well.

[Bevo 13468]

1 hour ago, elfenix said:

 

nicole would think life was pretty good under a notorious murder regime

 

a good read

 

The Iranian Intellectual Who Inspired the Islamic Revolution and Admired Israel

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/iranian-intellectual-admired-israel

[Gatorubet 30023]

8 hours ago, Dewey said:

Can't they just draw a line in the sand, play a volleyball game, winner gets to claim most peaceful religion? 

[Biff Tannen 45439]

2 hours ago, DaggerHorns said:

I thought it was Threeventy thousands.

[bolverk 29261]

This is a good piece on what various Arab countries in the Middle East are trying to do to de-escalate the situation.

Free link: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/15/world/middleeast/iran-israel-mideast.html?ugrp=m&unlocked_article_code=1.kk0.In_c.2Isb-hTJ5rmp&smid=url-share

[3 Stacks 9]

All worked out ahead of time 

 

[atomheartbevo 89304]

A carefully choreographed and telegraphed operation it seems.

Especially since we knew it was going to happen 8 days ago.

[Armybrat 40648]

Waitaminute!

Quote

the US conveyed to Iran via Ankara that its operation must be "within certain limits."

The Turks are basically saying  the US “approved” this attack if the Iranians “limited” its scope?

WTF? 

[Trey3216 15321]

23 hours ago, Basil said:

If I was Israel, I’d bomb the shit out of Iran.

straight out the mouth of Brian WIlson in 1965.  

[bolverk 29261]

17 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Waitaminute!

The Turks are basically saying  the US “approved” this attack if the Iranians “limited” its scope?

WTF? 

 

Israel bombed Iran's embassy in Syria, which is its "sovereign territory." You are kidding yourself if you don't think Iran didn't feel obligated to respond in kind. They were, however, very careful in telegraphing and communicating their response, letting both Israel and the US know more or less what would happen. That gave everyone a chance to get ready and go through the motions. We told them where the tolerable limits would be, but that does not mean the US "approved" the attack. 

All of this was carefully choreographed so that Iran would save a little face without it blowing up in everyone's faces by turning a regional conflict involving Israel and Iran into a wider war involving global players backing each side.

Brat, I'd always thought you'd been a history teacher. Maybe I was wrong, because anyone who has studied the start of World War I should know how hot-headed shit can easily spiral out of control without clear communication of intentions and expectations through diplomatic channels. That's how the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by Serbia ended up getting Russia, Germany, France, and Britain into a cauldron of boiling blood. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

So we spent a billion dollars on this dog and pony show.  

[Bevo 13468]

12 minutes ago, bolverk said:

They were, however, very careful in telegraphing and communicating their response, letting both Israel and the US know more or less what would happen. That gave everyone a chance to get ready and go through the motions.

You don't send 100s of ballistic missiles and hundreds of drones into a foreign country's civilian population without intent to damage and kill.

If that happened to the US, we would not be listening to other countries about using restraint. Israel warned us what was likely to happen in Iraq at pretty much every step along the way. Yet, we think we know what Israel should and shouldn't do. It is pretty funny if you think about it.

Luckily, Israel is much smarter than us about ME affairs. I have a feeling that they will act much more deliberately than us. But, I also hear that a response is necessary as to stop precedence.

[bolverk 29261]

16 minutes ago, Bevo said:

You don't send 100s of ballistic missiles and hundreds of drones into a foreign country's civilian population without intent to damage and kill.

If that happened to the US, we would not be listening to other countries about using restraint. Israel warned us what was likely to happen in Iraq at pretty much every step along the way. Yet, we think we know what Israel should and shouldn't do. It is pretty funny if you think about it.

Luckily, Israel is much smarter than us about ME affairs. I have a feeling that they will act much more deliberately than us. But, I also hear that a response is necessary as to stop precedence.

Did I say Israel SHOULDN'T respond?

Whatever they do, I certainly hope it's carefully concise and clearly communicated because I, for one, don't want this to turn into a situation where we have to back the current Israel government on one side while Russia/China are backing Iran on the other in a hot war. At the same time, shit's still going down in Ukraine and tempers continue to flair in the Far East over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Besides, Bibi's got enough on his plate right now, dealing with Hamas, Hezbollah, a humanitarian crisis, and staying the fuck out of jail. 

[troph 24500]

38 minutes ago, Bevo said:

You don't send 100s of ballistic missiles and hundreds of drones into a foreign country's civilian population without intent to damage and kill.

