What do you suppose the U.S. would do if, say, Russia launched an attack on the West Coast with several hundred non-nuclear missiles, justifying that attack by saying that the U.S. had given weapons and money to Ukraine to defend itself against Russia? Imagine further that U.S. planes and anti-missile defenses managed to fend off all the Russian missiles, and then the Russian attack stopped.
Would the U.S. then refrain from all further action, avoiding all retaliation by proclaiming that we had won a “great victory” over Russia? Would we listen to, say, Canada if they told us to avoid retaliating because Russia had stopped attacking and we’d only promote a “wider war”? I doubt it. We might not attack Russia with nukes, but you can bet that we would do something, even though we’ve put about as many sanctions on Russia as we can.
But, after Iran’s attack on Israel Saturday night, an attack to which Israel didn’t retaliate (but has contemplated doing so), and an attack in which Israel’s planes did not leave Israeli airspace, Biden has butted in,once again, preventing Israel from retaliating against an attack. It’s reported in this NYT piece (click to read, or find it archived here):
An excerpt:
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 against Iranian airstrikes constituted a major strategic victory that might not require another round of retaliation, U.S. officials said on Sunday.
The interception of nearly all of the more than 300 drones and missiles 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 yet clear as the country’s war cabinet met for several hours on Sunday to make decisions about its next steps.
The leaders of the Group of 7 major industrial democracies echoed Mr. Biden’s message on Sunday morning, condemning Iran for the attack and warning that it could provoke what they called an “uncontrollable regional escalation” in the Middle East.
“This must be avoided,” the joint statement said. “We will continue to work to stabilize the situation and avoid further escalation.”
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 with the firing of weapons from Iranian territory into Israeli territory. Had defenses not held, scores or hundreds could have been killed.
American officials said it was clear to them that wide-scale death was Iran’s intent, despite the fact that its leadership telegraphed the attack well in advance, publicly and privately. Officials said that even as the attack was underway, Iran’s government sent word through Swiss intermediaries that it considered the matter closed.
As the Elder of Ziyon remarks acidly,
Saying that Israel should regard this as a victory is shortsighted. As others have pointed out, surviving someone shooting at you many times because of your bulletproof vest is not a victory. The shooter can reload and only needs one bullet to make it through. Israel cannot afford to remain in a purely defensive posture forever, especially as Iran has proven that it is now willing to directly attack Israel.
If Iran fired a lot more missiles and drones at once, and Hezbollah launched a gazillion Iranian missiles, which it has, it might overwhelm the Iron dome completely and destroy considerable parts of Israel.
Yes, wide-scale death was Iran’s intent, and if you think it’s going to stop with that one attack, I’d argue that you’re wrong. Iran continues to supply its proxies, including Hezbollah and Yemen, not to mention Hamas, with money, material, and rockets. And of course Iran is developing nuclear weapons, one of which can easily destroy nearly all of Israel. (For some reason the U.S. doesn’t worry about that, though Israel tried to stop the program earlier by bombing Iranian nuclear facilities or assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists.) And yet Biden tells Israel to keep its hands off Iran, which, if there’s such a thing as an “axis of evil” in the Middle East, surely qualifies for the title. Even many Iranians dislike their oppressive theocracy, and there was some celebrating in Iran when its attack on Israel failed.
Now don’t get me wrong. I’m grateful to the U.S.—and to Britain, France, and Jordan—for defending Israel against the Iranian attack. And indeed, an Israeli retaliation could destabilize the Middle East and create a wider war—for now. But if I’m not wrong, that wider war is coming anyway. Iran will keep supplying countries who attack Israel, and if you think that its failure has deterred it from further attacks on Israel, all I can say is “I doubt it.” Someday, and it won’t be long now, Iran will have nuclear weapons and a delivery system. Further if war comes from Hezbollah in Lebanon, which might as well be an extension of Iran’s military, that can also be put on Iran. I guess I should add that I am not a big fan of Netanyahu and believe he needs to go as soon he can without his departure hurting Israel’s war effort.
What bothers me is not so much as America being a buttinski in this case, but its tendency to be a buttinski about everything that Israel does. And that includes the U.S.’s constant pressure on Israel not to go into Rafah. At best, Israel is told to evacuate its civilians (which it surely will) but then engage in targeted strikes rather than a big attack. (Is the U.S. an expert in that?) The U.S. doesn’t like any civilians being killed, despite the fact that the way Hamas operates is to ensure that Gazan civilians will be killed, for that gains them the world’s sympathy. Those who doubt that are dead wrong. “Collateral” deaths of Gazan civilians are not on Israel but Hamas. Further, the ratio of Gazan civilians killed to Hamas terrorists killed is on the order of 1.5:1 or even 1:1, and no country has achieved that in modern warfare. Does that placate the U.S.? Of course not, even though our own ratios are far worse than Israel’s. (Again, I am not by any means celebrating the tragedy of dead Gazan civilians, just noting who bears the responsibility.)
In the end, I can’t help but believe that a huge factor in Biden’s buttinski behavior about Israel involves boosting his own chances of re-election. The Muslim vote may be key in some states like Michigan, and younger Americans are more pro-Palestinian than older ones as well as far less approving about how Biden is dealing with the Israel/Hamas war. Biden needs those young voters. It seems to me unethical—indeed, reprehensible— to interfere in other countries’ affairs of state so you can buttress your own chances of re-election. If you imagine that America were in Israel’s shoes, as I tried to in my clumsy scenario above, I seriously doubt that we’d pay attention to other countries who tried to prevent us from defending ourselves.
To quote the learned Elder of Ziyon again:
After all, Iran has to defend its honor. And the US understands that – unlike Israelis, they are irrational Muslims who cannot live with themselves unless they project power and force millions of Israelis into shelters. Risking Israeli lives is a worthwhile bargain to let Iran feel victorious. Then, the bargain goes, the US will stop Israel from responding, because no one died (rumors that the Bedouin girl in the Negev hit with shrapnel died were not true) and Iran is happy.
Iran can announce that its operation is over, vengeance is theirs, they can return to their proxy war through Hezbollah and Syria and Iraq and Yemen, and warn the US to do its part of the bargain and not allow Israel to do anything against them.
Iran is not deterred in the least.
Any self respecting nation would respond harshly to such an open attack on its territory. Israel should be striking at every drone factory and every missile site in Iran, at the very least, and those attacks should have started as soon as Iranian aircraft crossed Iran;s own borders towards Israel.
At the moment, with the US constraining Israel’s ability to respond, Iran pays no price at all for its blatant aggression. Which means it has a green light to do it again.
The entire Middle East sees that this is what the US means when it says its support for an ally is “ironclad.” Which strengthens Iran a lot more than its drones do.
Biden fully knows this advice will be ignored by Israel. These public pronouncements are for local USA political reasons, IE keep the woke vote.
I might be overthinking this, but doesn’t anyone find it strange that Iran would launch 300 slow-flying drones and missiles? Almost as if they sent their oldest and most expendable in anticipation that none or very few would get through, but still offending Israel’s amour propre to the extent that it would provoke a response, moving world opinion ever further against Israel. And after Israel retaliates? That’s when they send their modern missiles (do they have Russian hypersonics?)
Much as I (and most Iranians) would be happy to see a response from Israel, it should be looked at from all sides before proceeding.
I think Biden’s goal is to stop the escalation. It’s only human to want to strike back and Israel certainly could do so much more effectively than Iran did, and should certainly reserve the right to do so.
But there is a chance to retaliate against Iran in perhaps a more effective way by increasingly isolating Iran and getting other other Arab nations to increase their opposition to Iran. In the long term I believe that this is the only solution as the religious zealots in Iran are not going to be cowered by repeated military retaliation.
If increased pressure fails, or if Iran strikes again, Israel still has the option for another Operation Opera like strike.
Well, we had isolated Iran with sanctions, but Biden has peeled those back to a total of $80B. Biden isn’t someone who can be expected to get tough on Iran.
Then this is a chance to increase them and get the other Arab countries involved. Prior to Gaza there was a definite commitment to that.
Also If the retaliation back and forth continues the US would be then be a participant in another war in the Middle East and they’ve already lost two of them in the last few years. I don’t think they want another one.
He may be following the lead of Obama, who for some reason thought that supporting Iran would lead to a better balance between Sunni and Shiites in the Middle East, and that (for some reason) would sustain peace there.
THAT — wasn’t a bad bet by Obama at the time.
You have to try to at least reason with your enemy first, and that’s what Obama did. That he didn’t know they were and would be in future utterly unable to reason wasn’t something he could have predicted well. (I was on the side of, and wrote an article defending the JCPOA – Iran deal).
Further, the Iran of today is even less – if that can be imagined – reasonable than before due to machinations and political (and BIG TIME economic) reasons within Iran that weren’t the case then. There was a glimmer of hope within the 2012 Tehran uprisings that probably tilted his calculation.
It is good we tried that gambit – hell – it might have worked.
It didn’t.
D.A.
NYC
By all means make the first move towards a detente, but when Iran responded by pushing every limit, a change of policy was indicated. Yet Obama and then Biden stuck with their plan, even as it turned out they were playing the part of Chamberlain in 1938.
“An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile, in the hope that it will eat him last.”
I’ve read several accounts of Iran under the Ayatollahs and the idea that these men would respond in a normal political way is unrealistic. Their entire outlook on life revolves around Islam and its apocalyptic end times. They are religious fanatics of the worst kind.
Exactly. And I’m afraid the Biden policy will only strengthen the Orange One in the coming election. Contrary to what another commenter said, I don’t think appeasement will win over any pro-Palestinians.
I don’t know Biden’s motivation. There may be multiple motivations, including placating the progressive left. (His involvement in the Gaza conflict certainly suggests that maintaining progressive support for November is one motivation.) What matters to me more is his actions and their consequences. True that if we knew his motivations we’d be better able to predict his next move, but I don’t know if we can really know what he wants.
Biden has in my view made it more difficult for Israel to prosecute the war in Gaza. His meddling in Rafah, for example, has stalled the Israeli response by preventing Israel from eliminating Hamas. (Eliminating Hamas would enable aid to get into the area immediately, but Biden’s delay is allowing more civilians to starve.) His demonization of Netanyahu may destabilize the Israeli government—which, being a parliamentary system—depends on alliances across factions in order to function.
Whether Biden’s current action to limit an Israeli response to Iran is a positive or a negative depends on what happens next. If Israel holds off on responding, and the U.S., Britain, France, and Arab partner states in the region develop an effective strategy to deter Iran and remove its nuclear threat, then Biden’s call on Israel for restraint might have a positive impact. If, however, the call for restraint does not lead to a joint action or strategic plan by the allies and ends up simply kicking the can down the road, then the call for restraint will be a net negative. If Israel heeds Biden’s call for restraint but the allies dither rather than act, Iran will get the message that Israel can be attacked again.
So Biden’s actions have put Israel at a crossroads. Does Israel have an ally in the U.S. or is Israel on its own? Biden’s call for restraint has also put Biden in the spotlight. Will he deliver or will he let Israel down?
Re “other Arab nations”, Iran is not an Arab nation, and indeed Israel was the major supplier of weapons to Iran, against the Arabic nation of Iraq, during the Iran-Iraq war. As regards Iran’s current murderous hostility towards Israel, I imagine that is largely down to the religion of peace.
The Ayatollahs of Iran have been strongly anti-Israel from the time they took over in 1979. It’s related to their religious beliefs. There is no way their thinking can be modified. Religious fanaticism.
