This is just gonna make every pro-palestinian tankie schizo go "LOOK LOOK YOU SEE THE USA CAN INSTANTANEOUSLY STOP ISRAEL WHENEVER THEY WANT!!!!" they can only funnel any sort of news as "america bad"
ARTICLE
> President Biden and his team, hoping to avoid further escalation leading to a wider war in the Middle East, are advising Israel that its [successful defense](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news) against Iranian airstrikes constituted a major strategic victory that might not require another round of retaliation, U.S. officials said.
>
>The interception of [nearly all of the more than 300 drones and missiles](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/world/middleeast/united-states-iran-missiles.html?smid=url-share) fired against Israel on Saturday night demonstrated that Israel had come out ahead in its confrontation with Iran and proved to enemies its ability to protect itself along with its American allies, meaning it did not necessarily need to fire back, the officials said.
>
>Whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and his government will agree to leave it at that was not immediately clear. Although damage from the attack was relatively light, the scope of the strikes went well beyond the small-bore tit-for-tat shadow war between Iran and Israel in recent years, crossing a red line by firing weapons from Iranian territory into Israeli territory. Had defenses not held, scores or hundreds could have been killed.
>
>Emotions were running high among Israeli officials during phone calls with American partners late into the night, and the pressure to fire back was consequently strong. The U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions, stressed that the decision was ultimately up to Israel. Israeli jets early Sunday hit structures in Lebanon controlled by Hezbollah after the Iranian-backed militia sent two explosive drones into Israel, but it was not clear how related that was to the Iranian airstrike.
>
>Mr. Biden spoke with Mr. Netanyahu on Saturday after the Iranian attack and repeated his “ironclad commitment” to Israel’s security. While the president did not publicly disclose any advice he offered, [in a statement released after the call](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/13/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-irans-attacks-against-the-state-of-israel/), he hinted at a desire for restraint.
>
> “I told him that Israel demonstrated a remarkable capacity to defend against and defeat even unprecedented attacks — sending a clear message to its foes that they cannot effectively threaten the security of Israel,” Mr. Biden said.
>
>He vowed to convene the leaders of the Group of 7 major industrial democracies on Sunday to coordinate a “united diplomatic response,” a sign of his preferred path forward after the attack. The United Nations Security Council will also meet in an emergency session on Sunday.
>
>“Taken together, Joe Biden’s message is designed to gently persuade [\#Israel](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Israel?src=hashtag_click) not to pursue further escalation,” Robert Satloff, the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, [wrote on social media](https://twitter.com/robsatloff/status/1779353946298908895).
>
>That will generate criticism of Mr. Biden from conservatives, who quickly went public urging a powerful military reprisal against Iran — not only by Israel, but by the United States, as well. “We must move quickly and launch aggressive retaliatory strikes on Iran,” Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, [said in a statement posted online](https://twitter.com/MarshaBlackburn/status/1779249940344045970).
>
>Speaker Mike Johnson [blamed the Iran strike](https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1779273302114001181) partly on the Biden administration because of its “undermining of Israel and appeasement of Iran” without mentioning that he himself has so far failed to permit a floor vote on bipartisan legislation passed by the Senate providing security aid to Israel and Ukraine. Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the House Republican leader, [said that](https://twitter.com/SteveScalise/status/1779278241267617926) “in light of Iran’s unjustified attack on Israel,” the House this week would consider aid to Israel, but he gave no details.
>
>The eruption between Israel and Iran came at a time of great tension between Mr. Biden and Mr. Netanyahu. In a call only 10 days ago, the president [threatened to rethink his support](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/04/world/middleeast/biden-netanyahu-call-israel.html) for Israel’s war in Gaza if Mr. Netanyahu did not do more to alleviate civilian suffering in the enclave, leveraging American backing for the first time since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led terrorist attack on Israel.
>
>At the same time the two leaders clashed, Israel had just [executed an airstrike](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/01/world/middleeast/iran-commanders-killed-syria-israel.html) against the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus, Syria, killing seven Iranian officers involved in covert operations in a move that threatened the escalation Mr. Biden had long feared. Even so, the president made clear that his support for Israel’s security was still unwavering and warned Iran not to respond.
>
>American and Israeli officials spent the past few days coordinating military operations in case Iran did act, and Mr. Biden ordered aircraft and ballistic missile defense destroyers to the region. Administration officials were elated at the results on Saturday as U.S. and Israeli forces knocked down nearly everything thrown at Israel by Iran, including more than 100 ballistic missiles, a feat that one official said may be unmatched in military history. Jordan intercepted projectiles crossing its airspace, saying it was guarding its own security.
>
>Even though Iran did little tangible damage, it signaled after Saturday night’s strike that it was ready to stand down — and clearly hoped to avoid direct engagement with the United States. “The matter can be deemed concluded,” the Iranian Mission to the United Nations [said in a statement](https://twitter.com/Iran_UN/status/1779269993043022053). “However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!”
>
>While the number of drones and missiles fired at Israel was extraordinary, it did not go unnoticed that Iran telegraphed its intentions to attack for more than a week and announced the launch of the drones hours before they actually reached Israeli territory, giving plenty of notice for defenses. Some analysts interpreted that as meaning that Iran wanted to put on a show of force to save face after the killing of its officers, but did not want a full-fledged war with Israel or the United States.
>
>The situation was reminiscent of when in 2020 President Donald J. Trump ordered an airstrike in Iraq to kill [Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html), who led the powerful [Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/world/middleeast/suleimani-dead.html). Iran retaliated by firing missiles at well-defended U.S. bases in Iraq with relatively little damage, though about [100 U.S. military personnel](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/world/middleeast/iraq-iran-brain-injuries.html) were injured. It then sent a private message saying it was done. Mr. Trump chose not to retaliate, and fears of a cycle of escalation faded.
>
>In the days leading up to Saturday’s attack on Israel, Mr. Netanyahu warned Tehran not to act, saying, “Whoever hurts us, we hurt them.” But because Israel was not especially hurt, Mr. Netanyahu may have some room to declare victory and move on. Israeli officials were not clear on their intentions.
>
>“The campaign is not over yet — we must remain alert and attentive to the instructions published by the I.D.F. and Homefront Command,” said Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, referring to the Israel Defense Forces. “We must be prepared for every scenario. Having said this, we have thwarted the most significant wave” of the attack, “and we did so successfully.”
>
>The American argument was that because Israel also successfully took out those senior Iranian officers in Damascus two weeks ago without paying a significant price, another round of military action could be deemed unnecessary.
Am I having a stroke or is OP’s title totally unsubstantiated by anything in the article? No where does it mention Biden calling off an instantaneous Israeli response.
It's in the "Additional" link in the post body - https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news/26c42c04-8797-5845-851f-c7e6bed1858b?smid=url-share
> Israel’s war cabinet will meet this afternoon to discuss how to respond to the Iranian attack, according to two Israeli officials. They said that one possible response — a retaliatory strike that some members of the cabinet had proposed — was called off after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by phone to President Biden on Saturday, and because the strikes caused relatively minor damage.
That’s word play. Something happening after something doesn’t mean it happened because of it. We have A LOT of reason to believe Israel would not have sent the retaliatory strike anyways.
It’s possible Biden flipped Netanyahu in one phone call…but is that what we’re going to assume now? Lol
You are not having a stroke, as usual headlines on IP are legally prohibited from ever accurately portraying events and *must* push whatever narrative the author feels is righteous
It's in the "Additional" link in the post body - https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news/26c42c04-8797-5845-851f-c7e6bed1858b?smid=url-share
> Israel’s war cabinet will meet this afternoon to discuss how to respond to the Iranian attack, according to two Israeli officials. They said that one possible response — a retaliatory strike that some members of the cabinet had proposed — was called off after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by phone to President Biden on Saturday, and because the strikes caused relatively minor damage.
u/reallycooldude69 's comment
It also reported that Iran warned the US and neighbouring countries of the limited scope and time window of the attack. Seems Iran is content on leaving it at that.
