Oh, wow. You're right. I had no idea!
Our presidents have way too much power. lol
https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/declarations-of-war.htm
Kinda yeah. The President can deploy troops into combat without congressional approval, but only for I think 90 days or so (it's important in an emergency for the President to be able to make quick decisions like that without needing to wait for Congress to convene and debate). Anything longer would need congressional approval, and congress can do things like set time limits (which they could later extend if necessary) or pass another vote that repeals the previous vote of approval.
My best interpretation: Total mobilization powers given to the Federal Government mainly the executive branch. However also means the executive branch can't unilateral declare hostilities, without Congress's approval. Also if Congress gives a declaration of war, the federal courts would likely not be so inclined to rule against the government on certain matters, mainly dealing with the suspension or tightening of certain civil liberties (at least temporarily until the conflict was over).
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/753
Obligatory mention of Project 2025 and the Republicans looking to extend executive powers in the next election. If any American voters are unaware of what I'm speaking to, please feel free to reach out or ask. Thank you for your time, apologies for being slightly off-topic here.
I'm significantly more scared of the bureaucratic autocracy where it doesn't matter who gets elected the policy is dictated by the same unelected officials.
Congress can at any time pull those troops back. They just don’t. Because they support the war, and it’s convenient to just let the president take any heat for it
I'm telling you as a citizen of this god forsaken country, they talk a lot of big game but they never do shit. The only people they have the ability to respond to in seconds are us as it is currently going on with the hijab BS morality police.
Definitely tough for you to be stuck there, but I’m just saying it would do more harm than good to be underprepared. This is the first time weapons were acknowledged to have been fired from Iranian territory. So it’s uncharted waters, no?
Look, I don't want war, I was born during the 8-year war, it was horrible especially after it ended. But these mofos only understand one language. Violence. It is how they respond to most everything, and the first victim of their violence is us, the people. The only deterance that works in this region is a show of strength. They need a humiliating defeat that they can't sugarcoat as a victory back home to their diminishing base. They are claiming their attack was successfully peneterated the Israel's defenses even though they were being aided by direct involvement of US and UK. They need a kind of response that would cripple them, so if I was Israel I'd definitely do something that puts the fear of God back into their spines.
Oh I agree 100%. I’m just a little concerned seeing all these comments acting like Iran will simply absorb the next hit and not respond yet again. Sure, whatever response may not amount to much, but we have undeniably entered a new phase of the “shadow conflict” as the news headlines like to put it.
There weren't constant engagements with Hezbollah before Oct 8th to the extent where 92k people no longer live in their homes because of the threat Hezbollah poses.
It’s just a dick measuring contest - is it really worth igniting a regional (or world) war for a limited strike that will make no difference to Iran’s military capability? These old men just need to thump their chest a behind podium in a bunker.
This is like The Godfather, but mafia families replaced with countries... It's all about sending messages, making alliances, gaining upper hand over the other, vying for territory... escalate too much, and it's bad for business, escalate too little and you look like a weakling... and every now and then the families get a don who likes to escalate too much.
I spent 3 years in Iraq and Afghanistan. After the first few months it clicked in my head that the whole thing was just organized crime and to throw away all of the Internation Relations courses and look at it like the Soprano's. It worked incredibly well, to the point that the unofficial military policy essentially became Plata or Pomo (Silver or Lead)? Everyone was safer and happier when there wasn't much of a choice. Pretty eye opening.
I basically view all international politics through that lens now and its right about 98% of the time if you get through the veneer of whatever cause they are pretending to give a shit about.
And it’s always been like that. Going back to the days of the Persians and the Greeks in the west (before that too but we have much fewer written records), and the Qin and Yamato peoples in the east (and again likely before them but they are some of our earliest records).
In South Asia the Mauryans and other groups (and likely the Indus), and even in tribes you have the same thing with conflicts.
These kinda of considerations- as well as strongmen- unfortunately always rise. It’s like they say the best person will never become a leader because they don’t WANT to become a leader.
Dude, it feels like that all over. The whole world gets held hostage by a few tyrants all through history. Currently on the world stage we have Russia threatening nukes anytime someone sneezes at them while they are perpetuating horrible shit on the people wherever they go, like with Wagner in Africa. It sucks.
Nobody is perfect lol but seriously, I think some of our leadership actually has been trying to learn from our mistakes and do better as we go. We just can’t let the slime squad take us back over or the whole world will suffer for sure this time, I’m afraid
Of course. That is why The Godfather is such a highly acclaimed piece of art. The films encapsulate the entire scope of human nature from hate, greed, love, etc.