Iran’s “attack” was only legitimate response to the vicious and absolutely unacceptable destruction by Israel of Iran’s embassy in Syria, which killed 16 people. This was a serious crime according to international law. Iran’s reaction was very restrained. They announced their operation 3 days in advance, allowing everyone to get ready and take appropriate measures. They did not target any civilians, their targets were 100% military installations, in particular the base from which the attack on their embassy was launched. Israel is 100% to be blamed here, they were trying to drag the US into a war with Iran by provoking Iran and forcing it to react, hoping for an escalation. But neither Iran nor the US took the bait.
I’ve never seen a comment in which virtually every assertion is wrong but this is close. First, it wasn’t the embassy that was destroyed, and the people targeted were members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (one of which helped plan the October 7 attack) as well as a Hezbollah member. 11 people were killed, not 16. It is not against international law to kill people who have planned attacks that killed your people. Iran did not announce its operation 3 days in advance; clearly Israel didn’t know when the strike would occur. You have no idea whether Iran targeted any civilians and so you’re just making that up. The only person hurt WAS in fact a civilian.
You are totally ignorant of the things you’re speaking of. This is the first comment to make so many factual errors–ALL of which are wrong.
Wow.
Let’s talk about international respect for diplomatic premises.
1. For 444 days this regime held hostage American diplomats. US Embassy, Tehran.
As I recall then the outer edge of our debate was to avoid nuking Tehran.
2. Israeli embassy, Bs.As. Argentina. BLOWN UP. By Iran’s proxies. (oh. fuck. And a damn day care center with nearly 100 dead Jews who last I checked are still dead).
3. DECADES of Iran using diplomatic passports and premises to assassinate dissidents in free countries. Perhaps the thick file on this is something you haven’t gotten around to sir, in your twitter and facebook research?
Forgive my ire, but to hear the mullahs bleating about AN ANNEX to their actual embassy, not necessarily covered by the 1964 Vienna Convention… bombed..
…. is as parody as it gets. Hilarious.
Those 16 dead “Martyrs” (Islamic for “in the fight”) in Damascus were, by any and all definition, combatants.
The nature of the surgical strike was incredible. I found it fantastic. Art.
respectfully,
D.A.
NYC
I don’t know what’s in the NYT story, but there are reports that Iran talked to Turkey beforehand, and Turkey informed the US of the coming strike. (Reuters) A Turkish source said:
This suggests that Biden gave Iran the go-ahead with an attack, “within certain limits.”
Outrageous.
Outrageous? Could be seen that way. I see it more as a warning. The US was saying; “we know what you’re planning to do and can’t stop you, but be warned; our response, which as you well know can be devastating, will depend a great deal on what you do”.
I think the point is that Biden could have stopped it.
Biden can tell Iran “we know what you’re planning to do and can’t stop you” but he can tell Israel to not go into Rafah? US policy seems feckless and misguided.
Melanie Phillips has an essay out today on this very topic which is worth reading. Of particular interest is her recounting of the infiltration of the Biden administration by known Iranian actors – one of which who is still employed there:
https://melaniephillips.substack.com/p/strangling-israel-slowly?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=77655&post_id=143602996&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=155te&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
“Iran sought mass casualties in Israel strike, U.S. officials say”
“Iran’s weekend aerial attack on Israel was designed to cause mass casualties and infrastructure damage, senior U.S. officials said, an assessment that complicates deliberations on how to respond to Tehran and its military allies in the coming weeks.
The Biden administration on Sunday hailed a unified defense of Israel that included U.S., U.K. and French air power and allied Arab states, such as Jordan. Their anti-drone and anti-missile capabilities, combined with Israel’s Iron Dome air defense system, shot down 99% of the more than 300 munitions Tehran and its proxies fired into the Jewish state from Iran, Iraq, Syria and Yemen on Saturday.”
https://www.semafor.com/article/04/14/2024/iran-sought-mass-casualties-in-israel-strike-us-official-say
The involvement of Jordan in shooting down Iranian munitions on behalf of Israel’s defense is worth emphasizing. It is one reason for Israel to be canny about the nature and time of any retaliatory action.