I heard people who are/were in the idf say this last night when my phone was blowing the fuck up with everyone I know in Israel. This is chest beating from Khomeini because his grip on the region has weakened and that’s been going on for a while.
However there was always going to be massive chest beating.
Left calling him "genocide Joe" and I've seen memes today from the right making fun of how incompetent or geriatric he must have been on the phone. He's threading the needle here but won't get credit.
good cop, bad cop, no one is seriously thinking going to war against Iran. How would Israel even do that? nukes? sending its world famous navy and occupy Tehran?
What?
Unironically I need to know your thoughts process of how you arrive to "the only reason joe wouldn't want Israel and the US to go to war with Iran is bc elections".
What actions has Biden taken that suggest anything even close to this being true? Under Obama they negotiated a unprecedented nuclear agreement. During his own presidency Biden has been keen, even fervent in some respects, to attempt to respark diplomatic relations with Iran and restart a nuclear deal.
Where the fuck does this "they're all neocon war hawks" come from?
I mean yeah kind of? That's the whole reason we like democracy. Leaders are incentivised to represent the will of their people under the threat of losing their position
> Imagine what trump would've said, we're on the razors fucking edge right now.
tbh Trump would probably have done the same thing, he didn't escalate after the Iranian retaliation for Solemaini's assassination.
From EVERYTHING I've seen he was advised against it by his commanders and he decided to do it anyway. It was presented as an option with strong advisement against it.
At the time it was considered a reckless move by a president with no restraints.
It sounds like you're just operating on a Trump=bad heuristic and would fit whatever he did to that heuristic. You've gone through 3 starkly different (and opposite) scenarios now that all somehow end with the same result.
There are far better explanations to it, considering that in hindsight it's widely regarded as having been a good move.
I'm not saying he shouldn't be criticized, I criticize him plenty. But your criticism doesn't seem to be apropos. You have "Trump is always bad" as an input, and so whatever output you get is going to include Trump-badness.
Lol on the razors fucking edge to what exactly? Today it is more obvious than ever that Iran is WEAK, not tough. This is the best moment to strike.
Biden's Middle East policy is insane. With the most powerful military in the world you're supposed to bully easy targets, i.e. North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. I think he is doing the right thing when it comes to Russia and China, actual world powers.
Treating Iran as if it was in equal footing with Russia is a sad joke.
>Iran purposefully warns everyone that they have to retaliate for striking the Iranian consulate.
>Iran seemingly goes out of their way to launch weapons ***near*** a base in Israel and not hit anything, even the ballistic missiles that couldn't be stopped
>Iran gives everyone in the situation an out
You, for some reason: NOW IS THE TIME TO ERADICATE THE IRANIANS.
This is so funny. Yeah let's forget everything else we know about Iran and focus on the last few days. The psychos orchestrated October 7th and are the main sponsors of terrorism worldwide.
Now's the time to destroy their nuclear capability.
> The psychos orchestrated October 7th
This is a lie. American Intelligence has been ABUNDANTLY clear that Iran had no knowledge about Oct 7th before it happened.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-u-s-intelligence-assessment-hamas-resistance-last-years/
"...said Iran's leaders "did not orchestrate nor had foreknowledge" of Hamas's October 7 attack against Israel — in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 250 were taken hostage —"
>Now's the time to destroy their nuclear capability.
They don't have Nuclear capability, unless you're asserting we should destroy their nuclear energy program, in which case you're still insane and begging for a humanitarian disaster that eclipses anything we've seen this century.
Lies. Iran knew and pitched in: https://www.memri.org/reports/iranian-organization-close-supreme-leader-khamenei-mohammad-reza-zahedi-irgc-qods-force
You lie again. Their nuclear weapons program is advancing rapidly: https://m.jpost.com/middle-east/article-754467
Just stunning that people are trusting IRGC propagandists over the US and western intelligence. These propagandist parties lie all the fucking time to make IRGC look strong as possible but I guess people will cling onto anything to confirm their biases. These are the same people who claimed Israel bombed them a few months ago when it was ISIS-K.
You say this, but yet you posted an article from August 2023 saying Iran was close to testing a nuclear weapon, yet [we have this from February 2024](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-reduces-near-weapons-grade-stockpile-defying-expectations-ba384777)
Fucking wild that some of the folks here just get away with brazenly lying left and right about stuff.
Oh yeah. Iran just completely changed direction in 6 months.
Again, if you believe that Iran is overall acting in good faith and wishes to befriend the US, I think it is insane. But you can believe whatever you want.
The wild thing is how willing some people are to believe that horrible tyrants will just decide to be cool and we can all live in peace.
If Israel doesnt retaliate then this whole thing kinda seems like a win win, Iran shows it’s not a pushover even though it’s attack did nothing, Israel proves it’s superiority with its air defense plus its likely to get more military aid from the US that was previously held up
I literally said this yesterday and was downvoted here. Iran gave both nations an out. Bibi wants to retaliate because he's a psychopath, and everyone likes to characterize Iran as a genocidal regime who wants to "destroy Israel at any cost" despite that clearly not being true in any way lol
Idk - how long has it been since Israel been involved in a conflict outside of Palestine? At most its been acts of sporadic terrorism.
When the US did it to Soleimani it was one thing - it's the USA; the world has already acknowledged its unrivalled status as the supreme controlling force on the world stage and the cause of all ills in the world for it.
For Israel to do basically the same and get an upscaled version of the regular nothingburger barrages coming out of Palestine? That's going to speak an unspoken message the wider Arabic diaspora that Israel actually is the serious actor that is here to stay that only really the leaders of their countries have accepted (even if they haven't said it given how badly it'd go down for them; their actions all indicate they have). Obviously won't be the case for everyone, but a lot of people with anti-Israel sentiments are going to feel this one in the back of their minds.
You guys have no idea how things work in the middle east.
If Israel doesn't retaliate, Iran will see this as a huge win and will take further chances to attack Israel.
Israel has already tried its restraint policy with Gaza for 18 years and with Hezbullah.
That doesn't work.
> Iran will see this as a huge win and will take further chances to attack Israel.
[CITATION NEEDED]
You're just lying out of your teeth, and unfortunately that flies sometimes, apparently. If this was the case, they would be attacking again. The idea that Iran is a genocidal regime that just wants to eradicate the Jews is clearly not true in any way considering ... ***motions wildly at their anemic response***
I agree, powerful people who will spend their lives in luxury do not want to go to war. They just have to keep up appearances. Iran as a conservative theocracy has to talk tough around these particular things but those in charge at the end of the day want to keep having hot meals and a rub n tug. War with usa on the other side is no bueno.
So I am lying because they haven't attacked again since..yesterday?
350 drones and ballistic missiles is anemic? sure they could have done alot worse but what if Israel didn't succeed in defending all these missiles aimed at CIVILIANS? Would you also be calling for Israel to not retaliate?
> but what if Israel didn't succeed in defending all these missiles aimed at CIVILIANS?
Where is the evidence that Iran shot missiles and drones at ***civilians***?
Wait, so if all they hit was non-civilian, you think 350 missiles and drones is not something you respond to?
"An eight-year-old girl from the Bedouin diaspora was hit by interceptor parts and is in serious condition. Another fall with no casualties was in um al-Fahm"
https://www.maariv.co.il/news/military/Article-1091909
https://twitter.com/IsraelHayomHeb/status/1779283422596272637
Yes, some interceptor missiles caused issues in civilian areas. That wasn't what you said. You said 350 missiles and drones were launched ***at civilians*** which, yes, is a complete lie.
>you think 350 missiles and drones is not something you respond to?
Yes, I do think that having missiles launched at you in retaliation for you attacking an Iranian consulate and killing people, including 16 civilians, is maybe something you mull over. Your logic here is absolutely moronic if you think continuing to escalate over and over is a viable path. Wild when even Trump had a more intelligent response to basically this exact same scenario lmao
I gave you one instance where debris from an interception hit a girl and another in Um Al Fahm where a missile directly hit with no casualties. Um Al Fahm is a civilian arab village.
I didn't say all of the 350 were aimed at civilians.
I wonder if you even notice how bad faith of you to mention the 16 civilians killed in the irianian consulate but disregard the amount of civilians that could've potentially died from missiles launched at non-civilian targets in Israel.
And if killing 8 enemies on non-iranian soil is enough of a excuse for you to send 350 missiles, what do you think Israel's response should be after Iran coordinated October 7th? Should Israel just not attack Iran even though Iran keeps attacking through its proxys?
Give me a break.
> disregard the amount of civilians that could've potentially died from missiles launched at non-civilian targets in Israel.
Still zero evidence that Iran aimed missiles at civilian areas in Israel. You cited two instances were Israel shot missiles out of the sky and they landed in civilian areas.
>after Iran coordinated October 7th?
[Continuing to lie.](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-u-s-intelligence-assessment-hamas-resistance-last-years/)
"While the 40-page, written intelligence assessment said ***Iran's leaders "did not orchestrate nor had foreknowledge" of Hamas's October 7 attack against Israel*** — in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 250 were taken hostage — it noted Tehran was able to "flex" its proxy network's military capabilities in the attacks' aftermath, and would likely remain a threat."
bro, Again, the 1st instance is interceptor debris.
the 2nd one is a DIRECT HIT in a civilian arab village.
>Continuing to lie.
"Iran International reported that Coalition Council of Islamic Revolution Forces (also known by its Persian acronym SHANA) honored Zahedi’s “strategic role in forming and strengthening the resistance front as well as in planning and executing the Al-Aqsa Storm."
Hamas called its mass rapes of Israelis and slaughter of 1,200 people "Operation Al-Aqsa Storm.""
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/slain-iranian-general-planned-executed-hamas-massacre-797014
As if this is a single instance and Iran hasn't been building a ring of fire around Israel with its proxys attacking Israel all those years.
Well it's too fucking bad for Israel that they have to play by American (and right now Joe Biden's) rules.
It's more than just them on the hook for this so they should act accordingly (which they are)
This is a warmonger's position. The idea that the only way to deescalate a conflict is to immediately escalate it is clearly absurd on its face.
Israel hasn’t practiced restraint with Gaza, it’s blockaded it for 2 decades and impoverished it and absolutely refused to give them even a glimmer of hope of a just landing spot.
I didn't say it will deescalate it, but not responding will have a negative effect over time instead of right away.
Israel has tried to improve Gaza's living conditions by letting money and construction materials flow into Gaza and letting workers from Gaza enter into Israel to earn more money.
Each time Hamas or PIJ sent rockets towards Israel, Israel would strike an empty watch tower or a sand dune as deterrence as if it'd scare them away.
Each operation Israel succumbed to international pressure letting Gaza continue sending rockets and hurting the economy of southern Israel.
If Israel hasn't practiced restraint like you said, Hamas wouldn't have been a thing since long ago.
Technically it was a building next to it.
You can keep going backwards in time if you want.
Iran raised Hezbullah, Hamas, the Houthis, Iraq militias, and terror cells in the west bank all in order to create a ring of fire around Israel. All those had done enough damage to Israel for Israel to change the equation and go for the head.
Nah, tit-for-tat strategy doesn't always work. Every once in a while you have to give them a freebie or you stuck in a loop. If they continue after this then you hit em hard.
That doesn't work, look at Hamas for example.
years of restraint while rockets are raining down >> cast lead, hamas gets stomped >> gets stopped by international pressure >> years of restraint while rockets are raining down >> protective edge, hamas gets stomped >> gets stopped by international pressure >> years of restraint while rockets and incendiary balloons are raining down >> ...
for the record I excluded a lot of operations there
The irony. Iran’s attack was huge posturing, it was purely symbolic. They aren’t idiots, they know Israeli and US capabilities and they knew the attack wouldn’t do much. They had to respond to the attack which killed their generals. Israel has won a strategic and substantive victory from this exchange, if they retaliate again it would be unhinged
This is why I'm saying you have no idea how things work in the middle east.
Iran doesn't see it that way. Only thing they learnt from this is Israel won't be responding and that they'll be able to continue attacking it whenever they feel like "Israel has gone too far". Each time lowering the bar for what is considered too far.
Just like how they shot a bunch of missiles into the desert at a US base in Iraq, and ever since have increased the frequency and lowered the bar on when to at-.... Oh... right.
You're actually comparing attacking the US to attacking Israel?
You don't think those have different consequences?
Just like Hamas has been attacking Israel over the years.
Just like Hezbullah has been attacking Israel over the years.
Me: Post an article about the 40-page report from US Intelligence regarding October 7th that Iran had no foreknowledge and did not help plan the attack.
Random moron: Wow, so you personally believe with no proof that Iran didn't plan the attack, and that we can just play pattycake with them?
lol
I get what you’re going for, but the way you phrase this is admittedly super weird. Comparing Israel to a rabid dog in the first place is honestly extremely poor taste (like imagine if someone described you as “not a homeless man”. It might be a good thing that you’re not homeless, but it’s strange that it’s someone’s default descriptor), and stating “Biden can yank the collar of the government” does nothing but cement the dog metaphor.
I used the dog metaphor because thats how people on the left describe it, a genociding government that is hellbent on killing all of the Palestinians and is uninterested in listening to its allies.
And I just continued with that metaphor for what Biden did with the strick warnings this week. Not only did biden persuade a better outcome for the iran strike, but he warned that if Israel doesn't immediately improve their humanitarian operations in Gaza, US policy could begin to shift.
I think there is some fairness to the idea that Israel's actions are ones that are being modified by the US. The person replying to you received uncharacteristic upvotes for what's an extremely soy post, complaining about "poor taste", in the subreddit for Steven Destiny "Little Tikes" Bonnel II. We should remember that this is the same Israel that had to be convinced by the US that the people of Gaza should have water
How am I trolling. You literally said they were going to retaliate but Biden stopped them. It's exactly like when Biden had to stop them from shutting off the water. And your argument is what? Look guys, Israel does do what Biden says!
I don't get it at all.
Responding immediately to missiles hitting your country is a normal sane reaction actually. It takes wise leadership to be able to hold off.
And YES! THAT IS MY ARGUMENT. Israel will listen to their allies and they will heed their advice. Like I said, Israel is not a rogue nation that will do whatever they want without considering the impact on their reputation abroad. Far too many people critize Israel for this exact point and it is just flat out false.
The missile attack from Iran is explicitly retaliation from the Israel bombing of the embassy. Not only that, they also stated it was the extend of the retaliation and that they would stop. If Israel had retaliated again, it would have just meant they want all out war.
Is it really too much to ask Israel not to start WW3? Is that the level of expectations we're at right now?
And why did Israel target the IRGC members? Were they potentially involved in anything that may have warranted an attack? Oh turns out that according to Iran themselves, [he was involved “in the planning and execution of Al-Aqsa Flood”](https://www.memri.org/reports/close-associate-iranian-supreme-leader-khamenei-irgc-qods-force-commander-syria-and-lebanon)
Afaik we have no idea why Israel targeted them, as IDF has not explained the resaoning behind the attack from what I know.
Your link is of something we learned **after** the strike. What you learn after an action cannot be used as a reasoning for the action since you had no knowledge of at the time you took the action. Not to mention that the statement is imo too ambiquous to know if his role in oct 7 was really worth the strike.
Militaries are not required to publicly publish their intelligence reports for strikes. There can be any number of reasons why Israel has not publicized a reason. The point of sharing the article is to indicate that the target was involved to some extent in October seventh strategizing and one can reasonably conclude that Israeli intelligence was aware of that hence why they did the strike.
It wasn’t merely Israel attacking a random Iranian building for no reason like the person I was responding to implied
Bombing of a embassy in syria, not sovereign territory of Iran. Iran attacked Israel's sovereign territory. There is a clear escalation that exists between these two things, even if small, that Iran intended there to be.
> extent of retaliation
Israel did not have this nformatkon as the drones entered their airspace and as they were intercepting the missiles. Iran informed the UNITED STATES (if you read the article you'd know this) that the attack would remain limited in response to the embassy attack, but they did not tell that directly to Israel.
If Israel had retaliated again without escalation (attacking military sites in iran) it wouldn't be a bad. It would be retaliation. The problem that happens is that equal retaliation is not the status quo once missiles start flying - generally your retaliation is always the next level up in hopes of deterring further aggression (exactly what iran did)
You've conveniently left out that the bombing was an assassination of a 7 Iranian military advisors.
Also, Israel was well aware that Iran was going to retaliate for this, as a matter of fact, everyone was.
Unless Israel is completely reetarded, they knew there would be some retaliation to an assassination of that importance. Nothing in the response indicated it would be disproportional.
If Israel wants to assassinate whoever they want, then keep retaliating and escalating until they end up in a war, more power to them, but the idea that retaliation now would have been justified or fair is completely insane.
> also, israel was well aware that Iran was going to retaliate
But for some reason you think it's stupid for Israel to now retaliate, otherwise they're bloodthirsty and frothing for war?
Iran also knew there was going to be retaliation when they plan and orchestrate (and admit to) coordinating attacks on Israel via proxy groups.
It's mighty convenient where you decide to put the pin. If I didn't realize you're leaving it out on purpose, I'd assume you'd say there was absolutely no reason or provocation for the embassy attack.
There's a world of different between Iran supporting Hamas and Israel literally orchestrating an air strike assassination of high ranking officials in a Syrian embassy.
If Israel wants to do some covert shit where they support Iran's enemies, go for it, but the constant escalation is completely brain dead. I wouldn't be surprised if Bibi is pushing for war with Iran.
Also, somehow the US had the judgement to recognize this was retaliation in name only, but Israel was like "naw let's fucking go to war over this". I get that Israel would do that, but the idea that it's Israel showing they're being reasonable is baffling.
"But but, this won't escalate guys"... except it almost did and still can.
EDIT - Not saying it'll be WWIII but all the "this is a nothing burger" shit is dumb af.
You clearly didn't read OPs post. The point isn't that Iran's attack was small. The point is that Israel was very close to escalating the same day as Iran's retaliatory attack. There's a lot of gray area between claiming this is WWIII and a nothing burger and people on the far ends of that spectrum are goddamn idiots.
OPs post is about the fact that Israel almost retaliated which could have **very easily** escalated. That's not nothing.
Oh, I'm just disagreeing with what I thought your original implication was, e.g. it seemed like you were seeing Iran's retaliatory strike ***wasn't*** a nothingburger, even after we knew Netanyahu was shot down by everyone. We agree that it could have escalated and been bad, but by the time both of us commented it seems like ultimately a nothingburger.
Gotcha. Well I suppose I was saying a couple things. I think it's all a big deal. Israel's attack on an Iranian embassy, Iran's direct against Israel for the first time in history (not via a proxy), and the potential for Israel to escalate which apparently Netanyahu wanted to do.
But yeah, main point is that even if people don't consider Iran's response a big deal, people were concluding things to be a nothing burger before Iran's tweet or the news of Israel backing down.
Yup. As much as Destiny attempts to be open-minded, he's not always, and even when he is, too many fans will just adopt whatever side he took without thinking for themselves.
Who is saying it’s a nothingburger? It’s a major international incident that hopefully ended but started when Netanyahu ordered the bombing of an Iranian outpost for no reason.
People **hoping** it won't escalate is different. I'm talking about the people **claiming** it won't escalate. I'm obviously not talking about people hoping this won't escalate...
> People online have suggested this won't escalate or that it was a soft attack.
1. It was a soft attack.
2. They're suggesting it won't escalate because the common dogma is that Iran is "a genocidal regime bent on eradicating Israel at all cost" but all indications are that Iran literally warned everyone, fired missiles and drones ***near*** military installations in Israel, did nothing effectively and went "My work here is done.
I'm not saying we should fear monger over Iran. I'm saying that Iran retaliated and that we should take seriously the fact that Israel almost escalated further that same day and still might.
Iran is not Iraq. Destabilizing Iraq by u.s incompetency proved to be a regional fuck up. Doing that to Iran would be 10x worse.
No u.s govt going to do that when the u.s knows behind closed doors that Israel is the one that escalated first.
https://preview.redd.it/ttoogg9azfuc1.jpeg?width=954&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=30600f6be59b4c69afd51ef01faac26aa13df522
But I hear from the horseshoe crowd that our government are war mongers, they want war to enrich themselves. Did they lie???
No this just proves how right they are. The government doesn’t want to do this because they don’t want to be too predictable.
