Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and other Related Conflicts in the Middle East (read the rules in the first post)

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
It is fairly evident that this "attack" was a measured response designed to give Iran the initiative to de-escalate whilst simultaneously fulfilling what has long been promised to Israel's citizenry and intelligentsia by their government.

View attachment 137812
It was a weak attack. Iran can definitely walk away and end it here. But then again, an attack is an attack, no matter how impotent. Iran could very well justify a minor retaliation, but actually hit something useful (a single rocket hitting an ammo depot). Something that does not invite outrage, has tangible benefit, yet too shameful to downplay. Which reaction should Iran pick?

I think there should be a careful weighing opportunity cost. Yes Iran can say they come out on top if they stop. Or they could win bigger. Iran is not pushed to the edge, but Israeli politician's career is pushed to edge. A small attack could slap their face and make their position untenable, force them to save face elsewhere. They would be pushed to make more mistakes that they otherwise would not make.

Keep the small win or set up something bigger?
 

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
It was a weak attack. Iran can definitely walk away and end it here. But then again, an attack is an attack, no matter how impotent. Iran could very well justify a minor retaliation, but actually hit something useful (a single rocket hitting an ammo depot). Something that does not invite outrage, has tangible benefit, yet too shameful to downplay. Which reaction should Iran pick?

I think there should be a careful weighing opportunity cost. Yes Iran can say they come out on top if they stop. Or they could win bigger. Iran is not pushed to the edge, but Israeli politician's career is pushed to edge. A small attack could slap their face and make their position untenable, force them to save face elsewhere. They would be pushed to make more mistakes that they otherwise would not make.

Keep the small win or set up something bigger?
The weakness of the Israeli attack shows that they don't want war. And we know Iran doesn't want war either. The whole region is condemning the attacks, showing that Iranian diplomacy to integrate with its Arab neighbours is working.

Maybe there will be another reaction, but it wouldn't be at the same scale as the one earlier this month. If Israel stops bombing Iranian allies in Lebanon, then the conflict might even be over

At this point it probably depends on the us election. If Trump is back, Iran doesn't want to give him a reason for more economic attacks, which do far more damage than this Israeli strike
 

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
It was a weak attack. Iran can definitely walk away and end it here. But then again, an attack is an attack, no matter how impotent. Iran could very well justify a minor retaliation, but actually hit something useful (a single rocket hitting an ammo depot). Something that does not invite outrage, has tangible benefit, yet too shameful to downplay. Which reaction should Iran pick?

I think there should be a careful weighing opportunity cost. Yes Iran can say they come out on top if they stop. Or they could win bigger. Iran is not pushed to the edge, but Israeli politician's career is pushed to edge. A small attack could slap their face and make their position untenable, force them to save face elsewhere. They would be pushed to make more mistakes that they otherwise would not make.

Keep the small win or set up something bigger?
This seems like one of those moves where media does all the attacking while no physical attack actually occurred on the ground. Like this,

CNN: Israel pounds Iran
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
lol

I think it will backfire or not taken seriously. They seem hellbent on their old, outdated tactic of false mainstream media reporting, the tactic that's been an utter failure in this whole war with social media exposing everything to the contrary.
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
The weakness of the Israeli attack shows that they don't want war. And we know Iran doesn't want war either. The whole region is condemning the attacks, showing that Iranian diplomacy to integrate with its Arab neighbours is working.

Maybe there will be another reaction, but it wouldn't be at the same scale as the one earlier this month. If Israel stops bombing Iranian allies in Lebanon, then the conflict might even be over

At this point it probably depends on the us election. If Trump is back, Iran doesn't want to give him a reason for more economic attacks, which do far more damage than this Israeli strike
Sure peace has its own value, but can you be sure of that? Israel lie all the time. Besides, Israel could just be regrouping for another wave. If that is the case, it would be wise to provoke them to resume attack in anger, as opposed to attack effectively after regroup.
 