Yes, Jon. That was a little crazy and heartwarming. To see Jordan and – in limited form but still flying the flag – SAUDI ARABIA to assist in defending Israel wasn’t on my bingo card.
And it is a sign of just how morally bankrupt the “Palestinian Cause” and its Iranian paymasters have become.
I’m not sure Jordan and KSA will ever make excellent allies of Israel, not best mates, but the turn around from past decades is wonderful.
D.A.
NYC
“If I didn’t vote at all, Biden would still win this Democratic state and all its electoral votes”
Of course, you are confusing Cook County and the surrounding metro for Illinois! The only thing the metropolis has in common with the rest of the state is the corruption in Springfield.
One of these days, the people in the ruby-red farm and downstate counties—which is most of Illinois—are going to refuse to feed all of you and your mid-state university comrades!
Excuse me, but Biden won more than 57% of Illinois’s popular votes in the last election and took the state, getting all of its 20 electoral-college votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Illinois#:~:text=Biden%20carried%20Illinois%2C%20winning%2057.54,candidates%20winning%20less%20than%201%25.
So I’m confused about what you’re trying to say. I am not confusing Illinois with Cook County. If most of the state were ruby-red, then 57.5% of the people wouldn’t have voted for Biden.
I’d appreciate your correcting yourself.
Jerry, I’m teasing, but that apparently wasn’t clear. I am a fourth-generation Cook County boy, born and reared there.
When you look at a county-by-county election map of Illinois (disregarding population size), it is a sea of red with the big blue island in the NE corner and a few smaller islands in the college towns in Central and Southern Illinois. (Wisconsin is similar, red aside from Madison, Milwaukee, and a few smaller pockets.)
Of course, total votes are what matters (and not a count of red counties versus blue). And the metro area population swamps that of the rest of the state, both in voting power and policy preference. Clearly. But it has long been recognized, particularly by those of us who have lived both in the Chicago metro and the vast Illinois outside of it, that Illinois is two often-opposed political “states” residing within the geographic contours of one. When I lived there it was generally a point of fun, jibes, and mutual good humor. Unfortunately, like elsewhere in this country, I imagine the politics has grown toxic.
I had hoped that the exclamation points, the reference to Springfield corruption, and the over-the-top suggestion that the downstate farmers and truck drivers might starve the metropolis would have made it clear I was joking. My apologies that they did not.
A reason for Israel to not retaliate is that an inconclusive tit-for-tat will disclose to Iran more about Israel’s offensive and defensive capabilities with each round, allowing the enemy to learn, as Russia is doing in Ukraine. When the big one comes, many more than 1% of Iran’s munitions would get through. Israel might want to keep its electronic-warfare powder dry until it is ready to annihilate Iran, or at least tear off an arm, as deGaulle put it. Remember the prize is Iran’s nuclear program, probably buried in the mountains.
yes, Leslie. The long game.
D.A.
NYC
I am with Peter Zeihan on this one who points out that Iran has given information via the embassy of Switzerland to the US about the numbers, types and flight paths of their attack vectors.
For me everything points towards Iran making one attack to save face and retaliate for the attack on their consulate. Yes, bad guys were in that consulate, but if that’s justification for blowing up diplomatic missions, then being a diplomat has just become a whole lot more dangerous.
If Iran had planned to seriously strike, the would have called in all the chips with Hisbollah and overwhelmed the Iron Dome.
Sorry M. Kober, but I’ve been waiting for somebody – like a spider – to mention Zaidan here at WEIT as any authority on anything but beard growing here for awhile.
Please put no stock in the man selling “SUBWAY MAPS OF CITY X” which are maps of City Y.
Zaidan is one of the biggest frauds out there. Look back over his record – he is the Paul McCartney of Wrong, the LeBron James of idiotic, impossible predictions.
He’s Tony Robbins for people who like Int’l politics (as you and I evidently do).
Not only are his pronouncements and predictions PROVABLY stupid, he just MAKES THINGS UP. (Apart from his “demographic predictions” which are basic math anyway.) As is his bleedingly obvious observations on this current issue in the M.E.