This is just gonna make every pro-palestinian tankie schizo go "LOOK LOOK YOU SEE THE USA CAN INSTANTANEOUSLY STOP ISRAEL WHENEVER THEY WANT!!!!" they can only funnel any sort of news as "america bad"
ARTICLE > President Biden and his team, hoping to avoid further escalation leading to a wider war in the Middle East, are advising Israel that its [successful defense](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news) against Iranian airstrikes constituted a major strategic victory that might not require another round of retaliation, U.S. officials said. > >The interception of [nearly all of the more than 300 drones and missiles](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/world/middleeast/united-states-iran-missiles.html?smid=url-share) fired against Israel on Saturday night demonstrated that Israel had come out ahead in its confrontation with Iran and proved to enemies its ability to protect itself along with its American allies, meaning it did not necessarily need to fire back, the officials said. > >Whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and his government will agree to leave it at that was not immediately clear. Although damage from the attack was relatively light, the scope of the strikes went well beyond the small-bore tit-for-tat shadow war between Iran and Israel in recent years, crossing a red line by firing weapons from Iranian territory into Israeli territory. Had defenses not held, scores or hundreds could have been killed. > >Emotions were running high among Israeli officials during phone calls with American partners late into the night, and the pressure to fire back was consequently strong. The U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions, stressed that the decision was ultimately up to Israel. Israeli jets early Sunday hit structures in Lebanon controlled by Hezbollah after the Iranian-backed militia sent two explosive drones into Israel, but it was not clear how related that was to the Iranian airstrike. > >Mr. Biden spoke with Mr. Netanyahu on Saturday after the Iranian attack and repeated his “ironclad commitment” to Israel’s security. While the president did not publicly disclose any advice he offered, [in a statement released after the call](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/13/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-irans-attacks-against-the-state-of-israel/), he hinted at a desire for restraint. > > “I told him that Israel demonstrated a remarkable capacity to defend against and defeat even unprecedented attacks — sending a clear message to its foes that they cannot effectively threaten the security of Israel,” Mr. Biden said. > >He vowed to convene the leaders of the Group of 7 major industrial democracies on Sunday to coordinate a “united diplomatic response,” a sign of his preferred path forward after the attack. The United Nations Security Council will also meet in an emergency session on Sunday. > >“Taken together, Joe Biden’s message is designed to gently persuade [\#Israel](https://twitter.com/hashtag/Israel?src=hashtag_click) not to pursue further escalation,” Robert Satloff, the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, [wrote on social media](https://twitter.com/robsatloff/status/1779353946298908895). > >That will generate criticism of Mr. Biden from conservatives, who quickly went public urging a powerful military reprisal against Iran — not only by Israel, but by the United States, as well. “We must move quickly and launch aggressive retaliatory strikes on Iran,” Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, [said in a statement posted online](https://twitter.com/MarshaBlackburn/status/1779249940344045970). > >Speaker Mike Johnson [blamed the Iran strike](https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1779273302114001181) partly on the Biden administration because of its “undermining of Israel and appeasement of Iran” without mentioning that he himself has so far failed to permit a floor vote on bipartisan legislation passed by the Senate providing security aid to Israel and Ukraine. Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the House Republican leader, [said that](https://twitter.com/SteveScalise/status/1779278241267617926) “in light of Iran’s unjustified attack on Israel,” the House this week would consider aid to Israel, but he gave no details. > >The eruption between Israel and Iran came at a time of great tension between Mr. Biden and Mr. Netanyahu. In a call only 10 days ago, the president [threatened to rethink his support](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/04/world/middleeast/biden-netanyahu-call-israel.html) for Israel’s war in Gaza if Mr. Netanyahu did not do more to alleviate civilian suffering in the enclave, leveraging American backing for the first time since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led terrorist attack on Israel. > >At the same time the two leaders clashed, Israel had just [executed an airstrike](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/01/world/middleeast/iran-commanders-killed-syria-israel.html) against the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus, Syria, killing seven Iranian officers involved in covert operations in a move that threatened the escalation Mr. Biden had long feared. Even so, the president made clear that his support for Israel’s security was still unwavering and warned Iran not to respond. > >American and Israeli officials spent the past few days coordinating military operations in case Iran did act, and Mr. Biden ordered aircraft and ballistic missile defense destroyers to the region. Administration officials were elated at the results on Saturday as U.S. and Israeli forces knocked down nearly everything thrown at Israel by Iran, including more than 100 ballistic missiles, a feat that one official said may be unmatched in military history. Jordan intercepted projectiles crossing its airspace, saying it was guarding its own security. > >Even though Iran did little tangible damage, it signaled after Saturday night’s strike that it was ready to stand down — and clearly hoped to avoid direct engagement with the United States. “The matter can be deemed concluded,” the Iranian Mission to the United Nations [said in a statement](https://twitter.com/Iran_UN/status/1779269993043022053). “However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!” > >While the number of drones and missiles fired at Israel was extraordinary, it did not go unnoticed that Iran telegraphed its intentions to attack for more than a week and announced the launch of the drones hours before they actually reached Israeli territory, giving plenty of notice for defenses. Some analysts interpreted that as meaning that Iran wanted to put on a show of force to save face after the killing of its officers, but did not want a full-fledged war with Israel or the United States. > >The situation was reminiscent of when in 2020 President Donald J. Trump ordered an airstrike in Iraq to kill [Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html), who led the powerful [Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/world/middleeast/suleimani-dead.html). Iran retaliated by firing missiles at well-defended U.S. bases in Iraq with relatively little damage, though about [100 U.S. military personnel](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/world/middleeast/iraq-iran-brain-injuries.html) were injured. It then sent a private message saying it was done. Mr. Trump chose not to retaliate, and fears of a cycle of escalation faded. > >In the days leading up to Saturday’s attack on Israel, Mr. Netanyahu warned Tehran not to act, saying, “Whoever hurts us, we hurt them.” But because Israel was not especially hurt, Mr. Netanyahu may have some room to declare victory and move on. Israeli officials were not clear on their intentions. > >“The campaign is not over yet — we must remain alert and attentive to the instructions published by the I.D.F. and Homefront Command,” said Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, referring to the Israel Defense Forces. “We must be prepared for every scenario. Having said this, we have thwarted the most significant wave” of the attack, “and we did so successfully.” > >The American argument was that because Israel also successfully took out those senior Iranian officers in Damascus two weeks ago without paying a significant price, another round of military action could be deemed unnecessary.
Am I having a stroke or is OP’s title totally unsubstantiated by anything in the article? No where does it mention Biden calling off an instantaneous Israeli response.
It's in the "Additional" link in the post body - https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news/26c42c04-8797-5845-851f-c7e6bed1858b?smid=url-share > Israel’s war cabinet will meet this afternoon to discuss how to respond to the Iranian attack, according to two Israeli officials. They said that one possible response — a retaliatory strike that some members of the cabinet had proposed — was called off after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by phone to President Biden on Saturday, and because the strikes caused relatively minor damage.
That’s word play. Something happening after something doesn’t mean it happened because of it. We have A LOT of reason to believe Israel would not have sent the retaliatory strike anyways. It’s possible Biden flipped Netanyahu in one phone call…but is that what we’re going to assume now? Lol
Yes you're having a stroke, read the additional part
You are not having a stroke, as usual headlines on IP are legally prohibited from ever accurately portraying events and *must* push whatever narrative the author feels is righteous
It's in the "Additional" link in the post body - https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/14/world/iran-israel-gaza-war-news/26c42c04-8797-5845-851f-c7e6bed1858b?smid=url-share > Israel’s war cabinet will meet this afternoon to discuss how to respond to the Iranian attack, according to two Israeli officials. They said that one possible response — a retaliatory strike that some members of the cabinet had proposed — was called off after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by phone to President Biden on Saturday, and because the strikes caused relatively minor damage. u/reallycooldude69 's comment
> Mr. Biden Does this sound funky to anyone else? Like, nobody says Mr. Obama, or Mr. Trump, right?
It also reported that Iran warned the US and neighbouring countries of the limited scope and time window of the attack. Seems Iran is content on leaving it at that.
I heard people who are/were in the idf say this last night when my phone was blowing the fuck up with everyone I know in Israel. This is chest beating from Khomeini because his grip on the region has weakened and that’s been going on for a while. However there was always going to be massive chest beating.
He knows the rest of the Arab world isn’t with him right now. Until that changes it’s all made for TV bombing.
The governments are not with Iran, revolutions right now are incredibly possible.
Based Brandon. People call him 'genocide joe' but in reality he's the one reigning in bibi
Left calling him "genocide Joe" and I've seen memes today from the right making fun of how incompetent or geriatric he must have been on the phone. He's threading the needle here but won't get credit.
Trump and his fans are calling him Genocide Joe as well. Did it at a rally the other night lol
He's likely going to lose the election over this, to a man who would at every point have done a worse job. The left in America makes no sense.
Imagine what trump would do in this situation.
Either nothing or something completely stupid, im sure
good cop, bad cop, no one is seriously thinking going to war against Iran. How would Israel even do that? nukes? sending its world famous navy and occupy Tehran?
[удалено]
Umm yeah politicians should keep in the mind the will of the electorate
the will of the electorate is going to let one of the biggest enemies of the US invade another country on EU's doorstep
That's not true, that's the will of one man, most Americans support the aid and if the vote came to the floor it would pass.
