A couple of weeks ago Israel launched a missile attack on the Iranian embassy in Damascus, killing a general of the Revolutionary Guard. Today Iran retaliated:
IDF spokesman Rear Admiral Hagari: More than 200 drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles were fired from Iran. Most of the threats were intercepted outside Israeli airspace. A very small number of missiles hit Israeli territory with minor damages to a military base in…
— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) April 14, 2024
#BREAKING: Iran mission to the UN says after its attack against Israel tonight: “The matter can be deemed concluded"
— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) April 13, 2024
Drones? And a few small missiles? All of which Iran knew would be routinely shot down? This was obviously intended to be a pinprick attack, just enough to save face but not to do any serious damage. It couldn't be more obvious if Iran spelled out a message on the moon.
For now, anyway, this is yet another example of President Biden getting the job done. He made it clear to Iran that they crossed a line a few months ago, when a militia attack killed three American soldiers, and they've been quiet ever since. They couldn't literally do nothing in response to the embassy attack, but this is the next best thing. They plainly have no interest in escalating things to a point that might get the US directly involved.
From your mouth to God's ears.
This all depends on how Israel responds. It's too early to know if any of the ballistic and cruise missiles that hit, killed anyone. If they did, Israel's going to respond with a heavy hand, but they might wait a week or more to respond, to let the temperature drop a little. Or not. Bibi's a hot head.
He may be a hothead, but in this he is calculating. He has been trying to provoke a war between the US and Iran for years; I’m sure he’s disappointed that the attack on Iran’s consulate didn’t bring about something more, um, ‘kinetic’.
Exactamondo. The purpose of Israel was to start a shooting war between U.S and Iran. Israel is concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon and according to Wesley Clark (who to be sure has a spotty record) they are a few months from doing so. Israel options are quickly dwindling (too bad about that Obama accord, eh?) so they may not be done yet.
I just don't understand Israel's obsession with Iran's nuclear program. Even if they sent a nuke by proxy militia, they surly know Israel's retaliatory nukes would be aimed right at Teheran.
Unlike ISIS or Hamas, Iran has a real zip code, with infrastructure AND a source of income, all of which would be decimated with even a conventional exchange.
I heard opinions that even we couldn't dig out Iran's underground facilities. Even if we did, they'd just buy one and FedEx it here.
A radical country getting nukes? Then why is no one calling for an attack on NK, or even Pakistan?
jmho
"Iran has a real zip code, with infrastructure AND a source of income, all of which would be decimated with even a conventional exchange."
This is the most obvious thing that never seems to get mentioned. Not sure how long it would take, but I'm pretty sure Iran's oil infrastructure could be destroyed without much effort. Without oil money, how long do they last?
Israel wants to drag us into a war with Iran. Let’s not go along with that, mm-Kay?
Bibi is concerned about going to prison.
Doesn't Kevin permit links in comments anymore? I just had two attempts booted.
That sounds like a challenge to me. I will now attempt to link to the Guardian article I mentioned below.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/11/tim-kaine-interview-biden-israel-netanyahu
Seemed to let me do it.
Strange. I tried twice to post links to a story about Marsha Blackburn demanding America bomb Iran, but they disappeared when I clicked on 'Post Comment'.
I was going to suggest maybe hitting enter before pasting the URL into the edit window, because that worked for me earlier tonight when I also had a link disappear completely between the edit window and getting posted. Forcing a new line and pasting the link did the trick. Or apparently only seemed to-- there are links in other threads that don't start new lines, so that can't be it. Well then, assuming the links were fully formatted, I got nuthin'. Just standard tech-world troubleshooting, to keep trying different stuff until something works.
Historically, the link may not be the opening text of the comment.
Biden is playing a dangerous game. I am not nearly a sanguine about this as Kevin is. There is clearly nothing Netanyahu wants more than a war with Iran that Biden and the US feel the need to enter. Will Biden oblige?
A few days ago, there was an interview published in the Guardian with Senator Tim Kaine, D-Va. Kaine admitted that Biden had been played by Netanyahu concerning Gaza. But Kaine said it won't happen again. I am not at all confident about his prediction.
Iran's reputation for recklessness far exceeds it actual recklessness. They certainly play hard and push things, and in some ways the entire Gaza operation is the result of years of investment in Hamas that is paying Iran huge dividends right now.