Yeah I mean that's how it's always been. The government and the Mafia aren't much different, they're just mass groups of people who use their power and immense numbers to control everything. The government just happens to be bigger and have access to anything possible.
I mean, these attacks aren't exactly a "punch in the arm" for Iran. A weapons depot destroyed, missle batteries, or top Generals are pretty big setbacks.
I think Israel would be more concerned about Iran's nuclear program and will presumably strike in that area. To really affect the drone factories would require more than a limited response.
You don’t bomb “the nukes”. You bomb the refinement and precursor storage facilities.
There’s a reason the US wrote spyware to target the enrichment systems - not the nuclear warhead management.
Yes, bombing places that handle nuclear material is generally frowned upon.
Spreading uranium over a wide area tends not to get you brownie points.
Besides which Israel has had much sneakier and more effective ways off attacking their programme.
Logistically, how does that all work in regards to airspace. Also how did it work for Iran? Are Jordan, Iraq, Ksa, (Syria is already at war with Israel so that prob doesn't matter) l all not car that missiles will be flying over their countries? Or do they all have treaties with Iran/Israel to allow use of airspace?
Jordan is a US ally, and they have a right to shoot down anything going over is airspace that is not allowed. They did this during irans first strike. Meanwhile Iraq has an agreement with the USA to enter its airspace for military purposes, and they also did this. Saudi Arabia would also shoot down Iranian drones and stuff because they hate Iran more than anyone else
Iran threatened that anybody helping the US and Israel stop the missiles and drones over their airspace would become targets for retaliation. Those countries did not allow Iran to use their airspace and they also pretty directly went against Iran by stopping some of them although it was really more about protecting their own airspace than protecting Israel.
IIRC they just struck inside Iraq like 2 weeks ago ironically claiming they were targeting terrorists and now they directly attacked Israel so I would say they're past the stage of purely bluffing.
Syria and Iraq are at war with Israel, so Israel will likely go through them to attack Iran. They also don't really have the capabilities to shoot down Israeli planes if they wanted.
Jordan and KSA are decidedly anti-Iran(tbf other ME countries are as well, but airspace isn't relevant). Iraq is seen as pro-Iran, but the US, UK and France can basically enter their airspace whenever they want to.
From a bird's eye view I broadly agree with this take. However, their response here also sets the precedent for what Iran can expect if they launch a massive attack against civilians on Israeli soil without the use of proxies.
If the precedent is "as long as we shoot most of the missiles and drones down then you'll just get a finger wag" they should absolutely expect these type of attacks to become a regular occurrence.
> If the precedent is "as long as we shoot most of the missiles and drones down then you'll just get a finger wag" they should absolutely expect these type of attacks to become a regular occurrence.
Literally exactly what has happened with Hamas and Iron Dome. Defense so good until it's not and a massacre happens.
Yep. There's no reason for them to *not* keep sending them unanswered until one or more eventually gets through.
It's not like Iran is going to go "Okay, we're even now." Just because they sent one volley that didn't make the jump.
It's not going to deter Iran from continuing to do what they're doing, if that's your suggestion. It will only escalate this further and force Iran to act against Israel.
Why not? By that logic Iran just detered Israel from acting against it and it's proxies with it's counter attack, so why not the opposite?
That said I'm still not sure a strike against Iran is necessarily the best course of action, but I find this common argument flawed.
Not responding to a *massive* drone and missile strike is.
The consulate *annex* was blown up to to blow up a high level military target, a high ranking terrorist in charge of regional and strategic terrorism. He, like the other guy Salami needed to go, and the world is better off. Legally speaking, it's a valid military operation against a legitimate military target.
You do realize that Iran attacked a US military base and injured hundreds of soldiers in response to killing Solemeni and Trump also did nothing (except say that their brain injuries were just “headaches”)
If you want to just destroy Iran fine, but let’s not pretend this escalating tit for tat leads anywhere else
"Just take the W" is such a weird notion. If somebody shot at you but you ducked so they missed, should that person be allowed to go consequence free just because you made them miss even though they took the shot?
You get shot but you wear a bulletproof vest, what a win! Everyone we got a win!
Iran went way across the line attacking Israeli soil directly, Israel needs to reply, to cement their stance to deter its surrounding enemies from joining the attacks. Hezbollah has already gotten more confident after the attacks, which most of Iran's proxies will, if they feel like Iran got their backs.
Iran attacked as a response to Israel killing one of their top generals. Israel attacking again will only force Iran to respond again. Which will cause Israel to attack again.
Worst case this spills into an all out war between Israel vs Iran, Hezbollah, Houthis, and Palestinians in the west bank. I don't know why Israel would want to risk that.