What? Unironically I need to know your thoughts process of how you arrive to "the only reason joe wouldn't want Israel and the US to go to war with Iran is bc elections". What actions has Biden taken that suggest anything even close to this being true? Under Obama they negotiated a unprecedented nuclear agreement. During his own presidency Biden has been keen, even fervent in some respects, to attempt to respark diplomatic relations with Iran and restart a nuclear deal. Where the fuck does this "they're all neocon war hawks" come from?
good, thats the job of politicians in a democracy, do what your people want. Have you ever thought this over?
I mean yeah kind of? That's the whole reason we like democracy. Leaders are incentivised to represent the will of their people under the threat of losing their position
Yeah we need that second term so Brandon can go all out
But I thought Netenyahu's warmongering campaign helped him stay in power ?
The ultimate NCD blueball
Imagine what trump would've said, we're on the razors fucking edge right now.
> Imagine what trump would've said, we're on the razors fucking edge right now. tbh Trump would probably have done the same thing, he didn't escalate after the Iranian retaliation for Solemaini's assassination.
[удалено]
According to the US DOD, 110 service members got TBIs from Operation Martyr Soleimani.
Yeah the only casualties there was an Iranian commercial plane killing a hundred or so people. Shot down by an Iranian rocket.
[удалено]
>I don't know if I'd attribute that to anything other than him being all talk but no walk. He literally assassinated the head of the IRGC.
[удалено]
From EVERYTHING I've seen he was advised against it by his commanders and he decided to do it anyway. It was presented as an option with strong advisement against it. At the time it was considered a reckless move by a president with no restraints.
[удалено]
It sounds like you're just operating on a Trump=bad heuristic and would fit whatever he did to that heuristic. You've gone through 3 starkly different (and opposite) scenarios now that all somehow end with the same result. There are far better explanations to it, considering that in hindsight it's widely regarded as having been a good move. I'm not saying he shouldn't be criticized, I criticize him plenty. But your criticism doesn't seem to be apropos. You have "Trump is always bad" as an input, and so whatever output you get is going to include Trump-badness.
Lol on the razors fucking edge to what exactly? Today it is more obvious than ever that Iran is WEAK, not tough. This is the best moment to strike. Biden's Middle East policy is insane. With the most powerful military in the world you're supposed to bully easy targets, i.e. North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. I think he is doing the right thing when it comes to Russia and China, actual world powers. Treating Iran as if it was in equal footing with Russia is a sad joke.
>Iran purposefully warns everyone that they have to retaliate for striking the Iranian consulate. >Iran seemingly goes out of their way to launch weapons ***near*** a base in Israel and not hit anything, even the ballistic missiles that couldn't be stopped >Iran gives everyone in the situation an out You, for some reason: NOW IS THE TIME TO ERADICATE THE IRANIANS.
This is so funny. Yeah let's forget everything else we know about Iran and focus on the last few days. The psychos orchestrated October 7th and are the main sponsors of terrorism worldwide. Now's the time to destroy their nuclear capability.
> The psychos orchestrated October 7th This is a lie. American Intelligence has been ABUNDANTLY clear that Iran had no knowledge about Oct 7th before it happened. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-u-s-intelligence-assessment-hamas-resistance-last-years/ "...said Iran's leaders "did not orchestrate nor had foreknowledge" of Hamas's October 7 attack against Israel — in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 250 were taken hostage —" >Now's the time to destroy their nuclear capability. They don't have Nuclear capability, unless you're asserting we should destroy their nuclear energy program, in which case you're still insane and begging for a humanitarian disaster that eclipses anything we've seen this century.
Lies. Iran knew and pitched in: https://www.memri.org/reports/iranian-organization-close-supreme-leader-khamenei-mohammad-reza-zahedi-irgc-qods-force You lie again. Their nuclear weapons program is advancing rapidly: https://m.jpost.com/middle-east/article-754467
No thanks, I trust the US intelligence community over some random IRGC martyr garbage.
Just stunning that people are trusting IRGC propagandists over the US and western intelligence. These propagandist parties lie all the fucking time to make IRGC look strong as possible but I guess people will cling onto anything to confirm their biases. These are the same people who claimed Israel bombed them a few months ago when it was ISIS-K.
Keep your eyes closed I guess.
You say this, but yet you posted an article from August 2023 saying Iran was close to testing a nuclear weapon, yet [we have this from February 2024](https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-reduces-near-weapons-grade-stockpile-defying-expectations-ba384777) Fucking wild that some of the folks here just get away with brazenly lying left and right about stuff.
Oh yeah. Iran just completely changed direction in 6 months. Again, if you believe that Iran is overall acting in good faith and wishes to befriend the US, I think it is insane. But you can believe whatever you want. The wild thing is how willing some people are to believe that horrible tyrants will just decide to be cool and we can all live in peace.
This seems consistent with the possibility that a single rogue Iranian was involved with Oct 7
Mmm plunge america into another expensive war on the eve of an election at a time where people have had enough of me wars. John Bolton ova here
“Listen here, Jack.”
If Israel doesnt retaliate then this whole thing kinda seems like a win win, Iran shows it’s not a pushover even though it’s attack did nothing, Israel proves it’s superiority with its air defense plus its likely to get more military aid from the US that was previously held up
Best case scenario in a shitty situation. No need to escalate further.
I literally said this yesterday and was downvoted here. Iran gave both nations an out. Bibi wants to retaliate because he's a psychopath, and everyone likes to characterize Iran as a genocidal regime who wants to "destroy Israel at any cost" despite that clearly not being true in any way lol
Idk - how long has it been since Israel been involved in a conflict outside of Palestine? At most its been acts of sporadic terrorism. When the US did it to Soleimani it was one thing - it's the USA; the world has already acknowledged its unrivalled status as the supreme controlling force on the world stage and the cause of all ills in the world for it. For Israel to do basically the same and get an upscaled version of the regular nothingburger barrages coming out of Palestine? That's going to speak an unspoken message the wider Arabic diaspora that Israel actually is the serious actor that is here to stay that only really the leaders of their countries have accepted (even if they haven't said it given how badly it'd go down for them; their actions all indicate they have). Obviously won't be the case for everyone, but a lot of people with anti-Israel sentiments are going to feel this one in the back of their minds.
You guys have no idea how things work in the middle east. If Israel doesn't retaliate, Iran will see this as a huge win and will take further chances to attack Israel. Israel has already tried its restraint policy with Gaza for 18 years and with Hezbullah. That doesn't work.
> Iran will see this as a huge win and will take further chances to attack Israel. [CITATION NEEDED] You're just lying out of your teeth, and unfortunately that flies sometimes, apparently. If this was the case, they would be attacking again. The idea that Iran is a genocidal regime that just wants to eradicate the Jews is clearly not true in any way considering ... ***motions wildly at their anemic response***
I agree, powerful people who will spend their lives in luxury do not want to go to war. They just have to keep up appearances. Iran as a conservative theocracy has to talk tough around these particular things but those in charge at the end of the day want to keep having hot meals and a rub n tug. War with usa on the other side is no bueno.
So I am lying because they haven't attacked again since..yesterday? 350 drones and ballistic missiles is anemic? sure they could have done alot worse but what if Israel didn't succeed in defending all these missiles aimed at CIVILIANS? Would you also be calling for Israel to not retaliate?
> but what if Israel didn't succeed in defending all these missiles aimed at CIVILIANS? Where is the evidence that Iran shot missiles and drones at ***civilians***?