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member

iBBz

Junior Member
Registered Member
The New Atlas's early report on the Israeli strike on Iran.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Iran announced the deaths of four people, two of which were air defence soldiers.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Israel hit an agriculture, mining and drilling company near Tehran that it claims to be a drone assembly facility.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Iranian stock market shares are increasing in value, probably because they successfully defended their airspace against the US and EU.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


And while I'd hesitate to make any battle assessment at this time, the results are probably more or less comparable to that of the Iranian BM attack, at least in terms of casualties and infrastructure damage.
Iran is more than 70 times the size of Israel. Large countries strategically spread their assets and air defences in order to make it as difficult as possible to penetrate their airspace and do serious damage. Israel is one of the most densely populated places and their air defence systems are a joke, to the point where they have to call on the EU and USAF and USN to utilize foreign airspace in order to defend Israel.

What more is needed? Theyre just moving rubble mostly in Gaza.

Theyve knocked out thousands of Hezbollah fighters and missiles, and lost few dozen soldiers.
Bombing civilians doesn't win wars. On the contrary, it pushes more people to join the resistance. Also what thousands of Hezbollah fighters are you talking about? I'm seeing reports of 1:1 losses for Hezbollah vs IDF fighters. If you are referring to the pager attacks, these people were civilian workers, not fighters.


Drones, cruise missiles, loitering munition, AGM, etc. What's missing is the damage on the ground. Nothing noteworthy has appeared yet on any media. Strikes in Lebanon and Syria could be seen from miles away, captured from press to social media, but nothing showing in Iran. Either the incoming strikes were intercepted or there were none fired. US and Israel are saying the operations is completed. Very disappointing operation from the looks of it.
_________

Atleast 6 USAF tankers spotted on the Western border of Iran (indicating a massive aerial presence in the region),
View attachment 137832View attachment 137833View attachment 137834View attachment 137835

1 British tanker + 2 Eurofighters spotted entering the region from Cyprus, via Turkey
View attachment 137838View attachment 137837
Any info on the Israeli planes themselves that participated in the strike? Do Chosen aircraft show up on this app or website?

Image looks like on an aircraft carrier with F/A-18 in the back.
The holly land.

The weakness of the Israeli attack shows that they don't want war. And we know Iran doesn't want war either. The whole region is condemning the attacks, showing that Iranian diplomacy to integrate with its Arab neighbours is working.
They all condemn the attack while simultaneously helping the US by allowing them to utilize their airspace to hit Iran.

At this point it probably depends on the us election. If Trump is back, Iran doesn't want to give him a reason for more economic attacks, which do far more damage than this Israeli strike
There is nothing Trump can do that Biden hasn't already done. Iran has already survived a total blockade imposed by many US administrations, including Trump's. I don't know if you've been paying attention, but sanctions don't work anymore and will only do harm to the US, and in the case of Iran, it is connected directly to it's partners through land and sea corridors that the US cannot blockade. Attacking Iran's infrastructure will only provoke Iran into attacking infrastructure in the region, which will instantly render Trump's presidency facade a failure.
 

enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Has Iran officials said anything with regard to retaliation yet? As weak as the Israeli attack seems to be, it still caused casualty and Iran is well within reason to retaliate, only question is whether they wanted to. I'm guessing Pezeshkian may not want escalation but the hardliners are going to be pressuring him, this weak sauce attack maybe seen as sign of weakness on the part of both Israel and US; both of those countries are not known for their restraint, they held back for good reasons
 
Last edited:

CasualObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Turkey is in NATO, in case you forgot. Besides that, politics has always been quid pro quo. In return for Erdogan’s cooperation, the West continues to designate the PKK as a terrorist group. That gives huge leeway to Erdogan in handling the threat.
LMAO @ this

But Israel is not. There is no need for Turkey to collaborate with Israel.

Erdogan has been accusing Israel of genocide and then he turns around and co-operates with them. If he wants to be a puppet then he should act like one, not fake pretend to be tough on Israel. All I'm asking for is consistency. Whatever you want to say about Iran, they are consistent in their actions with their rhetoric.
and @ this bullcrap, you folks around here have really got no clue about Turkey whatsoever.