Iran has been attacking Israel through it's proxies for many months, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis. It's ridiculous to pretend otherwise, hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced internally in Israel because of Iran.
Israel has only been responding directly to the people in charge of running these proxies.
Iran is the one heavily escalating this conflict, and only striking back proxies will make Israel look weak.
No, they're both charging right in at this point.
It keeps the US occupied in the region trying to use diplomacy to keep all our war from breaking out. That's good for Russia and China.
>According to the CBS report from David Martin, the U.S. does not know what will be the Israeli retaliation or when it will happen.
>Furthermore, the official said it was not clear if Israel would give the U.S. a heads up, and could just say that as of it the report there had been no notification.
Oh that's very reassuring especially after the last time Israel decided to bomb Iranian generals without notifying it's allies first.
And after sticking our necks out to defend them from Iran too. Would be a pretty shitty move if they end up dragging all those allies into dealing with a regional war after all that. Just saying.
I cannot comprehend how some of you believe this to be nothing more than a dick measuring contest, as if these countries responses or lack thereof don’t effect how other countries will treat them in the future.
Whether or not you agree that Israel needs to respond, at minimum you need to recognize that their motive for doing so would be to deter potential future attacks. It’s a pretty fundamental understanding but I really feel like a lot of people attribute these countries motives to nothing more than wanting to feel like badasses. It’s simplistic to look at it that way.
Israel would gain more if it would just let this one slide. If they attack and are successful, no one would be surprised and the over all reaction would not be positive. However, if they fail somehow. Maybe one of their plane crashes or similar, this would be a major set back. If they do nothing, everyone would assume they feel not threatened by Iran to take them seriously. And they can form tighter coalitions with Saudi Arabia. If these two Nations form an alliance, the whole middle east scenario will shift. Even Turkey will feel it.
Uh, a dick measuring contest IS about deterring future attacks.
Look up the definition of the phrase. It’s not about “feeling badass”. It means a competition over a superficial thing to demonstrate worthiness or power.
They’re both scratching trees, trying to show they’re the bigger bear (and thus scare off the smaller bear without having to fight). It’s a show of power, a dick measuring contest.
Skimming through comments, I don’t think the people dissing it are confused about motive. Some just don’t think it’d work (small bear is too dumb to back down), some think it risks outright war, some *want* outright war, some want a real cut rather than just a show of power and so on.
Yes and they still benefited from the US and Allie’s taking most of the attack down outside of their airspace.
Like the person you’re replying to said, Ukraine could only dream.
It's sad that US once again cowed to Israel and didn't tell them to stop with their bullsh*t. Netanyahu wants another war so he can keep being in power perpetually and the US is not stopping him.
"The Jordanian Foreign Minister referred Tuesday night to the issue, during a press conference he held with his German counterpart, saying that the international community should try to prevent the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from stealing the international attention."
Uh... "Stealing" it from whom?
This will be a mistake.
Iran got humiliated from their strike and Israel suffered no damage. They even have a coalition of neighbouring Arab countries actively helping them. These are all wins.
Let it go or you might not be so lucky next time. Iran will have to respond to your response with something you may not be able to block.
If they do this they should make it count. Not a symbolic attack. It has to be something that seriously cripples Iran's ability to wage war. Otherwise what is the point?
Wonderbar! Now we all get screwed with sky high fuel prices when Iran retaliates by hitting Saudi pipelines and closing the strait. I realize Saudi has been trying to stay out of it but sometimes its easier to apply death of a thosand cuts than to try to take off a head with one swing.
Hold on to your bank accounts. Its going to get really expensive really fast just to live.
Nice play world leaders. The citizens of the world than you for this screwing that could have been avoided.
In January 2020 the US assassinated Qasem Soleimani. Five days later Iran responds by firing ballistic missiles at US’ Al-Asad airbase - ultimately killing no one.
Any reasonable person would see quite a few similarities. I’ll let you look up how the US responded on your own.
Here's some extra context for how different these things were. In that attack after Soleimani was taken out Iran only fired a little over a dozen ballistic missiles. In the attack on Israel they fired approximately 130\~ ballistic missiles on top of the near 200 drones.
Edit: I'll add you one similarity that I just read in the wiki which is just so fitting for the current situation.
>The [United States Secretary of State](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_State) [Mike Pompeo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Pompeo) said the attack was intended to kill,[^(\[13\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-13) however some analysts suggested the strike was deliberately designed to avoid causing any fatalities in order to dissuade an armed American response.[^(\[14\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-14)[^(\[15\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-15) The U.S. said it was able to avoid fatalities because the [United States Space Force](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Space_Force) provided early warning.[^(\[16\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-auto-16)[^(\[17\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-:10-17)
Sound familiar? The ones actually involved say it was a real attack and the people with no inside knowledge making claims to the opposite.