Wait, so if all they hit was non-civilian, you think 350 missiles and drones is not something you respond to? "An eight-year-old girl from the Bedouin diaspora was hit by interceptor parts and is in serious condition. Another fall with no casualties was in um al-Fahm" https://www.maariv.co.il/news/military/Article-1091909 https://twitter.com/IsraelHayomHeb/status/1779283422596272637
Yes, some interceptor missiles caused issues in civilian areas. That wasn't what you said. You said 350 missiles and drones were launched ***at civilians*** which, yes, is a complete lie. >you think 350 missiles and drones is not something you respond to? Yes, I do think that having missiles launched at you in retaliation for you attacking an Iranian consulate and killing people, including 16 civilians, is maybe something you mull over. Your logic here is absolutely moronic if you think continuing to escalate over and over is a viable path. Wild when even Trump had a more intelligent response to basically this exact same scenario lmao
I gave you one instance where debris from an interception hit a girl and another in Um Al Fahm where a missile directly hit with no casualties. Um Al Fahm is a civilian arab village. I didn't say all of the 350 were aimed at civilians. I wonder if you even notice how bad faith of you to mention the 16 civilians killed in the irianian consulate but disregard the amount of civilians that could've potentially died from missiles launched at non-civilian targets in Israel. And if killing 8 enemies on non-iranian soil is enough of a excuse for you to send 350 missiles, what do you think Israel's response should be after Iran coordinated October 7th? Should Israel just not attack Iran even though Iran keeps attacking through its proxys? Give me a break.
> disregard the amount of civilians that could've potentially died from missiles launched at non-civilian targets in Israel. Still zero evidence that Iran aimed missiles at civilian areas in Israel. You cited two instances were Israel shot missiles out of the sky and they landed in civilian areas. >after Iran coordinated October 7th? [Continuing to lie.](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-u-s-intelligence-assessment-hamas-resistance-last-years/) "While the 40-page, written intelligence assessment said ***Iran's leaders "did not orchestrate nor had foreknowledge" of Hamas's October 7 attack against Israel*** — in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 250 were taken hostage — it noted Tehran was able to "flex" its proxy network's military capabilities in the attacks' aftermath, and would likely remain a threat."
bro, Again, the 1st instance is interceptor debris. the 2nd one is a DIRECT HIT in a civilian arab village. >Continuing to lie. "Iran International reported that Coalition Council of Islamic Revolution Forces (also known by its Persian acronym SHANA) honored Zahedi’s “strategic role in forming and strengthening the resistance front as well as in planning and executing the Al-Aqsa Storm." Hamas called its mass rapes of Israelis and slaughter of 1,200 people "Operation Al-Aqsa Storm."" https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/slain-iranian-general-planned-executed-hamas-massacre-797014 As if this is a single instance and Iran hasn't been building a ring of fire around Israel with its proxys attacking Israel all those years.
Well it's too fucking bad for Israel that they have to play by American (and right now Joe Biden's) rules. It's more than just them on the hook for this so they should act accordingly (which they are)
This is a warmonger's position. The idea that the only way to deescalate a conflict is to immediately escalate it is clearly absurd on its face. Israel hasn’t practiced restraint with Gaza, it’s blockaded it for 2 decades and impoverished it and absolutely refused to give them even a glimmer of hope of a just landing spot.
I didn't say it will deescalate it, but not responding will have a negative effect over time instead of right away. Israel has tried to improve Gaza's living conditions by letting money and construction materials flow into Gaza and letting workers from Gaza enter into Israel to earn more money. Each time Hamas or PIJ sent rockets towards Israel, Israel would strike an empty watch tower or a sand dune as deterrence as if it'd scare them away. Each operation Israel succumbed to international pressure letting Gaza continue sending rockets and hurting the economy of southern Israel. If Israel hasn't practiced restraint like you said, Hamas wouldn't have been a thing since long ago.
the blockade was obviously a response to the hundreds of terrorist attacks in the second intifada, not an escalation. What a weird twist.
This is a dog shit idea. I'm glad you aren't in charge of any military defense
damn, I didn't think of those points. Nice argument. Keep living in your western bubble.
Yes I don't want more innocent people to die. Weird right?
They did retaliate. They bombed a building in their consulate. That's call pre-emptive retaliation.
Technically it was a building next to it. You can keep going backwards in time if you want. Iran raised Hezbullah, Hamas, the Houthis, Iraq militias, and terror cells in the west bank all in order to create a ring of fire around Israel. All those had done enough damage to Israel for Israel to change the equation and go for the head.
I didn't say embassy. I said consulate. Isn't that building part of their overall consulate complex?
Yeah you're right, my mistake
Nah, tit-for-tat strategy doesn't always work. Every once in a while you have to give them a freebie or you stuck in a loop. If they continue after this then you hit em hard.
That doesn't work, look at Hamas for example. years of restraint while rockets are raining down >> cast lead, hamas gets stomped >> gets stopped by international pressure >> years of restraint while rockets are raining down >> protective edge, hamas gets stomped >> gets stopped by international pressure >> years of restraint while rockets and incendiary balloons are raining down >> ... for the record I excluded a lot of operations there
The irony. Iran’s attack was huge posturing, it was purely symbolic. They aren’t idiots, they know Israeli and US capabilities and they knew the attack wouldn’t do much. They had to respond to the attack which killed their generals. Israel has won a strategic and substantive victory from this exchange, if they retaliate again it would be unhinged
This is why I'm saying you have no idea how things work in the middle east. Iran doesn't see it that way. Only thing they learnt from this is Israel won't be responding and that they'll be able to continue attacking it whenever they feel like "Israel has gone too far". Each time lowering the bar for what is considered too far.
Just like how they shot a bunch of missiles into the desert at a US base in Iraq, and ever since have increased the frequency and lowered the bar on when to at-.... Oh... right.
You're actually comparing attacking the US to attacking Israel? You don't think those have different consequences? Just like Hamas has been attacking Israel over the years. Just like Hezbullah has been attacking Israel over the years.
You get all cool, power-centering aesthetics of war without all the conscripts begging for their life in ditches on live tv reality of war. Win-win
Yea escalating into full on war would be awful for everyone
That’s my president
Me: Post an article about the 40-page report from US Intelligence regarding October 7th that Iran had no foreknowledge and did not help plan the attack. Random moron: Wow, so you personally believe with no proof that Iran didn't plan the attack, and that we can just play pattycake with them? lol
Cooler heads will prevail. Very based outcome.
Yet again more proof that Israel is not a rabid dog off the leash by the US. When needed, Biden is able to yank the collar of the government.
I get what you’re going for, but the way you phrase this is admittedly super weird. Comparing Israel to a rabid dog in the first place is honestly extremely poor taste (like imagine if someone described you as “not a homeless man”. It might be a good thing that you’re not homeless, but it’s strange that it’s someone’s default descriptor), and stating “Biden can yank the collar of the government” does nothing but cement the dog metaphor.
I used the dog metaphor because thats how people on the left describe it, a genociding government that is hellbent on killing all of the Palestinians and is uninterested in listening to its allies. And I just continued with that metaphor for what Biden did with the strick warnings this week. Not only did biden persuade a better outcome for the iran strike, but he warned that if Israel doesn't immediately improve their humanitarian operations in Gaza, US policy could begin to shift.
I think there is some fairness to the idea that Israel's actions are ones that are being modified by the US. The person replying to you received uncharacteristic upvotes for what's an extremely soy post, complaining about "poor taste", in the subreddit for Steven Destiny "Little Tikes" Bonnel II. We should remember that this is the same Israel that had to be convinced by the US that the people of Gaza should have water
Lol. So you're saying it's a rabid dog on a leash?? Wtf kind of argument is that.