But when confronted with the possibility of actual retaliation and damage, Iran plays it cool and avoids escalation and has been doing this for years. They feel a lot more vulnerable than others often perceive. Biden probably knew this already through his personal experience as well as through the advice of the under-ratedly smart offerings of the US Intelligence Community and State Department.
Oh well okay, competent policy, competent organizations, competent staff, avoiding war, keeping a crazy indicted allied leader from lighting a fuse in the most volatile part of the world, FINE. But he's OLD! This is why we need Donald TRUMP who will have and do NONE of those things. Which will be BETTER! Because ... um ... AMERICA!
👍👍👍👍👍
None of these global conflicts would be happening if Trump was president. The reasons are so obvious it's insulting to ask him to explain why.
Plus, anyone who has to ask couldn't possibly understand . . .
Agreed it's more for show than anything although thanks to their reckless stupidity, the Iranians have assured an aid package to Israel will pass the House next week.
They plainly have no interest in escalating things to a point that might get the US directly involved.
I agree Iran doesn't want war with America. But Bibi very much wants Iran to be at war with America. And it's very clear now the US is basically his bitch.
I'd be massively surprised if Israel doesn't strike back hard at Iranian targets. Tit for tat is what the Netanyahu government is after, because it wants to prolong and widen the war, first and foremost because Bibi calculates doing so is in his political interest. And what Bibi wants, Joe provides. With a little luck, Trump will be swept into office by nine dollar gas prices (that's Bibi's other priority: hurting Biden and helping Trump).
Josh Marshall disagrees with you:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/follow-up-3
He points out that Iran fired hundreds of missiles and UAVs, and the US (as well as Arab states like Jordan) shot down an appreciable percentage. If Iran just wanted to put on a light show, why did the US need to get involved? What would have happened if we hadn't?
I was going to comment on this as well. I'll just add this: that as an astute observer of the Middle East (and, well, just about everything else, empathically including US politics) I'd choose Josh Marshall over Kevin every day of the week.
I think it's likely Iran actually informed the US of its intentions. They did just want a light show, otherwise they wouldn't have said "matter closed" after such a serious violation of intl law by Israel and no damage whatsoever done to Israel in return.
It got lost in the bigger news, but earlier on Saturday a container ship owned by an Israeli (but not registered or operated from there) was taken over by the Revolutionary Guard off the Strait of Hormuz (Biden has demanded its return). No idea where that leads, but it's a reminder that the Iranians have more than one avenue of approach.
Biden's helping Israel but also stopping Bibi (and the far-right) from his worst impulses.
Yes.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-netanyahu-vows-victory-after-iran-strikes-fears-wider-conflict-grow-2024-04-14/
Good on Joe. Bibi will have to try harder
(Note: Comment was not accepted when I started it with the link, as Rick_Jones surmised above)
I fail to see where the "Iran Sues for Peace" headline comes from. More importantly, it's dispiriting how Israelis keep electing a man who would gladly watch the world burn, if it saved his own skin for a few more years or months. They keep showing us who they are.
Obvious corollary: There's too much trump in the personality of the United States. Mea culpa.
There’s a lot of complexity that you’re only hinting at. Also, I am not an expert on parliamentary systems; nevertheless, I will ask: how often have either Donald Trump or Netanyahu won an actual majority of votes?
Trump has definitely lost the vote in the overwhelming majority of elections in which he has competed. And most Americans did not vote for him when he became President in 2016.
As best I am aware, 2022 may be the only year since Trump’s political career began that Republicans (barely) won a majority of votes: and that was in a midterm against an incumbent President who at that time was presiding over very high inflation.
And there are at least some parallels with Netanyahu. Israelis do not necessarily vote for him, at least not directly. Rather, an election is held and the President of Israel grants a party or a coalition of parties the opportunity to form a government based on the results of that election. Netanyahu is now in power because he succeeded at building a (very right wing) coalition of otherwise largely unpopular parties. Parliaments can be strange.
My point is that it can be reductive to judge any large and diverse populace based on individual leaders, especially when such leaders rarely if ever actually receive a majority of votes.
Um ...
Israel commits an act of war against Iran, and not for first time.
And now Iran has every justification to attack Israel. Which it did, but which it has every justification to do again, at the time and through the method of its own choosing.
And America commits itself to retaliating against any Iranian attack against Israel, no matter that it would be justified.
So Iran now has every justification to attack America.
And I'm an American taxpayer, bankrolling both American and Israeli militaries.