If that happened to the US, we would not be listening to other countries about using restraint. Israel warned us what was likely to happen in Iraq at pretty much every step along the way. Yet, we think we know what Israel should and shouldn't do. It is pretty funny if you think about it.

Luckily, Israel is much smarter than us about ME affairs. I have a feeling that they will act much more deliberately than us. But, I also hear that a response is necessary as to stop precedence.

I'm not sure Israel is smarter than the US on ME issues. Israel has a policy of disproportionate responses which are understandable given the size and the number of countries that have historically opposed Israel. The greatest fear is that Israel will engage in its standard playbook and engage in a disproportionate response to Iran which would be a tipping point. Can the world convince Israel to go against it's customs and norms of disproportionate responses?

I sure as shit hope so.

[Texzilla588 767]

 
Israel bombed Iran's embassy in Syria, which is its "sovereign territory." You are kidding yourself if you don't think Iran didn't feel obligated to respond in kind. They were, however, very careful in telegraphing and communicating their response, letting both Israel and the US know more or less what would happen. That gave everyone a chance to get ready and go through the motions. We told them where the tolerable limits would be, but that does not mean the US "approved" the attack. 
All of this was carefully choreographed so that Iran would save a little face without it blowing up in everyone's faces by turning a regional conflict involving Israel and Iran into a wider war involving global players backing each side.
Brat, I'd always thought you'd been a history teacher. Maybe I was wrong, because anyone who has studied the start of World War I should know how hot-headed shit can easily spiral out of control without clear communication of intentions and expectations through diplomatic channels. That's how the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by Serbia ended up getting Russia, Germany, France, and Britain into a cauldron of boiling blood. 

The attack on the embassy was an attack on Iranian sovereign soil. Just as their attack on our embassy was. Iran has been managing the Houthis attacks on free vessels at sea, seized a ship in the strait of Hormuz, and has poured billions into Hamas and Hezbollah and planned the terror attacks from Gaza. They deserve anything and everything they get back.

They have never not stood by any stupidity we have conducted thru the years around the world. To break that commitment and support is a huge issue and one of concern to them, as well as Taiwan, Korea, Japan and others worried about any commitments from us.

[Bevo 13468]

2 minutes ago, troph said:

I'm not sure Israel is smarter than the US on ME issues. Israel has a policy of disproportionate responses which are understandable given the size and the number of countries that have historically opposed Israel. The greatest fear is that Israel will engage in its standard playbook and engage in a disproportionate response to Iran which would be a tipping point. Can the world convince Israel to go against it's customs and norms of disproportionate responses?

I sure as shit hope so.

We've been pretty terrible on ME issues since pretty much forever. As for disproportional responses - they have worked in the past as a deterrence in the ME. And personally, I would love for Iran's nuclear program to be destroyed.

But, the US currently has no interest in deterring Iran. And with the US' tepid backing of Israel, Israel would probably be unwise to go after major targets such as nuclear, drone manufacturing and military targets. So, it may be limited to targeted hits against individuals. OTOH, if Israel uses patience and waits until after it exits Gaza and until there is a more favorable environment in Washington, it may be able to actually work in conjunction with the US to deter Iran.

[bolverk 29261]

4 minutes ago, Texzilla588 said:

The attack on the embassy was an attack on Iranian sovereign soil. Just as their attack on our embassy was. Iran has been managing the Houthis attacks on free vessels at sea, seized a ship in the strait of Hormuz, and has poured billions into Hamas and Hezbollah and planned the terror attacks from Gaza. They deserve anything and everything they get back.

We can keep going back and forth about every fucking thing that's ever happened in the past between the US, Iran, Israel, etc., going to the coup we backed that overturned Iran's duly-elected government and installed an unelected despot 20-some-odd years before them attacking our embassy in Tehran.

And, yes, I understand that ever since the hostage crisis, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been the adversary of both the US and Israel. No. fucking. shit.

Up to this point, nearly everything that's gone down between Israel and Iran has been conducted through proxies -- very similar to the Cold War the US had with the Soviets. We back groups that fought the USSR, and they back groups that fought us. But what neither of us did was directly and openly attack one another. Right now, we are backing the Ukrainians in their fight against Russia. Would you not expect us to respond if Russia bombed our embassy in Warsaw in retaliation for us helping the Ukrainians out, for example?

I don't know if you've been paying attention to any of the threads, but our resident international bros clearly explained last week that embassies are off-limits.