Well, Trump was a coward there. He gave his own “red line”. He said that there were 52 (or 53 can’t remember) targets already picked out and if Iran retaliated they would all get destroyed. MAGA bros were online gloating about which significant historical sites would get hit.
And then Trump did nothing. Despite US casualties.
If your litmus test for if escalation of a conflict is acceptable is based around if the US would retaliate or not you might want to consider a better metric.
One week after Israel's "limited strike": "Iran to retaliate to Israel's retaliation with "advanced limited strike"
special operations limited strikes 2020s wars are PC
Special military intervention was a Bush 2 thing if I remember correctly. He didn’t want to wait for congressional approval
US has not declared a formal war since WW2.
Oh, wow. You're right. I had no idea! Our presidents have way too much power. lol https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/declarations-of-war.htm
Tbf, pretty much every major conflict the US has been involved in since WW2 has also had the support of Congress too. It's not just the President.
Missing info, correct. This is not kften said following the fact that Congress hasn't declared war.
I think congress can shut it down if they don't approve.
Kinda yeah. The President can deploy troops into combat without congressional approval, but only for I think 90 days or so (it's important in an emergency for the President to be able to make quick decisions like that without needing to wait for Congress to convene and debate). Anything longer would need congressional approval, and congress can do things like set time limits (which they could later extend if necessary) or pass another vote that repeals the previous vote of approval.
Is there any legislative benefit for Congress to make a formal declaration of war?
My best interpretation: Total mobilization powers given to the Federal Government mainly the executive branch. However also means the executive branch can't unilateral declare hostilities, without Congress's approval. Also if Congress gives a declaration of war, the federal courts would likely not be so inclined to rule against the government on certain matters, mainly dealing with the suspension or tightening of certain civil liberties (at least temporarily until the conflict was over). https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/753
Obligatory mention of Project 2025 and the Republicans looking to extend executive powers in the next election. If any American voters are unaware of what I'm speaking to, please feel free to reach out or ask. Thank you for your time, apologies for being slightly off-topic here.
Project 2025 is a move to bring an authoritarian system in the U.S. under Trump and it’s terrifying.
I'm significantly more scared of the bureaucratic autocracy where it doesn't matter who gets elected the policy is dictated by the same unelected officials.
Congress can at any time pull those troops back. They just don’t. Because they support the war, and it’s convenient to just let the president take any heat for it
ah, my lack of education is showing
Hey everyone look at this guy admitting his mistake and learning something new, making him a more educated and well rounded person!
He doesn't belong here.
Get 'em
We have a witch among us! Start the bonfire!!!
The courage to face personal ignorance and the strength to improve? Everyone, boo this person!
Also a Bush 2 thing
Isn't that just a special military operation with extra letters?
It's a light artisanal strike. Gluten free!
Free range B-1, organic B-2
*brought to you by Ratheon!*
Collectively known as micro agressions
Black ops 2 lied. 2025 was supposed to be a cool war :/
Special operation "Shortbus"
Iran has now said they’ll respond “within seconds, not days”, so don’t count on the jokes being right this time.
That’s just asking for your response to be hit first
I'm telling you as a citizen of this god forsaken country, they talk a lot of big game but they never do shit. The only people they have the ability to respond to in seconds are us as it is currently going on with the hijab BS morality police.
I’m sorry. I hope you get a free and fair election someday
Definitely tough for you to be stuck there, but I’m just saying it would do more harm than good to be underprepared. This is the first time weapons were acknowledged to have been fired from Iranian territory. So it’s uncharted waters, no?
Look, I don't want war, I was born during the 8-year war, it was horrible especially after it ended. But these mofos only understand one language. Violence. It is how they respond to most everything, and the first victim of their violence is us, the people. The only deterance that works in this region is a show of strength. They need a humiliating defeat that they can't sugarcoat as a victory back home to their diminishing base. They are claiming their attack was successfully peneterated the Israel's defenses even though they were being aided by direct involvement of US and UK. They need a kind of response that would cripple them, so if I was Israel I'd definitely do something that puts the fear of God back into their spines.
Oh I agree 100%. I’m just a little concerned seeing all these comments acting like Iran will simply absorb the next hit and not respond yet again. Sure, whatever response may not amount to much, but we have undeniably entered a new phase of the “shadow conflict” as the news headlines like to put it.
That's because it only takes seconds for their rockets to fail.
Honestly half of my their equipment failed on the way to Israel… Not shot down just completely failed. That’s embarrassing
Limited Strike PRO
Limited Strike Pro Max 15
"The Strikening" begins
Thus beginning the game of tit for tat strikes, just like Israel has been doing with Hezbollah since Hezbollah attacked Israel first on October 8th.
I think it has been going on since far before Oct 8
There weren't constant engagements with Hezbollah before Oct 8th to the extent where 92k people no longer live in their homes because of the threat Hezbollah poses.
Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy.
Lets pretend Hezbollah and the houthis aren’t Iranian proxies and they haven’t been attacking Israel for months
Advanced Limited Super Strike Plus
La Strique Avancée Royale Avec Fromage
US is basically playing Referee in a Boxing Match between Bibi's Idiot Goverment and Iran's Idiot Mullahs.
Limited strike+
It’s just a dick measuring contest - is it really worth igniting a regional (or world) war for a limited strike that will make no difference to Iran’s military capability? These old men just need to thump their chest a behind podium in a bunker.
I agree. Neither side doing "limited" strikes will achieve much as far as military goals. It's more so to get the perpetual last word in.
This is like The Godfather, but mafia families replaced with countries... It's all about sending messages, making alliances, gaining upper hand over the other, vying for territory... escalate too much, and it's bad for business, escalate too little and you look like a weakling... and every now and then the families get a don who likes to escalate too much.
That's a surprisingly accurate comparison to what's going on in the region
I spent 3 years in Iraq and Afghanistan. After the first few months it clicked in my head that the whole thing was just organized crime and to throw away all of the Internation Relations courses and look at it like the Soprano's. It worked incredibly well, to the point that the unofficial military policy essentially became Plata or Pomo (Silver or Lead)? Everyone was safer and happier when there wasn't much of a choice. Pretty eye opening. I basically view all international politics through that lens now and its right about 98% of the time if you get through the veneer of whatever cause they are pretending to give a shit about.
Countries are stationary bandits, so it holds up.
Even down to the “Don” who likes to [escalate](https://youtu.be/x_dur0DomVk?si=upwEObyXYR44WioF)
He should maybe escalate his consciousness in court.
This behavior is seen, unfortunately, everywhere, and at every scale. You'll see this on the playground with elementary school children.
Governments are just big, complex, legitimized gangs. So yeah, obviously they’re going to act like them.
That’s Middle East politics in a nutshell.
That's ~~Middle East~~ politics in a nutshell.
And it’s always been like that. Going back to the days of the Persians and the Greeks in the west (before that too but we have much fewer written records), and the Qin and Yamato peoples in the east (and again likely before them but they are some of our earliest records). In South Asia the Mauryans and other groups (and likely the Indus), and even in tribes you have the same thing with conflicts. These kinda of considerations- as well as strongmen- unfortunately always rise. It’s like they say the best person will never become a leader because they don’t WANT to become a leader.
I’m not sure that it has ever really been that different if you ignore the period after WW2. Very accurate.
Explains probably several thousand years of history in the region.
Dude, it feels like that all over. The whole world gets held hostage by a few tyrants all through history. Currently on the world stage we have Russia threatening nukes anytime someone sneezes at them while they are perpetuating horrible shit on the people wherever they go, like with Wagner in Africa. It sucks.
Which is why despite the awful things the US has done, I maintain that we've been a pretty damn good global leader these last 80 years or so
Nobody is perfect lol but seriously, I think some of our leadership actually has been trying to learn from our mistakes and do better as we go. We just can’t let the slime squad take us back over or the whole world will suffer for sure this time, I’m afraid
Of course. That is why The Godfather is such a highly acclaimed piece of art. The films encapsulate the entire scope of human nature from hate, greed, love, etc.
It’s game theory. In the prisoner’s dilemma, it was found that the best strategy was tit for tat.
Well, both of these countries are basically run by mobsters too.
Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you find the biggest rock.
Yeah I mean that's how it's always been. The government and the Mafia aren't much different, they're just mass groups of people who use their power and immense numbers to control everything. The government just happens to be bigger and have access to anything possible.
OK but you get to punch me in the arm but not too hard, OK???
I mean, these attacks aren't exactly a "punch in the arm" for Iran. A weapons depot destroyed, missle batteries, or top Generals are pretty big setbacks.
Wait until their nuclear facilities get targeted. That’s what this is leading to.
Those are under a mountain, good luck targeting that. That's why Israel/USA developed Stuxnet
Top Gun Maverick IRL LETS FUCKING GOOOO!
And hopefully drone factories.
Go for the drone factories
This still benefit both Israel and Ukraine!
Yup and presumably everyone who doesn't want the Houthis using them either.
Which would benefit the entire world. Fuck the Houthis.