So Iran now has every justification to attack me.
My government has painted a big target on my chest over its unquestioning support of Israel, something that I don't believe for a moment benefits me or my country.
Thanks a bunch, government!
Furthermore, it is my considered opinion that the State of Israel does not deserve to exist.
“Furthermore, it is my considered opinion that the State of Israel does not deserve to exist.”
Do you say this about any other country? Based on the available evidence, I would say that you’re a hateful and bigoted anti-Semite.
And I just find it amazing that The commenters at Kevin’s blog seem disinclined to make such obvious assertions.
But based on the tenor of Kevin’s posts since the current Israel/Hamas war began (or, as Kevin implicitly asserts, the Israel/nothing-to-see-here war), and on the stark raving madness of responses like yours, I suspect that there may simply not be a whole lot of sane Liberals still populating this blog.
Hey Probstat, why do you think Israel took out the Iranian general in Syria? Just for giggles?
Nope, it was because Iran ships weapons to Hezbollah and the West Bank through Syria and the Iranians are there to coordinate with their proxies.
You think the US wouldn't take out a known hideout of Iranian agents or officers in Mexico if they were arming the cartels to wage war against us?
Iran commits acts of war against Israel every time a Hezbollah or Hamas missile hits Israel. Literally tens of thousands of times over the last few years. On civilian targets. Are you ok with that?
Israel took out a military target.
What other states do you think do not deserve to exist?
Is the United States committing an act of war against the Russians every time the Ukrainians shoot at them?
Whether you like it or not, arming another country is not considered to be an act of war when that country fires your weaponry at someone else.
To the best of my knowledge, the US has told Ukraine to use their weapons only in defense, not to attack Russian territory.
I think there is a distinction between defensive and offensive use.
If the US set up a missile in Ukraine and set the coordinates for Russia, but then had a Ukrainian soldier press the button, Russia would consider it an act of war on the part of the US.
I think the level of Iranian participation may analogous
“They couldn't literally do nothing in response to the embassy attack…”
Really? I think they could have acted with the same restraint now demanded of Netanyahu and his fanatical supporters.
“Of the parties to this conflict, no one country or leader is in the right. In fact all, to varying degrees, are in the wrong. All require saving from themselves. The alternative is more bloodshed, more endless, pointless, spreading misery.”
This is why I won’t pick sides. They all suck. And the so called innocent civilians enabled it. So do their supporters all over the world. Go have your fun little war.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/14/iran-drone-attack-israel-crisis-benjamin-netanyahu-tehran
Iran is a nation led by religious fanatics, proud of its culture and heritage. They were just embarrassed on the world stage. Their sabre-rattling was not effective, and their drones and missiles were rendered more or less harmless. They will want to save face, and they can build a Bomb. The next step would be to use it. Mutually Assured Destruction won't necessarily contain them, since they think they are doing Allah's will. Let's hope they just threaten.
There is nothing in Iran's deep or recent history to justify such a fear. I mean there is always a fear while nukes exist anywhere but I'd put Iran farther down the list than most nuclear enable countries in terms of likelihood of first striking.
This seems a bit optimistic. Israel attacked an Iranian consulate, apparently with the intention of getting a response that would pull the US into the conflict. As noted above Iran responded with the minimal possible response under the circumstances. But Biden getting it done, as Drum claims, involves Biden putting pressure on Iran not to escalate, but not putting pressure on Israel not to escalate. And Israel is completely in the wrong here. What happens when Israel, as they are promising to do, responds to this attack by killing more Iranians? So far Biden is claiming his support for Israel will remain ironclad. And that is not likely to deescalate things.
This has long been the problem with our support for Israel when Israel is often the problem. It means we are encourage the problem to get bigger, not smaller.
Yes. Also, I don't see any proof Biden got the job done. Nothing indicates Iran, entirely by itself, was not wary of escalation.
Agreed. And if I had to put money down, I would put it on further escalation from Isreal, which mean even more risk and more uncertainty.
Once again, why did Israel bomb the "annex" to the consulate in Syria? Because Iranian agents and officers use routes through Syria to get weapons to Hezbollah and into the West Bank, to use against Israel. C'mon, this is so well known even the NYT reports it.
Israel didn't do this to piss off the Iranians for no reason. They did this to tell the Iranians to back the f*** off their border.
Why the scare quotes around annex?
