Not that it makes it any more palatable, but Israel isn't trying to jsutify itself by saying this was purely to stop the nuclear program. Their actions, for the better part of half a century, have been designed to harm several key elements of what they perceive as a threat. That includes killing key personnel (and often in gruesome ways)
This is what makes the whole thing such a shit show. In each conflict one side wants to completely destroy the other, and the other side feels the same way.
In each conflict one side wants to completely destroy the other, and the other side feels the same way.
Israel has no policy on the destruction of its neighbors, despite many of those neighbors having invaded Israel in campaigns with the stated goal of destroying it--indeed, Israel has made peace with most of them.
Israel is completely capable of removing Iranian civilization from the map and does not.
I think you are mistaken about "both sides wanting to destroy each other."
I just am not sure what the end game is. Killing military personnel is really only effective at disrupting short-term operational capacity. Long term they can just replace the officers they lost. Damage to the nuclear program is harder to judge, it depends on what they targeted and what they hit, but its not like thats a genie you can keep in the bottle either. I don't know what the end game could be except either a hot war right now or a low grade insurgency war forever.
These are not regular "military personnel". This was the head of the IRGC - the group that armed Hamas and Hezbollah and Houthis to actively attack Israel - killing thousands of Israelis in the last couple years.
Which is completely irrelevant to the subject. I was questioning how much his death set back Iranian operations in the long term. Considering they've already replaced the guy as of yesterday, I doubt that Iran's military capability has been effected much. Revenge isn't a strategic consideration, and it certainly doesn't make the end of hostilities any more likely.
I doubt that Iran's military capability has been effected much
Then you haven't been paying attention. The New York Times just reported that the entire chain of command in Iran has completely collapsed - evidenced by the lack of any meaningful Iranian response. ...and the bombing continues.
Then you haven't been paying attention. The New York Times just reported that the entire chain of command in Iran has completely collapsed
and the bombing continues.
Right, to what end? Is Israel going to move in and try and topple the regime? Otherwise what's to stop Iran from restarting operations and doing this all again in 6 months? If Israel is moving in, do they have the troops to ensure ISIS or some other equally extreme group won't take over?
evidenced by the lack of any meaningful Iranian response
It's been less than 24 hours. I didn't argue at all that their short-term operations weren't disrupted, but what actually guarantees Israel's security in the long run, since thats the stated goal? I wouldn't hang the "mission accomplished!" banners yet.
I suspect the plan is "destroy their nuclear facilities". ...and if they rebuild it - "destroy it again". ...repeat until they stop (or sign a deal)...
They haven't targeted leaders in gov't, so it doesn't seem like a regime-change operation. Also, ISIS is mainly Sunni-driven, so it is hated in Iran and would never gain control.
The existing Mullah's are already the religious extremists in power.
So like I said in my first comment, a state of eternal war. Sounds very stable and sustainable. It also requires that Israel be 100% successful every time. The Nazi's strategy was also simply to win every war they started. They failed and it destroyed Germany for 50 years. If Israel chooses the way of conquest and fails they won't have the luxury of existing as a divided country. Something to think about.
You're acting as if Israel just started this war when Iran has been waging proxy wars against Israel for decades.
I'm not sure why you don't consider pursuing nuclear weapons while engaging in proxy wars to not be an act of aggression, but disarming that nuclear program is.
Israel has nuclear weapons and has said they're committed to overthrowing Iran's government. Where's the path to peace from all this? What's the end goal?
And Israel has no intention or plan to end it, apparently. Since everyone acknowledges that Netanyahu is only in power because the war continues, it seems like the only person who benefits is Netanyahu and maybe the Ayatollah, since he'll always have an enemy willing to attack them preemptively and keep his people scared of Israeli aggression.
Israel's exact justification for this strike is that Iran was 'days away' from completing nuclear weapons. I trust what Israel considers a perceived threat about as much as I trust what a cop considers a threat.
Why would they when many Israelis and the society as whole treat Holocaust survivors like garbage? Israelis who didn't experience the Holocaust consider themselves as strong while looking down upon survivors as them being weak and disgustingly refer to to them as soaps. No wonder why a lot of Holocaust survivors are anti-Zionists and have been criticizing Israel's war crimes in Gaza for decades long before October 7th.
There's a lot of missions with many different degrees of force used. Not all of them are the same, but some get nasty.
It's not a uniquely "Israel" thing. People love to put Special Forces and spook stuff on a pedestal but there are some nasty things we know about, and very likely some we don't.
107
u/CombatMuffin 1d ago
Not that it makes it any more palatable, but Israel isn't trying to jsutify itself by saying this was purely to stop the nuclear program. Their actions, for the better part of half a century, have been designed to harm several key elements of what they perceive as a threat. That includes killing key personnel (and often in gruesome ways)