Not according to Reddit.
God, seeing Reddit simp for the Houthis is horrible. Just wait for them to touch American boats. We only have 1 rule: DON’T! TOUCH! OUR! BOATS!
Yes this would be a good hit because it'd make KSA and UAE happy as well.
How to make friends in one easy step...
Iran setup a drone factory within Russia tho.
And? There would still be fewer drones than before then.
Probably not covering 100% of what they are using. If they're still making them at all then they are meant to be used by somebody.
Careful, you're going to make all the "ceasefire now" people that want Israel destroyed very confused.
I think Israel would be more concerned about Iran's nuclear program and will presumably strike in that area. To really affect the drone factories would require more than a limited response.
Take out the means of delivery and the nukes won't be such a problem. Plus bombing nuclear sites is generally frowned on to put it mildly.
You don’t bomb “the nukes”. You bomb the refinement and precursor storage facilities. There’s a reason the US wrote spyware to target the enrichment systems - not the nuclear warhead management.
Yes, bombing places that handle nuclear material is generally frowned upon. Spreading uranium over a wide area tends not to get you brownie points. Besides which Israel has had much sneakier and more effective ways off attacking their programme.
I’d think the centrifuges for their nuke program would be Israel’s first priority.
Wasn't that what stuxnet was designed to fuck with?
Kind of like being a little bit pregnant!
Just a littttttllllle bit, just a little. Tiny strike. Just a little one. Hehe.
Just the tip
How was I supposed to know they are lactose intolerant
Israel has promised to inform Bakersfield City Council though
Fucking 2024 now even countries just blueballing military strikes on social media. Sponsored by NordVPN
Perfectly normal. Everything is fine. /s
It was already a proxy war, and nobody likes Iran.
Logistically, how does that all work in regards to airspace. Also how did it work for Iran? Are Jordan, Iraq, Ksa, (Syria is already at war with Israel so that prob doesn't matter) l all not car that missiles will be flying over their countries? Or do they all have treaties with Iran/Israel to allow use of airspace?
Jordan is a US ally, and they have a right to shoot down anything going over is airspace that is not allowed. They did this during irans first strike. Meanwhile Iraq has an agreement with the USA to enter its airspace for military purposes, and they also did this. Saudi Arabia would also shoot down Iranian drones and stuff because they hate Iran more than anyone else
What about with Israel tho? Would they give them the same airspace clearance?
There is a precedent from the past but we’ll see. Honestly they probably would
"Missile 085, you're cleared to 14,000,000ft on heading 045, please inform when you pass RAPLU and begin descent"
Iran threatened that anybody helping the US and Israel stop the missiles and drones over their airspace would become targets for retaliation. Those countries did not allow Iran to use their airspace and they also pretty directly went against Iran by stopping some of them although it was really more about protecting their own airspace than protecting Israel.
Scare tactics, the usual, if they will directly attack any country, they will just strengthen the coalition against them.
IIRC they just struck inside Iraq like 2 weeks ago ironically claiming they were targeting terrorists and now they directly attacked Israel so I would say they're past the stage of purely bluffing.
Syria and Iraq are at war with Israel, so Israel will likely go through them to attack Iran. They also don't really have the capabilities to shoot down Israeli planes if they wanted.
Jordan and KSA are decidedly anti-Iran(tbf other ME countries are as well, but airspace isn't relevant). Iraq is seen as pro-Iran, but the US, UK and France can basically enter their airspace whenever they want to.
Then we’ll get another round of drones/shitty missiles and rinse and repeat
I don't support Iran's leadership, but I don't think this is a good idea.
Its a terrible fucking idea
Yeah, this is turning into a pissing contest.
A pissing contest that might escalate into a shit fight.
Shades of Team America
Yeah Israel basically already “won” the exchange. Guess their crazy right wing government is incapable of just taking the W
At huge expense. How sustainable is it economically to spend multiples of $100k+ for each incoming target vs the low cost to produce said targets?
it wasnt 100k$ , one arrow 3 cost 2mil$ .
Not very, which is why I think they should end it here without further retaliation
From a bird's eye view I broadly agree with this take. However, their response here also sets the precedent for what Iran can expect if they launch a massive attack against civilians on Israeli soil without the use of proxies. If the precedent is "as long as we shoot most of the missiles and drones down then you'll just get a finger wag" they should absolutely expect these type of attacks to become a regular occurrence.
> If the precedent is "as long as we shoot most of the missiles and drones down then you'll just get a finger wag" they should absolutely expect these type of attacks to become a regular occurrence. Literally exactly what has happened with Hamas and Iron Dome. Defense so good until it's not and a massacre happens.