Yes your critique of Erdogan accusing them of a genocide, officially embargoing them and yet still doing business as usual is a commonly voiced critique within the public and also in Turkish internal politics.

Can you show me any proof of any other state besides Turkey and Iran (and prolly Pakistan as well, I haven't kept up with that country for a while) in the "Islamic World" raising voice and showing real opposition to Israeli actions since Oct 7 last year? (even that "real opposition" is quite laughable tbh)

Strangely and so suddenly; in the last couple of weeks Erdogan, his allies and the opposition have all been showing willingness in unison to concede every gain Turkey has ever made against the bloody US and Russia-backed terrorism in Syria and Iraq that deeply affects the country's union just so that they can focus on increasing relations with the MENA including Iran to prepare themselves against what they perceive as an imminent Israeli threat.

Now, whether you believe that crap or not (I personally do not!), all sides of the (corrupt) political spectrum swiftly agreeing to something as controversial and treasonous as giving up the fight against foreign sponsored-terrorism behind closed doors is quite significant if you ask me. It means there's something huge going on that the state intelligence or foreign affairs has picked up that they deem it necessary to concede constitutive public safety and indivisibility of the state.
 
Last edited:

FriedButter

Colonel
Registered Member
Has Iran officials said anything with regard to retaliation yet? As weak as the Israeli attack seems to be, it still caused casualty and Iran is well within reason to retaliate, only question is whether they wanted to. I'm guessing Pezeshkian may not want escalation but the hardliners are going to be pressuring him, this weak sauce attack maybe seen as sign of weakness on the part of both Israel and US; both of those countries are not known for their restraint, they held back for good reasons

The supreme leader has the final say on Iran foreign policy. So the hardliners will be pressuring Khamenei with Pezeshkian and his allies advising restraint. I think Iran will probably choose not to response (or at least in a very limited way). They want to grow their relations with Russia, fostering it with BRICS, and continued normalization with the Arab/Gulf states around them. With the Israeli response being so mild, they could use it as domestic cover while saying deterrence has been established. Israel on the other hand could face domestic pressure over their lackluster response which puts the escalation ball back on their side.
 

iewgnem

Junior Member
Registered Member
We know from the videos of the Iranian attacks how obvious ballistic missiles are to a civilian population. But we only have videos of some anti aircraft artillery firing, presumably at drones. Doesn't that suggest that the majority of the Israeli attacks were carried out using the stealth drone mentioned in the previous leaked documents? Air launched ballistic missiles should be very obvious, surely?
Must be stealth explosions too.

Israel said they used 100 combat aircraft, that's almost half of their entire airforce, so either most abandoned mission half way for some reason, or almost all missiles launched were intercepted. There is simply no squaring Israel's claimed fleet size with the lack of any observable results.

It's actually not that unusual, every month or so Russia would say they intercepted 100+ Ukrainian home made drones the night before but very rarely does it get caught on camera, and when they do its exclusively during the day. Iran and Russia are very big places and slow missiles intercepted at night a long way from destination are almost impossible to catch on camera.

If you look at the bigger picture, Israel's weapons inventory is heavily skewed toward up close gravity bombs used against civilians and guerrilla forces in Palestine and Lebanon, neither themselves nor the US has, as we've already seen from Ukraine, the ability to field modern long range drones in any quantity, with Ukraine's drones actually almost entirely sourced from China. What Israel has are air launched cruise missiles developed decades ago with 200-300km range, which is probably what they used, but this is where Russia sending S400 comes in, not that S400 were involved in intercepting them, but because if Russia sent S400, Russia almost certainly provided other systems too.

Infact, if you really think about it, the fact that Israeli jets even need to fly over Iraq or through Azerbaijan implies they're using old missiles with limited range, old missiles that are fairly easy to intercept with Russian help. Afterall Iran with actual modern weapons didn't need to even leave their borders to rain fire on Israel.
 
Top