 

Quote

They have never not stood by any stupidity we have conducted thru the years around the world. To break that commitment and support is a huge issue and one of concern to them, as well as Taiwan, Korea, Japan and others worried about any commitments from us.

When have I suggested we should break any commitments to supporting the defense of Israel? 

[Armybrat 40648]

I already understood Israel attacked the Iranian consulate/embassy and that Iran had the right to respond.

However, restraint on “our part” means nothing to the radical Islamists running that country. 
They are guilty of mass murder and are sneering at the West’s weakness just like Putin is.

[wildcat09 29146]

28 minutes ago, Bevo said:

We've been pretty terrible on ME issues since pretty much forever. As for disproportional responses - they have worked in the past as a deterrence in the ME. And personally, I would love for Iran's nuclear program to be destroyed.

But, the US currently has no interest in deterring Iran. And with the US' tepid backing of Israel, Israel would probably be unwise to go after major targets such as nuclear, drone manufacturing and military targets. So, it may be limited to targeted hits against individuals. OTOH, if Israel uses patience and waits until after it exits Gaza and until there is a more favorable environment in Washington, it may be able to actually work in conjunction with the US to deter Iran.

Wtf?

[bolverk 29261]

20 minutes ago, Bevo said:

And with the US' tepid backing of Israel

This is fucking laughable. We just shot drones and missiles out of the sky before they even reached Israel. 

Quote

 

the US currently has no interest in deterring Iran

OTOH, if Israel uses patience and waits until after it exits Gaza and until there is a more favorable environment in Washington, it may be able to actually work in conjunction with the US to deter Iran.

 

These are both statements I strongly disagree with but can't respond to here because that would be CR.

[Bevo 13468]

16 minutes ago, bolverk said:

This is fucking laughable. We just shot drones and missiles out of the sky before they even reached Israel. 

These are both statements I strongly disagree with but can't respond to here because that would be CR.

Maybe respond to an article vs. responding to me. I feel my words may have been presented stronger than what others are saying. And don't worry about me - I don't need to respond to what you have to say so it shouldn't have to be too CR.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68813496

US tells Israel it won't join any retaliatory strikes on Iran

17 hours ago

By Bernd Debusmann Jr,BBC News, White House

 

Reuters

Israeli and US aircraft and air defence systems shot down 99% of the drones launched by Iran.

The White House has warned Israel that the US will not participate in any retaliatory strikes on Iran, senior administration officials have said.

Over 300 drones and missiles were fired at Israel overnight, which Iran said was in response to an 1 April strike on its consulate in Syria.

Almost all weapons were shot down by Israeli, US and allied forces before they reached their targets.

Officials said Joe Biden urged Israel to consider its response "carefully".

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, a senior administration official said that Mr Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to "think very carefully and strategically" about how his forces replied to the unprecedented action, the first direct attack by Iran on the country.

 

The official added that the Biden administration believes Israel "got the best of it" in the exchange, which began when senior Iranian military commanders were killed at an Iranian consular building in Syria.

About 99% of the missiles, drones and cruise missiles launched during Iran's retaliatory operation were shot down or intercepted - which US officials point to as a sign of Israeli military superiority over Iran.

US aircraft and naval vessels shot down dozens of Iranian projectiles as the attack took place. More than 80 drones and at least six ballistic missiles were downed by US aircraft and vessels or by air defence forces over Iraq.

This includes seven drones and a ballistic missile as they prepared to launch from Yemen, US Central Command (Centcom) added in an update on Sunday.

A conversation took place between Mr Biden and Mr Netanyahu at a time "of heightened emotion" just after the attack, which included about 100 ballistic missiles simultaneously flying towards Israel.

 

During the call, the two leaders had a discussion "about how to slow things down and think through things", with Mr Biden emphasising that Israel has "gotten the best of it".

The official declined to say, however, whether the White House warned against a significant response, saying only that "it is a calculation the Israelis have to make".

In a string of television appearances on US networks earlier in the day, national security spokesman John Kirby repeatedly said that the US had made it clear to Israel that it seeks to avoid a wider conflict.

The senior administration said that the same message has been sent to Iran through diplomatic channels.

• As Israel debates Iran attack response, can US and allies stop slide into all-out war?
• What was in wave of Iranian attacks and how were they thwarted?
• All eyes on Israel's response to Iran drone and missile attacks

 

Both Mr Kirby and the official said that the US would continue to defend Israel, but has ruled out participating in any Israeli response.

