80
submitted 1 week ago by breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

The Iranian government has belittled the scale and effectiveness of the Israeli attack on its military sites, but hardliners in the parliament insisted the strikes breached Iranian red lines and required a swift response, preferably at a time when Israel is already enmeshed in Lebanon and Gaza.

The internal Iranian debate on how to respond to the long-awaited Israeli attack turns on whether to treat Israel’s breach of Iranian national sovereignty as too grave to be ignored, or instead to heed the advice coming from the region and from the US to acknowledge the relatively limited nature of the attack and to step back from the brink by not launching reprisals.

In making its decision, the Iranian political elite will have to weigh conflicting political, diplomatic and military pressures. But the initial tone from the government was one of patriotic pride at the performance of the air defences, rather than calls for immediate retribution. Some even claimed that the air defences proved better than Israel’s Iron Dome.

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 1 week ago

Is there any possible scenario where US doesnt get involved here?

[-] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 week ago

Both sides taking the off-ramp, returning to the shadow war, and not attacking each other directly.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, this is going back to saber-rattling. Let's hope it stays there. On both sides.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

So, the smart move for Iran is to go heads down till they have their nukes ready, which should be soon.

Israel has their hands full, and honestly probably can't stop Iran in any meaningful way, what they really want is the US to get deeply involved, which I'm sure is what Trump promised them.

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 7 points 1 week ago

Both sides continue to launch weak and ineffective attacks on each other.

[-] Sundial@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

Unless there's boots on the ground in Israel, then US won't get involved. At most they'll just support Israel and shield them. This war is way too unpopular in America as it is right now.

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago

Not enough unpopular to make differences, but it's definitely a hot topic of discussion, or not talking about, for fear of being labeled. Meanwhile we're still doing what we've always done. It's almost like it goes much deeper than who is the President...

[-] Sundial@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

It is incredibly unpopular. Over 2/3rds of Americans support enforcing a ceasefire. That number will only go up if American troops start coming under fire. The only reason this isn't changing much is because a significant majority of Americans are voting Harris just because of how scared they are of Trump. If this race were between two genuine candidates and not what it is now, Harris would have lost a lot more votes.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

If any of the two candidates was a real electable candidate (like not even anything amazing, just 2020 Biden level of electable) they'd win by a land slide. Instead y'all have this clown show.

[-] Evotech@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

What do you mean, every single rocket Israel send is American.

[-] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah but Israel needs US boots on the ground. When this shit blows back, they need to ensure that our name is right next to theirs.

I don't know where they think america is going to find idiots to die for this... but they sure are trying to make this JUST US AND us DOING A GENOCIDE TOGETHER LIKE REAL BROS

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago

I wish we had an electoral option to tell Israel to get bent.

Unfortunately both sides are in on the conspiracy.

[-] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 0 points 1 week ago

you can always write in jesus, if neither party is satisfactory

[-] 00x0xx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

At minimum, the US will be involved indirectly. US has too much to lose if Iran takes a lead in the war.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Is that supposed to be a joke?

How, in hell, would Iran take a lead?

Israel has f35s, useful aa defenses, and Iran isn't on their border.

At the very worst for Israel, if they aren't interested it's a draw, more likely a few f35s drop jdams on important buildings, maybe even destroy power generating if they really want to be assholes.

Don't think a few hundred shaheds is going to do it here, 50kg of semtex only goes so far.

this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
80 points (96.5% liked)

World News

38969 readers
2018 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS