- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
Benjamin Netanyahu is seeking to trap the west into a total war across the Middle East that would have incalculable consequences for the region and the world, Iran’s top diplomat in the UK has claimed, in his first interview since Tehran launched an unprecedented missile and drone attack against Israel at the weekend.
Seyed Mehdi Hosseini Matin also warned that if Israel made “another mistake” by launching an attack on Iran, there would be a response from Iran that was stronger, more severe, and administered without a warning like that issued before the weekend attack.
The salvo of more than 300 drones and missiles – almost all of which were intercepted by Israel and its allies or fell short of their targets – came in retaliation for a 1 April airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, that killed several Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards officers. Israel’s top general, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, has said the country would respond, but it remains unclear what form that would take.
You must log in or register to comment.
Normally, I’m the first to call out Iran on bullshit, but, uh, they ain’t wrong here.
Except this is totally wrong. Israel is doing it out of self interest, not some weird conspiracy to drag the west into something. They want to gain power for themselves, just as Iran, the US, and every other country wants to do. There is zero reason to think it’s more than that. Bibi needs a distraction, and that’s what all of this is.
It’s not a weird conspiracy though. It’s just that dragging the US into protecting Israel from Iran has the effect of halting US criticism of the Gaza genocide.
Dragging the US into the middle east would provide Bibi the distraction he needs for the rest of his life.
Or maybe Iran is making a play by saying something to enflame Americans? I don’t know why anyone would listen to Iran suddenly. Sure, they’re against Israel, which is the popular stance here right now (for good reason), but they don’t care to be accurate. They say something because it’s useful.
I wasn’t on Lemmy then, but I’d be curious to see what Lemmy would have been like during the Iranian protests that I think we’re last year. I’m sure they’d be saying Iran is lying about everything then and only saying what’s useful. I don’t know why anyone would trust a word they say now.
Anything with power is always lying. Consider what purpose saying it has. Even if it’s true, they’re saying it to manipulate. The actual implied intent is a lie.
I don’t think you have to “listen to Iran” to know Israel attacked their embassy compound.
That’s not what I’m trying to say. Obviously that happened. This post is about some master plan to drag the west into a war with Iran. That’s almost certainly not happening. Israel is just trying to do things to gain power, and so is Iran.
Have you seen this report.
If it’s true then Israel attacking Iran has had the exact effect on the US that we predicted - softened their response to the genocide.
Yeah, that’s more like what I expect to come out of it.
I don’t think Iran is trying to inflame Americans, but more noting that the continued attacks on Palestinians are not going to be tolerated diplomatically for long. This is a diplomatic crisis and different sides are negotiating both publicly and privately.
Iran’s attack was in response to Israel attacking their embassy, not Palestine.
Yeah, because Iran is noted for their knowledge of geopolitics
I mean, yes. Iran is unironically very talented at manipulating regional politics to their favor. You don’t have one of the best systems of proxies and catpaws in the region without knowing shit like that.
Iran’s international competence isn’t generally the problem - but whether to trust what they say. Usually, the answer is “No, you shouldn’t trust anything out of their mouth”, but in this case, it’s a “The sky is blue” moment.
This has been Israel’s aim for its entire existence. It’s no mere coincidence that any country that could potentially stand up to it has been invaded or otherwise regime changed (Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc) or paid off (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc, but likely only to hold them off because their turn will come later). Iran is a major item on the hit list.
While Netanyahu would love to draw all of NATO into a giant Middle Eastern conflict, I think he knows that goal isn’t realistic. What he’s likely aiming to accomplish is to destroy as much of Iran’s nuclear program as possible. That’s been his goal for over a decade.
How is it not realistic when iran has vowed to respond.
All bibi has to do is just keep doing tit for tat.
I find it interesting that they said there’d be a larger response if Israel retaliated 2 days ago, but now they’re saying there will be no response to Israel’s retaliatory strike.
Probably just an effort to discourage escalation. They don’t have diplomatic relations so they’re always signalling through military and public statements. Iran doesn’t want a direct war with Israel and wants to go back to the shadow war they’ve been fighting for decades. They’ve been sabre-rattling militarily and pressuring restraint diplomatically since their attack. They’re obviously not going to say “attacking us in a limited way is totally cool,” but I think the takeaway is basically “we won’t escalate if you won’t.”
By “the west” I assume this means the US and Germany because at this point do any other countries even really support Israel?
Isn’t that enough!? OK, I suspect there are other governments out there that will fall on the side of Israel should push comes to shove. I strongly suspect the UK will also support Israel when it comes to it.
It’s just weird how people use “the west” and are just talking about the US. Gives off the vibes of some people calling China “the orient”.
LOL, hey kettle, meet pot.
Alright cool Iran, you see the potential danger. So how about you don’t escalate shit yourselves?
Sending a message “We can overwhelm your batteries of 100,000 dollar missiles with 1000 dollar drones if we want to.” is a de-esclatory action; it shows that escalating would be bad for Israel, without requiring a response.
Edit: According to an Israeli general, the Israeli missiles cost a total of ~1 billion. IDK if this includes the missiles launched by the US.
Most of that 1 billion is on the American taxpayer. This is why you don’t have universal health care. You need to spend billions, so Israeli military bases don’t suffer from the consequences of attacking an Iranian embassy.
The US government has promised to continue this line of spending.