The stance is one that has sparked criticism from some US lawmakers and former officials from both sides of the political spectrum.

Ohio Republican Representative Mike Turner, who serves as chair of the House intelligence committee, said that Mr Kirby's comments about de-escalating the conflict were "wrong".

"It is already escalating, and the administration needs to respond," he said on NBC.

And John Bolton, who served as national security adviser under President Donald Trump, said the US should join Israel if its chose to launch a retaliatory attack on Iran's nuclear programme.

 

"I think it [Israel] can destroy or disable a very substantial part [of the programme], if not totally," he told NewsNation. "Frankly, if Israel is prepared to go after Iran's nuclear programme, the United States should proudly join them."

In the wake of Iran's attack on Israel, Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that the body would "try again" to pass military aid for Israel.

Previous attempts to send more aid to Israel have stalled amid Democratic calls that the aid package should also include assistance for Taiwan and Ukraine.

Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Secretary of Defence for the Middle East, told the BBC that aid for Israel should be passed "without delay".

"If it wasn't for US security assistance, we could be facing a major regional war," he said. "That supplement and the ones for Ukraine and Taiwan are in our national security interest. It is not charity. It's part of the US national defence."

[billfromlaketravis 11330]

4 hours ago, 3 Stacks said:

All worked out ahead of time 

 

The Turks are pretty duplicitous and are run by an autocrat, but I’ll buy it.

The US, under current management, was going to stop the attack, but asking for restraint and warning Israel is extremely consistent with current US Foreign Policy. 
 

I hate that Turkey has so much influence in the region. They seem to be the mediators on every single dispute now.

[wildcat09 29146]

10 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Maybe respond to an article vs. responding to me. I feel my words may have been presented stronger than what others are saying. And don't worry about me - I don't need to respond to what you have to say so it shouldn't have to be too CR.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68813496

US tells Israel it won't join any retaliatory strikes on Iran

17 hours ago

By Bernd Debusmann Jr,BBC News, White House

 

Reuters

Israeli and US aircraft and air defence systems shot down 99% of the drones launched by Iran.

The White House has warned Israel that the US will not participate in any retaliatory strikes on Iran, senior administration officials have said.

Over 300 drones and missiles were fired at Israel overnight, which Iran said was in response to an 1 April strike on its consulate in Syria.

Almost all weapons were shot down by Israeli, US and allied forces before they reached their targets.

Officials said Joe Biden urged Israel to consider its response "carefully".

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, a senior administration official said that Mr Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to "think very carefully and strategically" about how his forces replied to the unprecedented action, the first direct attack by Iran on the country.

 

The official added that the Biden administration believes Israel "got the best of it" in the exchange, which began when senior Iranian military commanders were killed at an Iranian consular building in Syria.

About 99% of the missiles, drones and cruise missiles launched during Iran's retaliatory operation were shot down or intercepted - which US officials point to as a sign of Israeli military superiority over Iran.

US aircraft and naval vessels shot down dozens of Iranian projectiles as the attack took place. More than 80 drones and at least six ballistic missiles were downed by US aircraft and vessels or by air defence forces over Iraq.

This includes seven drones and a ballistic missile as they prepared to launch from Yemen, US Central Command (Centcom) added in an update on Sunday.

A conversation took place between Mr Biden and Mr Netanyahu at a time "of heightened emotion" just after the attack, which included about 100 ballistic missiles simultaneously flying towards Israel.

 

During the call, the two leaders had a discussion "about how to slow things down and think through things", with Mr Biden emphasising that Israel has "gotten the best of it".

The official declined to say, however, whether the White House warned against a significant response, saying only that "it is a calculation the Israelis have to make".

In a string of television appearances on US networks earlier in the day, national security spokesman John Kirby repeatedly said that the US had made it clear to Israel that it seeks to avoid a wider conflict.

The senior administration said that the same message has been sent to Iran through diplomatic channels.

• As Israel debates Iran attack response, can US and allies stop slide into all-out war?
• What was in wave of Iranian attacks and how were they thwarted?
• All eyes on Israel's response to Iran drone and missile attacks

 

Both Mr Kirby and the official said that the US would continue to defend Israel, but has ruled out participating in any Israeli response.

The stance is one that has sparked criticism from some US lawmakers and former officials from both sides of the political spectrum.

Ohio Republican Representative Mike Turner, who serves as chair of the House intelligence committee, said that Mr Kirby's comments about de-escalating the conflict were "wrong".

"It is already escalating, and the administration needs to respond," he said on NBC.