Sheesh. I really hate that guy.
No offense FX, I have to credit you better, but do look up his record and I’m sure you’ll come to the same conclusion.
best,
D.A.
NYC
Sal Mercogliano of the YouTube Channel What’s Going On With Shipping? was having fun the other day with Zeihan’s uninformed, out-of-his-fundament analysis of the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge and its implications for the global economy.
I am not saying he is an authority on anything, but he often has some information that is true, even if his interpretation is wrong. It’s the second time I have heard about the Switzerland connection, though the other source is more obscure.
Zeihan is wrong quite often, but still a useful perspective at a very zoomed out macro level. So I take him as food for thought, not as gospel.
Cool, Kober, I didn’t mean you personally.
Maybe my point is that Z. isn’t the oracle so many people for some reason think him to be with his expensive and authortative beard.
Ruminating the other day I decided to post here a list of three or four of the best analysts out there imho. Stay tuned!
best,
D.A.
NYC
Sorry to say that, but your argument is like the one people make lamenting Gazan fatalities, forgetting about Hamas’ initial attack. Israel DID attack an Iranian embassy, so a response was not unexpected. Israel managed to avoid being struck. There are many good arguments to avoid a full scale Mideastern war. So Biden has a right to butt in — especially because the US gave substantial help to stop the attack.
Actually, they struck the building *next door* to the embassy.
Right M. Baker – an annex actually. Not covered by the Geneva Convention and thus not “inviolate”
Unlike our US Embassy in 1980 or the Israeli Embassy in Argentina in 1991.
D.A.
NYC
It’s worse than the bullet proof vest comparison. Without fear of retaliation, as Biden is asking for, its more akin to allowing someone to shoot at you while they work out what parts are bullet proof.
According to the Times of Israel, the country’s War Cabinet has decided to hit back hard at Iran:
It’s interesting that Israel is effectively announcing (through leaks, apparently) that it will mount a response. (Iran did the same before it attacked Israel.) It’s hard to say what the purpose of these announcements is. I wonder if they are meant to send a message to the other side that they would like the upcoming attack to be the end of it—to signal that they would like to call it even.
I don’t know if either side will call it “even” at this point.
So will the US, and possibly the UK, join in on the attack on Iran just like they joined in to help defend Israel from the recent Iranian strike?
Who knows about the UK with dickhead Foreign Secretary Cameron advising the idiot Prime Minister and the dysfunctional government anything is possible but probably unlikely considering the state of the UK armed forces.
I had to run an errand, and turned NPR on in the car. The NPR propagandist described the Iranian attack as “largely performative.” Three hundred drones and cruise missiles “largely performative”? I think it turned out that way because of Israel’s excellent defense, but no one wastes that much ordnance intentionally. I guess it was a “mostly peaceful” fusillade.
Do you actually think the strike was planned to inflict serious damage? Would Iran trot out a motley assortment of drones and missiles fired haphazardly so the Iron Dome has more time for intercepts on a serious attack?
Yes, the attack was “largely performative”. Thank ceiling cat, the Mullahs don’t want to risk a direct war.
This analysis argues that it was intended to cause much more damage than it actually did.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran%E2%80%99s-attempt-hit-israel-russian-style-strike-package-failedfor-now
I meant to reference this source in my “learning” Comment #8 above but I couldn’t figure out how to get a postable link from my iPad.
Yes, as I said, I don’t think they would have wasted all that ordnance for mere show, and, if they wanted to just make a point, then they were taking an awful chance by assuming that Israel’s defenses would block their strike.
My opinion is that Iran is correctly frightened of Israel because in the case of a deadly serious attack by Iran against Israel, Israel will respond catastrophically probably by using nuclear weapons despite what Biden or the USA says and I for one would not blame them because if the situation is or becomes reversed Iran would attempt to totally destroy Israel.
A considerable number of countries would like to see Israel just disappear. I suspect I may currently live in one with a government of that opinion.