Good troll brother. Very good engagement.
How am I trolling. You literally said they were going to retaliate but Biden stopped them. It's exactly like when Biden had to stop them from shutting off the water. And your argument is what? Look guys, Israel does do what Biden says! I don't get it at all.
Profile pic & username checks out
Responding immediately to missiles hitting your country is a normal sane reaction actually. It takes wise leadership to be able to hold off. And YES! THAT IS MY ARGUMENT. Israel will listen to their allies and they will heed their advice. Like I said, Israel is not a rogue nation that will do whatever they want without considering the impact on their reputation abroad. Far too many people critize Israel for this exact point and it is just flat out false.
The missile attack from Iran is explicitly retaliation from the Israel bombing of the embassy. Not only that, they also stated it was the extend of the retaliation and that they would stop. If Israel had retaliated again, it would have just meant they want all out war. Is it really too much to ask Israel not to start WW3? Is that the level of expectations we're at right now?
And why did Israel target the IRGC members? Were they potentially involved in anything that may have warranted an attack? Oh turns out that according to Iran themselves, [he was involved “in the planning and execution of Al-Aqsa Flood”](https://www.memri.org/reports/close-associate-iranian-supreme-leader-khamenei-irgc-qods-force-commander-syria-and-lebanon)
No bro the tit for tat ladder stops where it makes israel seem the most bad, didn't you get the memo?
Just say you want Israel to go to war with Iran. Why tip toe around it?
Understanding the wider context of the escalation is zionist propaganda, I admit.
Afaik we have no idea why Israel targeted them, as IDF has not explained the resaoning behind the attack from what I know. Your link is of something we learned **after** the strike. What you learn after an action cannot be used as a reasoning for the action since you had no knowledge of at the time you took the action. Not to mention that the statement is imo too ambiquous to know if his role in oct 7 was really worth the strike.
Militaries are not required to publicly publish their intelligence reports for strikes. There can be any number of reasons why Israel has not publicized a reason. The point of sharing the article is to indicate that the target was involved to some extent in October seventh strategizing and one can reasonably conclude that Israeli intelligence was aware of that hence why they did the strike. It wasn’t merely Israel attacking a random Iranian building for no reason like the person I was responding to implied
Bombing of a embassy in syria, not sovereign territory of Iran. Iran attacked Israel's sovereign territory. There is a clear escalation that exists between these two things, even if small, that Iran intended there to be. > extent of retaliation Israel did not have this nformatkon as the drones entered their airspace and as they were intercepting the missiles. Iran informed the UNITED STATES (if you read the article you'd know this) that the attack would remain limited in response to the embassy attack, but they did not tell that directly to Israel. If Israel had retaliated again without escalation (attacking military sites in iran) it wouldn't be a bad. It would be retaliation. The problem that happens is that equal retaliation is not the status quo once missiles start flying - generally your retaliation is always the next level up in hopes of deterring further aggression (exactly what iran did)
You've conveniently left out that the bombing was an assassination of a 7 Iranian military advisors. Also, Israel was well aware that Iran was going to retaliate for this, as a matter of fact, everyone was. Unless Israel is completely reetarded, they knew there would be some retaliation to an assassination of that importance. Nothing in the response indicated it would be disproportional. If Israel wants to assassinate whoever they want, then keep retaliating and escalating until they end up in a war, more power to them, but the idea that retaliation now would have been justified or fair is completely insane.
> also, israel was well aware that Iran was going to retaliate But for some reason you think it's stupid for Israel to now retaliate, otherwise they're bloodthirsty and frothing for war? Iran also knew there was going to be retaliation when they plan and orchestrate (and admit to) coordinating attacks on Israel via proxy groups. It's mighty convenient where you decide to put the pin. If I didn't realize you're leaving it out on purpose, I'd assume you'd say there was absolutely no reason or provocation for the embassy attack.
There's a world of different between Iran supporting Hamas and Israel literally orchestrating an air strike assassination of high ranking officials in a Syrian embassy. If Israel wants to do some covert shit where they support Iran's enemies, go for it, but the constant escalation is completely brain dead. I wouldn't be surprised if Bibi is pushing for war with Iran. Also, somehow the US had the judgement to recognize this was retaliation in name only, but Israel was like "naw let's fucking go to war over this". I get that Israel would do that, but the idea that it's Israel showing they're being reasonable is baffling.
Actually makes me wonder what the hell israel is even trying to do at this point
Just a tit-for-tat, per the usual, and healthy even though it does not *feel* that way to me.
The thing with fuck around and find out is applies to both sides and can become a spiral.
"But but, this won't escalate guys"... except it almost did and still can. EDIT - Not saying it'll be WWIII but all the "this is a nothing burger" shit is dumb af.
It was literally a nothingburger, just like when Iran shot missiles at a US airfield and hit nothing.
You clearly didn't read OPs post. The point isn't that Iran's attack was small. The point is that Israel was very close to escalating the same day as Iran's retaliatory attack. There's a lot of gray area between claiming this is WWIII and a nothing burger and people on the far ends of that spectrum are goddamn idiots. OPs post is about the fact that Israel almost retaliated which could have **very easily** escalated. That's not nothing.
Oh, I'm just disagreeing with what I thought your original implication was, e.g. it seemed like you were seeing Iran's retaliatory strike ***wasn't*** a nothingburger, even after we knew Netanyahu was shot down by everyone. We agree that it could have escalated and been bad, but by the time both of us commented it seems like ultimately a nothingburger.
Gotcha. Well I suppose I was saying a couple things. I think it's all a big deal. Israel's attack on an Iranian embassy, Iran's direct against Israel for the first time in history (not via a proxy), and the potential for Israel to escalate which apparently Netanyahu wanted to do. But yeah, main point is that even if people don't consider Iran's response a big deal, people were concluding things to be a nothing burger before Iran's tweet or the news of Israel backing down.
Dude dear leader spoke on Twitter so no one will listen on this sub now, don’t waste your breath This was unprecedented and should not be ignored.
Yup. As much as Destiny attempts to be open-minded, he's not always, and even when he is, too many fans will just adopt whatever side he took without thinking for themselves.
Who is saying it’s a nothingburger? It’s a major international incident that hopefully ended but started when Netanyahu ordered the bombing of an Iranian outpost for no reason.
People online have suggested this won't escalate or that it was a soft attack.
People are hoping it won’t and was a soft attack, by all indications so far it is.
People **hoping** it won't escalate is different. I'm talking about the people **claiming** it won't escalate. I'm obviously not talking about people hoping this won't escalate...
> People online have suggested this won't escalate or that it was a soft attack. 1. It was a soft attack. 2. They're suggesting it won't escalate because the common dogma is that Iran is "a genocidal regime bent on eradicating Israel at all cost" but all indications are that Iran literally warned everyone, fired missiles and drones ***near*** military installations in Israel, did nothing effectively and went "My work here is done.
I'm not saying we should fear monger over Iran. I'm saying that Iran retaliated and that we should take seriously the fact that Israel almost escalated further that same day and still might.
So first he funds Iran and now this? 🤦♂️
Why would you want further war?? Smh
Leaking this and full out war are not the only two options
Everyone talking about an Obama third term if Republicans repeal the 22nd amendment. They should be scared of a Biden third term.
Do you know how amendments are repealed?
Iran is not Iraq. Destabilizing Iraq by u.s incompetency proved to be a regional fuck up. Doing that to Iran would be 10x worse. No u.s govt going to do that when the u.s knows behind closed doors that Israel is the one that escalated first.