And John Bolton, who served as national security adviser under President Donald Trump, said the US should join Israel if its chose to launch a retaliatory attack on Iran's nuclear programme.

 

"I think it [Israel] can destroy or disable a very substantial part [of the programme], if not totally," he told NewsNation. "Frankly, if Israel is prepared to go after Iran's nuclear programme, the United States should proudly join them."

In the wake of Iran's attack on Israel, Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that the body would "try again" to pass military aid for Israel.

Previous attempts to send more aid to Israel have stalled amid Democratic calls that the aid package should also include assistance for Taiwan and Ukraine.

Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Secretary of Defence for the Middle East, told the BBC that aid for Israel should be passed "without delay".

"If it wasn't for US security assistance, we could be facing a major regional war," he said. "That supplement and the ones for Ukraine and Taiwan are in our national security interest. It is not charity. It's part of the US national defence."

Listening to John Bolton's advice on Iran is about as intelligent as listening to Larry Summers' economic advice.

[bolverk 29261]

7 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Maybe respond to an article vs. responding to me. I feel my words may have been presented stronger than what others are saying. And don't worry about me - I don't need to respond to what you have to say so it shouldn't have to be too CR.

It's part of the US national defence."

I'm fully aware that the admin's policy is that it won't go on offense with Israel. I also fully disagree with your interpretation that this means we're not interested in deterring Iran, that we can't work in conjunction with Israel in that deterrence, or that our support for their defense is "tepid."

[Armybrat 40648]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I'm fully aware that the admin's policy is that it won't go on offense with Israel. I also fully disagree with your interpretation that this means we're not interested in deterring Iran, that we can't work in conjunction with Israel in that deterrence, or that our support for their defense is "tepid."

I agree, and that Bolton should stfu. The US should stay out of any military offensive measures to respond to Iran’s attack. 

But we should realize this quote is incorrect:

Quote

The official added that the Biden administration believes Israel "got the best of it" in the exchange, which began when senior Iranian military commanders were killed at an Iranian consular building in Syria.

It did not begin with the bombing of the Iranian consulate building. 
I believe that was just a part of  Israel’s ongoing eradication of the Iranian terrorist enablers/supporters/suppliers who helped orchestrate The October 7th massacre. 
But Israel erred with their technically illegal attack on the consulate. They should’ve taken out those Iranians in a non-diplomatic location. 
Much like the ATF could have arrested Vernon Howell anytime he was away from the Branch Davidian compound,  and avoided the inevitable blowback.

[troph 24500]

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

We've been pretty terrible on ME issues since pretty much forever. As for disproportional responses - they have worked in the past as a deterrence in the ME. And personally, I would love for Iran's nuclear program to be destroyed.

But, the US currently has no interest in deterring Iran. And with the US' tepid backing of Israel, Israel would probably be unwise to go after major targets such as nuclear, drone manufacturing and military targets. So, it may be limited to targeted hits against individuals. OTOH, if Israel uses patience and waits until after it exits Gaza and until there is a more favorable environment in Washington, it may be able to actually work in conjunction with the US to deter Iran.

There’s a whole lot of bias in this response. So carry on. I don’t see a point in engaging with you. 

[Bevo 13468]

Just now, bolverk said:

I'm fully aware that the admin's policy is that it won't go on offense with Israel. I also fully disagree with your interpretation that this means we're not interested in deterring Iran, that we can't work in conjunction with Israel in that deterrence, or that our support for their defense is "tepid."

I get it - and quite possibly aren't as far apart as you may think - By deterrence I mean we aren't going to sanction Iran and we aren't going to do any joint operations with Israel. We also stated publicly that Israel is on their own with any offensive which indicates to Iran that our position is equivocal. Iran has only understood force so maneuvers away from that actually emboldens Iran rather than deters. And while our goal is de-escalation, I think our statements and position work against that goal.

[troph 24500]

the deterrence was in telling Iran how they can save face or how they can FAFO. Iran said yes sir and did what we told them including giving a multi hour warning shit was going down with pedestrian drones launched hundreds and hundreds of miles away. That's some pretty damn good fucking diplomacy on Biden's part in the aftermath of a Iranian government building and several senior officials being killed. Now we get to deal with an extremist escalating because Israel has a disproportionate response to any aggression. Putting Israel on an island is the right thing to do here. The fucking war can be averted right now if Israel won't be dogmatic.

Edited April 15 by troph

[Rex Kramer 1279]

3 hours ago, bolverk said:

 

Israel bombed Iran's embassy in Syria, which is its "sovereign territory." You are kidding yourself if you don't think Iran didn't feel obligated to respond in kind. They were, however, very careful in telegraphing and communicating their response, letting both Israel and the US know more or less what would happen. That gave everyone a chance to get ready and go through the motions. We told them where the tolerable limits would be, but that does not mean the US "approved" the attack. 

All of this was carefully choreographed so that Iran would save a little face without it blowing up in everyone's faces by turning a regional conflict involving Israel and Iran into a wider war involving global players backing each side.

Brat, I'd always thought you'd been a history teacher. Maybe I was wrong, because anyone who has studied the start of World War I should know how hot-headed shit can easily spiral out of control without clear communication of intentions and expectations through diplomatic channels. That's how the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by Serbia ended up getting Russia, Germany, France, and Britain into a cauldron of boiling blood. 

Iran feeling obligated to respond is such odd thinking to me. They’re the ones that started all this shit in the first place. They didn’t have to respond. They have Quds and RG higher-ups get murdered all the time by Israel, and it is in direct response to the terror campaigns those Iranians lead in handling Hezbollah and Hamas. Never before have they launched 350 missiles and drones at Israel, directly. 

This “show of force to the Islamic world” is a massive failure. They’re a laughingstock abroad and in the region. If this was intentional, they’re dumber than I thought. 

[Bevo 13468]

33 minutes ago, troph said:

the deterrence was in telling Iran how they can save face or how they can FAFO. Iran said yes sir and did what we told them including giving a multi hour warning shit was going down with pedestrian drones launched hundreds and hundreds of miles away. That's some pretty damn good fucking diplomacy on Biden's part in the aftermath of a Iranian government building and several senior officials being killed. Now we get to deal with an extremist escalating because Israel has a disproportionate response to any aggression. Putting Israel on an island is the right thing to do here. The fucking war can be averted right now if Israel won't be dogmatic.

Long-term I disagree. Iran will see this as a sign of weakness and continue using Huthi rebels and Hezbollah and will continue its hijacking of vessels and such. And my fear as it has always been is nuclear weapons in the hands of this theocracy. Short-term, you are absolutely correct that Israel not doing anything will keep this war from escalating. Then you just have to deal with a vessel shot at or hijacked here and there and missiles launched weekly from proxies at Israel population centers. At least until it has nuclear weapons. Then we really are at WWIII with Saudi Arabia and Israel on one side and Iran and Russia on the other.

Edited April 15 by Bevo

[troph 24500]

we can think they are dumbasses and started it but jesus just because we hate oklahoma doesn't mean the rules of the game don't apply. you bomb a government building and kill senior leaders I don't care who the opponent is, could be the miami hurricanes shock the nation and you should understandably expect a response. the fact that the US was able to negotiate that response with a sworn enemy is fucking phenomenal.

[Rex Kramer 1279]

2 hours ago, troph said:

I'm not sure Israel is smarter than the US on ME issues. Israel has a policy of disproportionate responses which are understandable given the size and the number of countries that have historically opposed Israel. The greatest fear is that Israel will engage in its standard playbook and engage in a disproportionate response to Iran which would be a tipping point. Can the world convince Israel to go against it's customs and norms of disproportionate responses?

I sure as shit hope so.

Israel has historically displayed responses way beyond restraint. I’d argue it’s the entire reason 10/7 happened. 

[Victorious1 140]

2 minutes ago, troph said:

we can think they are dumbasses and started it but jesus just because we hate oklahoma doesn't mean the rules of the game don't apply. you bomb a government building and kill senior leaders I don't care who the opponent is, could be the miami hurricanes shock the nation and you should understandably expect a response. the fact that the US was able to negotiate that response with a sworn enemy is fucking phenomenal.

The only countries that play by the "rules of the game" are USA, UK, France, Germany and to a degree USSR.  

Do you remember the '72 Olympics in Munich?  Black September kidnapped Israeli athletes from the Olympic Village and things went south.  What was Israel's response?  They sent the Mossad after the Black September members and killed them to send a message...'you don't play by the rules and neither do we".

Remember the Vietnam War?  The US played by the rules but the enemy did not and we pretty much got our asses kicked. 

What do you think would happen to Israel in the Middle East if they "played by the rules" while Iran and everyone else played their own game?

 

[FartingMonk 3606]

2 minutes ago, Victorious1 said:

The only countries that play by the "rules of the game" are USA, UK, France, Germany and to a degree USSR.  