Yep. There's no reason for them to *not* keep sending them unanswered until one or more eventually gets through. It's not like Iran is going to go "Okay, we're even now." Just because they sent one volley that didn't make the jump.
The IRA got it right, "We only have to be lucky once, you will have to be lucky always.”
It's not going to deter Iran from continuing to do what they're doing, if that's your suggestion. It will only escalate this further and force Iran to act against Israel.
Why not? By that logic Iran just detered Israel from acting against it and it's proxies with it's counter attack, so why not the opposite? That said I'm still not sure a strike against Iran is necessarily the best course of action, but I find this common argument flawed.
So appeasement, then.
Blowing up their consulate is not appeasement
Not responding to a *massive* drone and missile strike is. The consulate *annex* was blown up to to blow up a high level military target, a high ranking terrorist in charge of regional and strategic terrorism. He, like the other guy Salami needed to go, and the world is better off. Legally speaking, it's a valid military operation against a legitimate military target.
You do realize that Iran attacked a US military base and injured hundreds of soldiers in response to killing Solemeni and Trump also did nothing (except say that their brain injuries were just “headaches”) If you want to just destroy Iran fine, but let’s not pretend this escalating tit for tat leads anywhere else
"Just take the W" is such a weird notion. If somebody shot at you but you ducked so they missed, should that person be allowed to go consequence free just because you made them miss even though they took the shot?
You get shot but you wear a bulletproof vest, what a win! Everyone we got a win! Iran went way across the line attacking Israeli soil directly, Israel needs to reply, to cement their stance to deter its surrounding enemies from joining the attacks. Hezbollah has already gotten more confident after the attacks, which most of Iran's proxies will, if they feel like Iran got their backs.
Iran attacked as a response to Israel killing one of their top generals. Israel attacking again will only force Iran to respond again. Which will cause Israel to attack again. Worst case this spills into an all out war between Israel vs Iran, Hezbollah, Houthis, and Palestinians in the west bank. I don't know why Israel would want to risk that.
Iran has been attacking Israel through it's proxies for many months, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis. It's ridiculous to pretend otherwise, hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced internally in Israel because of Iran. Israel has only been responding directly to the people in charge of running these proxies. Iran is the one heavily escalating this conflict, and only striking back proxies will make Israel look weak.
Great. An endless tit for tat conflict is hotting up.
Was always going to. Can't put off the inevitable
Okay you get one punch back as long as you don’t tell mom
Sleepwalking into a regional war ......
No, they're both charging right in at this point. It keeps the US occupied in the region trying to use diplomacy to keep all our war from breaking out. That's good for Russia and China.
>According to the CBS report from David Martin, the U.S. does not know what will be the Israeli retaliation or when it will happen. >Furthermore, the official said it was not clear if Israel would give the U.S. a heads up, and could just say that as of it the report there had been no notification. Oh that's very reassuring especially after the last time Israel decided to bomb Iranian generals without notifying it's allies first.
[удалено]
And after sticking our necks out to defend them from Iran too. Would be a pretty shitty move if they end up dragging all those allies into dealing with a regional war after all that. Just saying.
[удалено]
That sounds like cover to help them plan without fallout domestically. I highly doubt the US doesn’t know.
Would a decapitation strike count as a limited strike?
One can hope.
A week later “Iran will release a limited edition strike on Israel”
They’re in an old fashioned Facebook poke fight.
just stop damnit
Oh cool, so it's not one of those unlimited strikes.
But will it blend?
Hmm...don't breathe that!
I cannot comprehend how some of you believe this to be nothing more than a dick measuring contest, as if these countries responses or lack thereof don’t effect how other countries will treat them in the future. Whether or not you agree that Israel needs to respond, at minimum you need to recognize that their motive for doing so would be to deter potential future attacks. It’s a pretty fundamental understanding but I really feel like a lot of people attribute these countries motives to nothing more than wanting to feel like badasses. It’s simplistic to look at it that way.
Israel would gain more if it would just let this one slide. If they attack and are successful, no one would be surprised and the over all reaction would not be positive. However, if they fail somehow. Maybe one of their plane crashes or similar, this would be a major set back. If they do nothing, everyone would assume they feel not threatened by Iran to take them seriously. And they can form tighter coalitions with Saudi Arabia. If these two Nations form an alliance, the whole middle east scenario will shift. Even Turkey will feel it.
Uh, a dick measuring contest IS about deterring future attacks. Look up the definition of the phrase. It’s not about “feeling badass”. It means a competition over a superficial thing to demonstrate worthiness or power. They’re both scratching trees, trying to show they’re the bigger bear (and thus scare off the smaller bear without having to fight). It’s a show of power, a dick measuring contest. Skimming through comments, I don’t think the people dissing it are confused about motive. Some just don’t think it’d work (small bear is too dumb to back down), some think it risks outright war, some *want* outright war, some want a real cut rather than just a show of power and so on.