They had an Iranian on the BBC radio news yesterday boasting that Iran’s cheap drones had caused Israel to use $1 billion worth of air defence munitions, so perhaps the attack was partially performative / deliberately assymetric?
The cost factor you mention is an important one, Jez. One that I think is often overlooked.
Iran can and has stolen from its citizenry for—–well— ever.
As a democracy Israel is accountable for its expenses.
Yet another asymmetry.
Onwards Israeli heroes.
D.A.
NYC
“If I didn’t vote at all, Biden would still win this Democratic state and all its electoral votes, so I wouldn’t be helping Trump in the least. We shall see.”
Leaving the presidential line blank and filling in the rest of the ballot would send a message that neither candidate is acceptable to you. Unfortunately, the pro-Hamas contingent of the Democratic Party will try to spin all such ballots as support for their cause.
Biden’s old but hardly, “out if it”
Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo has an interesting take:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/call-it-what-it-is
Unless Israel intends to occupy Iran, which it doesn’t (and if Gaza is any indication, shows that it lacks that skillset altogether), then there’s nowhere else for this “war” to go but downhill for all involved. Iran had its sound and fury. Yay they got what they wanted. Israel got to knock off a few Revolutionary Guard bigwigs for free while being able to show the world that its iron dome, like Wu Tang, ain’t nothin’ to fuck with. Yay they got what they wanted. Regardless of what some other country might or might not do vis a vis a second one, given that Israel is not that first one and Iran is not that second one, the smart thing is to smile and move on. Israel’s image, fairly or unfairly, like it or not, is so deep in the shitter right now that its stink can overpower a perfume factory. Iran is poor. Majority-lives-in-poverty poor. 30% live in extreme poverty. Turns out that bowing to the hijab indistrial complex was a bad long term investment. They can’t afford a war but the grand poobahs can’t afford to lose the perception of strength. Cue impotent missile strike. A combo of pride and worry that their loathed fundamentalist-centered leadership might otherwise be ripe for a coup. Add to that the fact that Iran seems to have so few friends to speak of that it’s possible that it’s still on MySpace. But never underestimate the value of being a victim. You’re the good guy only so long as the bad guy doesn’t have the PR wherewithall to present itself as the victim. Any shoplifter kicked in the sack at a Walmart while jacking bottles of Tide and cartons of Lucky Strike for his starving family knows that game. Hamas is a pro at it. Israel is a pro at taking its goodwill and flicking it away like a dry snotball. Keeping the fight going is not a smart play.
I’ve made a similar comment earlier so I’ll be brief. Biden’s number concern has to be US security, and he believes (rightly IMO) that his major concern has to be to avoid a full scale Middle East war. The whole Iranian attack was weird – why lead off with slow moving drones, easily spotted and shot down? Maybe they that that they would serve as cover so the missiles would get through, but that was a major failure. The exchange has been a clear win for Israel, so I don’t blame the President for working to defuse things, at least for the time being.
Jerry, have you seen this interview with Robert Sapolski? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGBYYcH7CS8&t=345s
“Yes, wide-scale death was Iran’s intent…” – J. Coyne
Of course, it’s attempted mass murder. They didn’t send the drones and missiles just for a harmless Boo! effect.
Of course, I don’t speak for Biden. However… I see Biden as one of the losers in this confrontation. He wanted (and tried to get) some normalization of US/Iran relations. At least for the next few years, that is off the table. The other loser (too a lesser extent) is Putin. Any show of Iranian weakness hurts him. Hamas is an clear loser. The attempted Iranian strike (by definition) takes attention away from Gaza. That the attempted strike failed only makes things worse (for Hamas).
Who are the winners? Obviously, Israel. Less obviously, Jordan. However, I would add the US military to some (substantial) degree. When push came to shove, US military technology worked.
In asking why do people abandon religion, a one significant category is some disillusioning. What more can President Biden do to disillusion Professor Coyne? What would it take — would a different Republican have really made the difference?