You think a billion dollars is the reason who don’t universal health care? Even if we cut all military spending we would have enough to pay for 2 months of universal care. People who say this don’t understand what health cost or that we are only spending 3% of our GDP on the military.
We don’t have to defund the military, our current health spending easily covers healthcare needs, we just need to fix it.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416416/single-payer-systems-likely-save-money-us-analysis-finds
https://theintercept.com/2018/07/30/medicare-for-all-cost-health-care-wages/
Our military spending is what was brought up. I never argued against a tax paid system.
That’s not how I would read that. That would make me want to destroy the facilities the weapons came from
This is not a defense of Israel’s choices, this is a hypothetical response to an enemy making clear an engagement pattern is not in my favor. Find a new engagement.
That’s not how I would read that. That would make me want to destroy the facilities the weapons came from
Bombing American factories would be a hell of an escalation.
I get you’re trying to gotcha me, but you proved my point. If Iran had the means to go after American weapons production facilities, that certainly would be another engagement pattern.
They don’t really have the means to do so, so it’s irrelevant.
I never suggested Iran’s course of action wrt Israel was nonsensical, in the context of retaliation to Israel’s embassy bombing (which was despicable)
Edit what we are discussing here is now Israel’s next response to Iran, in light of them not being able to afford to shoot down tons of Iranian drones.
What has happened has happened, and we have no signal that iran and Israel are going to leave the extremism behind, and start a big happy family.
Israel will be seeking a new vector of retaliation, and they can’t just sit back and try to shoot down drones.
I get you probably want to respond that they should just cease all aggression and the drones would stop. I agree but that’s not what’s happening.
Likewise I agree that the us should absolutely stop supplying / supporting Israel, but that also isn’t what’s happening.
iran and Israel are going to leave the extremism behind
Don’t both sides this shit, Iran has been exceedingly level headed in the face of multiple acts of war, making only token or equal responses after having their ships stolen, a civilian airliner shot down, the guy who beat ISIS assassinated while on a diplomatic mission, their IAEA compliant nuclear program attacked, sanctions, violations of treaties, etc.
Lol, as I said,
Iran is a authoritarian theocracy, seeking Israel’s destruction. That’s all I’m implying.
Israel is commiting genocide. I am,.and have never apologized for them.
Israel is a authoritarian theocracy, seeking Iran’s destruction.
Yet only one of these parties is actively killing the others top generals.
deleted by creator
The US has been pumping out anti- Iranian propaganda for the last two years; their citizens are virtually foaming at the mouth for war.
I don’t like how Iran treats its population, and especially its women. I don’t like that Iran is helping Russia invade Ukraine. Iran arming Houthi rebels screwing up global trade is annoying.
As someone from the USA, I say none of that is a good enough justification for going to war with Iran. Even apart from the inevitable tragic loss of civilian life of Iranians, its not about having or not having the military might. We spent untold billions trying to make Afghanistan viable. I’m not interested in another repeat of that.
Also fighting in Iran would be a fucking nightmare Afghanistan but bigger basically. Hell the only reason that Islam was able to spread there is cause the Persian empire and Rome veat the living shit out of eachother and even then it took nearly a thousand years for the last major Zoroastrian regions to convert.
As someone from the USA, I say none of that is a good enough justification for going to war with Iran.
We should all remember that the Iranian government is not the same thing as the Iranian people, before going to war.
Unfortunately a lot of people actually hate Muslims so that argument isn’t going to work like you intended.
Unfortunately a lot of people actually hate Muslims so that argument isn’t going to work like you intended.
Maybe true, but also, it’s up to each of us individually to fight prejudice within ourselves. And either way, it’s worth saying, even if it ends up not being effective.
If we use the excuse of just allowing our hate to do what it wants, by evolving down to our base animalistic selves, then the center will not hold.
Do you think any place whose gov’t America has gone to war with since WWII is better for it?
America doesn’t go to war with a gov’t, our gov’t goes to war with the people. This is why they have insane civilian casualties, but fail to accomplish strategic objectives.
I guarantee no woman or gay person in Iran wants to be liberated by a B-52.
Do you think any place whose gov’t America has gone to war with since WWII is better for it?
America (and most countries) don’t go to war to help out that country’s populace. They do so to achieve geopolitical goals. Any outcome positive or negative to the populace of that country is usually superfluous to the primary geopolitical goals.
This is true. The Iranian people are wonderful, and are victims of a conservative government. Iran is an example of what unchecked conservative governing looks like.
their citizens are virtually foaming at the mouth for war
So, you’re wrong, there isn’t even enough interest to go to war for Ukraine, a fight that is arguably more just. Nobody is “foaming at the mouth” to go back to the middle east, except for the types that are generally foaming at the mouth anyway.
But worse, you’re generalizing, which makes you wrong by default.
There’s no point trying to convince them of anything
Sounds like you’re incapable of defending your position with any rational discussion, so you dismiss the possibility out of hand. How transparent.
The US has been pumping out anti- Iranian propaganda for the
last two45 yearsFTFY. The islamic revolution was 1979
Ah yes, responding to an attack with a bigger counterattack is deescalatory, of course.
The mental gymnastics are strong with this one.
Responding to an unprovoked bombing of an embassy with a demonstration that you can hit military targets, and you could have hit them much harder is infact deescalatory.
Escalatory would be bombing Israeli embassys and other non-military targets.
You’re wasting your time I suspect. If you had to explain your very simple point a second time I suspect they are falling on deaf ears.