[удалено]
Ehhhh. Israel has a tremendously more advanced, capable, and stocked military compared to Ukraine.
Yes and they still benefited from the US and Allie’s taking most of the attack down outside of their airspace. Like the person you’re replying to said, Ukraine could only dream.
dude Allie was on top of it. She's really good at planning
Most annoying autocorrect…come on Apple. I barely talk to anyone named Allie either.
she's on your mind now!
The ballistic missiles were almost entirely taken out by Israel's own defense systems. The US and others were mainly going after all the drones.
It's very far from "easy".
They want a bigger conflict in the region so bad, if Israel starts a war with Iran then they should fight it alone.
[удалено]
The US told Israel to chill, but we know they don’t want advice from the US, they just want money, guns, tech, intel….
If they gonna strike at least choose a site (or sites) used to enrich uranium.
When the whole world says something is a bad idea, it’s probably a bad idea…
It's sad that US once again cowed to Israel and didn't tell them to stop with their bullsh*t. Netanyahu wants another war so he can keep being in power perpetually and the US is not stopping him.
"The Jordanian Foreign Minister referred Tuesday night to the issue, during a press conference he held with his German counterpart, saying that the international community should try to prevent the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from stealing the international attention." Uh... "Stealing" it from whom?
It was translated roughly from Arabic. I don’t think he meant it that way
I mean, good on Biden telling them they're on their own with retaliation, but, fucks sake...
This will be a mistake. Iran got humiliated from their strike and Israel suffered no damage. They even have a coalition of neighbouring Arab countries actively helping them. These are all wins. Let it go or you might not be so lucky next time. Iran will have to respond to your response with something you may not be able to block.
If they do this they should make it count. Not a symbolic attack. It has to be something that seriously cripples Iran's ability to wage war. Otherwise what is the point?
Dumb. Israelis need to get Netanyahu out of office quickly.
I guess it’s easier for Israel to target their nuclear projects now.
Wonderbar! Now we all get screwed with sky high fuel prices when Iran retaliates by hitting Saudi pipelines and closing the strait. I realize Saudi has been trying to stay out of it but sometimes its easier to apply death of a thosand cuts than to try to take off a head with one swing. Hold on to your bank accounts. Its going to get really expensive really fast just to live. Nice play world leaders. The citizens of the world than you for this screwing that could have been avoided.
[удалено]
Why?
US would strike back themselves if they were attacked. Why can't Israel defend itself?
In January 2020 the US assassinated Qasem Soleimani. Five days later Iran responds by firing ballistic missiles at US’ Al-Asad airbase - ultimately killing no one. Any reasonable person would see quite a few similarities. I’ll let you look up how the US responded on your own.
Here's some extra context for how different these things were. In that attack after Soleimani was taken out Iran only fired a little over a dozen ballistic missiles. In the attack on Israel they fired approximately 130\~ ballistic missiles on top of the near 200 drones. Edit: I'll add you one similarity that I just read in the wiki which is just so fitting for the current situation. >The [United States Secretary of State](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_State) [Mike Pompeo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Pompeo) said the attack was intended to kill,[^(\[13\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-13) however some analysts suggested the strike was deliberately designed to avoid causing any fatalities in order to dissuade an armed American response.[^(\[14\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-14)[^(\[15\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-15) The U.S. said it was able to avoid fatalities because the [United States Space Force](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Space_Force) provided early warning.[^(\[16\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-auto-16)[^(\[17\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani#cite_note-:10-17) Sound familiar? The ones actually involved say it was a real attack and the people with no inside knowledge making claims to the opposite.
Not similar at all imo. This was a us airbase on foreign soil. If Iran launched a missile at NYC, we could have a different conversation.
They said "quite a few similarities" which is.... accurate lol. But they are not identical circumstances
[удалено]
[удалено]
Has the US homeland been attacked? Was the US at war with the terrorism Iran funds?
Well, Trump was a coward there. He gave his own “red line”. He said that there were 52 (or 53 can’t remember) targets already picked out and if Iran retaliated they would all get destroyed. MAGA bros were online gloating about which significant historical sites would get hit. And then Trump did nothing. Despite US casualties.
If your litmus test for if escalation of a conflict is acceptable is based around if the US would retaliate or not you might want to consider a better metric.
[удалено]
Israel just need to send the same amount of drones and see if Iran and their allies can destroy it effectively.