Do you remember the '72 Olympics in Munich?  Black September kidnapped Israeli athletes from the Olympic Village and things went south.  What was Israel's response?  They sent the Mossad after the Black September members and killed them to send a message...'you don't play by the rules and neither do we".

Remember the Vietnam War?  The US played by the rules but the enemy did not and we pretty much got our asses kicked. 

What do you think would happen to Israel in the Middle East if they "played by the rules" while Iran and everyone else played their own game?

 

We(the US) definitely do not play by the rules.  We make up the rules as we go.  Or we pay someone else to not play by the rules and look the other way.  We are dirty as fuck

 

[Victorious1 140]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

We(the US) definitely do not play by the rules.  We make up the rules as we go.  Or we pay someone else to not play by the rules and look the other way.  We are dirty as fuck

 

That is true...

[Rex Kramer 1279]

21 minutes ago, troph said:

we can think they are dumbasses and started it but jesus just because we hate oklahoma doesn't mean the rules of the game don't apply. you bomb a government building and kill senior leaders I don't care who the opponent is, could be the miami hurricanes shock the nation and you should understandably expect a response. the fact that the US was able to negotiate that response with a sworn enemy is fucking phenomenal.

I don’t agree this was Iran’s intention. Rather I lean toward their incompetence. Regardless, stop the self-congratulatory dick sucking about our role. If this was a multi-party dog and pony, there are many incompetent governments including our own, the Israelis and the Iranians. 

Edited April 15 by Rex Kramer

[PTINS 3438]

On 4/13/2024 at 9:15 PM, Brisketexan said:

So…it seems you’ve heard of planet earth and the vermin that is humanity.
Needless death and suffering for insanely stupid reasons is our jam.

[Bevo 13468]

2 minutes ago, PTINS said:

Milla's first outfit was pretty good - a little too flat chested, but still would 100X.

[Truth Hurts 77]

5 hours ago, Armybrat said:

Waitaminute!

The Turks are basically saying  the US “approved” this attack if the Iranians “limited” its scope?

WTF? 

no, no, no...Iran was told "Don't" 

[billfromlaketravis 11330]

2 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The Turks are pretty duplicitous and are run by an autocrat, but I’ll buy it.

The US, under current management, was going to stop the attack, but asking for restraint and warning Israel is extremely consistent with current US Foreign Policy. 
 

I hate that Turkey has so much influence in the region. They seem to be the mediators on every single dispute now.

Wasn’t going to stop the attack*

[InkaUtexas 25290]

1 minute ago, Truth Hurts said:

no, no, no...Iran was told "Don't" 

We got another. @immamac

[wildcat09 29146]

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

I get it - and quite possibly aren't as far apart as you may think - By deterrence I mean we aren't going to sanction Iran and we aren't going to do any joint operations with Israel. We also stated publicly that Israel is on their own with any offensive which indicates to Iran that our position is equivocal. Iran has only understood force so maneuvers away from that actually emboldens Iran rather than deters. And while our goal is de-escalation, I think our statements and position work against that goal.

How many more fucking sanctions do you think we can even impose on them?

 

58 minutes ago, Victorious1 said:

The only countries that play by the "rules of the game" are USA, UK, France, Germany and to a degree USSR.  

Do you remember the '72 Olympics in Munich?  Black September kidnapped Israeli athletes from the Olympic Village and things went south.  What was Israel's response?  They sent the Mossad after the Black September members and killed them to send a message...'you don't play by the rules and neither do we".

Remember the Vietnam War?  The US played by the rules but the enemy did not and we pretty much got our asses kicked. 

What do you think would happen to Israel in the Middle East if they "played by the rules" while Iran and everyone else played their own game?

 

How old are you?

[bolverk 29261]

Food for thought on some Israeli options

Israel’s choices in responding to Iran’s attack all come with risks.

As Israel’s leaders continued on Monday to mull a possible response to the massive Iranian aerial attack over the weekend, they faced several choices, all of which carry their own risks.

In the past, Israel has hit back hard when its enemies attacked, hoping to discourage further hostilities. A cross-border raid in 2006 by Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese group, kicked off a devastating monthlong war, and rocket barrages fired by armed groups out of Gaza have escalated into days of heavy fighting and destruction.

But this time Israel is juggling a host of conflicting interests, as well as some new factors.

If it does respond to the unprecedented Iranian attack — itself carried out in retaliation for a strike on an Iranian Embassy building in Syria that killed top commanders in Iran’s armed forces — Israel must weigh whether to do so in proportion to the actual results of the Iranian assault, which was largely blocked by air defenses and caused little damage, or to consider what could have happened if more than 300 drones and missiles had actually hit Israel.

Hard-right members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government are pushing for an immediate and forceful response, saying that the lack of one will further weaken Israel in its enemies’ eyes. Some Israelis see an opportunity to use military strikes to fulfill the longstanding Israeli goal of degrading Iran’s nuclear program.

But other Israelis are urging restraint or so-called “strategic patience,” wary, among other things, of taking the nation’s focus away from its war with Hamas in Gaza, the efforts to release its scores of hostages there and its skirmishes with Hezbollah along its northern border, as well as the risk of setting off a broader regional conflict without international support.

Analysts say the success of Israel and its allies, led by the United States, in blocking most of the Iranian attack has given Israel the leeway to choose how and when to respond, if at all.

“Israel has the apparent legitimacy to attack Iran,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former major general and national security adviser in Israel who is now at the conservative-leaning Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security.

“The other option is to say, we achieved what we wanted by eliminating the Al Quds Force commanders in Damascus, the Iranian attack failed, so let’s do what we need to do,” he said — which means finishing the campaign against Hamas in Gaza and investing in preparations to take on Hezbollah in Lebanon.

“Both are good options,” he said. “Each has pros and cons. It’s a matter of preference.”

Foreign leaders, chief among them President Biden, Israel’s most important supporter, have been pressing for restraint. Mr. Netanyahu has not publicly threatened Iran since the attack ended on Sunday morning. Other Israeli military and political leaders say they want to preserve and strengthen, not jeopardize, the alliance of Western and moderate Arab countries that, for the first time, came together to repel the Iranian attack and defend Israel.

The Iranian attack has given Israel a burst of international support after months of censure and opprobrium over the scope of the killing and hunger in Gaza, and some officials say that means Israel should act against Iran only in coordination with its allies.

“Israel versus Iran, the world versus Iran,” Benny Gantz, a centrist member of Israel’s war cabinet, said on Sunday, laying out the choices. “The strategic alliance and the regional cooperation system between us has been seriously put to the test, and now is the time for us to strengthen it. We’ll build a regional coalition against the Iranian threat and exact the price from Iran in the manner and at the time right for us.”

Israel’s options range from openly striking Iran, symbolically or with full force, to not retaliating at all, a concession that experts say Israel could leverage to encourage further international sanctioning of Iran or the formalization of the anti-Iranian alliance.

There is a precedent for doing nothing: During the Gulf War of 1991, as Iraq lobbed Scud missiles at Israeli cities, Yitzhak Shamir, then Israel’s hawkish prime minister, exercised restraint at the urging of the Bush administration to preserve the American-led coalition with friendly Arab states.

Israel could also orchestrate some kind of bloodless cyberattack or revert to the ways of its yearslong shadow war with Iran, relying on spy craft and covert actions against Iranian interests, inside or outside Iran, without claiming responsibility for them.

[InkaUtexas 25290]

Hope they go for regional. Want the Mullahs down? Get Mecca to call for it.

 

[SquishMitten 10381]

Taking all the history out of it (I know, I know) and looking at it like a street fight, I see it kinda like this: 

First punch: Israel attacked something that should’ve been off limits, but took out several high ranking targets. Exactly what they intended to accomplish.

Second: Iran shit the bed in response. Who knows what their actual intention was here. 

Third: Israel just chuckles, waives their hand dismissively, and walks away. 

How would you score that match?

[956 Worldwide 34242]

One thing to ponder here is that Iran shot something like 350 missiles, drones, and other projectiles at Israel. Nearly all got shot down, but Iran has now established that option as a “reasonable” response and action, anything less will be viewed as not so serious.  
 

We saw in real time how Iron Dome normalized Hamas rocket attacks and established the expectation that Israel should suck it up and just hunker down defensively.  Israel will be highly inclined to set a difference precedent with Iran. If an embassy warrants 350 projectiles, how many does an attack on Iran proxies warrant? 20? 100?

This is not a sustainable game for us and Israel.  Deterrence has failed and Iran can’t learn the lesson that it can shoot missiles at Israel with no kinetic response. 

[Truth Hurts 77]

why the sandy vag @Schulz2.0  ? Is that not verbatim what Joe's message to Iran in this clip??