Yes, Iran supports Hezbollah. The US supports Isreal. Wouldn't you see it as a significant escallation for Iran or Hezbollah to a assasinate high level US military commanders in US diplomatic properties in the region? Of course you would.
It is pretty uncontroversial that Bibi, if not Isreal in general, would like to draw the US directly into this regional warfare. It is pretty obvious that Isreal is trying to escalate the situation. You do not have to be "on their side" to understand another country's point of view, nor are you "disloyal" to your own side if you point out when they are instigating vs self defending.
So, your position is that Russia would be justified if they were to bomb the US embassy in Warsaw?
Indeed. It is hard to think of a clearer parallel than this!
Thank the Israel lobby for this. It is nearly political suicide to go against them. Even Hakeem Jeffries felt compelled to issue a one-sided condemnation of Iran. And since the US supports Israel financially, it is as if we are funding this huge lobby, against our better interests.
It's not like I feel any sympathy for the Iranian government. They are bad actors. But the worst actor of all is Netanyahu, along with his right wing government.
Should have been posted as a reply to Lon Becker.
I don't think that Iran is suing for peace.
"The composition of the ongoing Iranian attack on Israel is similar to the composition of Russian strikes that have repeatedly targeted Ukraine. These Russian strikes have attempted to determine the optimal package to penetrate Western air and missile defenses."
-https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-april-13-2024
Good point-- they (and the Russians and possible the Chinese too) can be learning a lot by studying exactly how all those drones and missiles were brought down. Unavoidable, but a factor for us too.
Personally, I think the Iranians keep themselves in a stronger position for now by not taking significant action right away, though. Hezbollah is most powerful as an uncommitted threatening force, and after yesterday there's a lot of diplomatic/political information about regional actors to be absorbed, as well as military. That says to me they have more to gain by taking their time and sticking with lower-level actions if any. At least, I hope that's right.
There is no "ongoing" attack and Iran said the whole deal was over as far as they were concerned.
I heard a report on public radio that Iran did not use any new weapons in the attack; suggesting that neither side will learn much about the other’s capabilities.
I saw a similar report, maybe BBC, to the effect that most of the drones seem to have been older and slower prop-driven ones. So in part the Iranian command might have seen the mandatory face-preserving military response (Iranians by and large differentiate themselves from Arabs and I'm sure have their own understanding of Arab psychology) as a chance to clear out semi-obsolescent stock while they were at it, and maybe more likely given that the drones didn't have the range for a return journey anyway. It was an expensive pyrotechnic event at the very least, and maybe nothing to be learned about the ordnance on either side.
On the other hand there does appear to have been an unusual degree of coordination/cooperation among different national militaries involved in bringing all that iron down. So I think they'd be interested in reviewing what they can of the message traffic as well as the sequence of action.
I propose calling deliberately ineffectual attacks of this kind "performative warfare".
Kevin says:
Drones? And a few small missiles? All of which Iran knew would be routinely shot down? This was obviously intended to be a pinprick attack, just enough to save face but not to do any serious damage.
Washington Post says:
"The five-hour barrage, in retaliation for a deadly Israeli strike on an Iranian diplomatic facility in Damascus, Syria, was massive, involving hundreds of attack drones and guided missiles, and supporting fire from at least some of Iran’s regional proxies."
"The Iranian attack consisted of 170 drones, 120 ballistic missiles and 30 cruise missiles, carrying a combined 60 tons of explosive material, according to the IDF."
The drones are 11 ft long, weigh 440 lbs and carry an 110 lb. warhead.
The "small" missile is 4 feet in diameter and carries a 1600 lb warhead. 120 is "a few"
Maybe the post should be updated.
Also, the diplomatic facility was used for military meetings between the Revolutionary Guard and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. So it is arguable that despite being a consulate, it is a legitimate military target.
If true, good point:
“Also, the diplomatic facility was used for military meetings between the Revolutionary Guard and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. So it is arguable that despite being a consulate, it is a legitimate military target.”
At the very least I’d be interested if reliable sources are confirming this info.
And you are basically implying what I have finally started to assert explicitly: Kevin is hopelessly biased against Israel, that bias is negatively impacting his ability to accurately assess the current war in the Middle East, and he continues to pretty badly discredit himself almost every time he attempts to write anything on the topic.
Kevin puts “Iran” and “peace” in the same headline. Seriously! The same pundit who as a matter of routine views every middle eastern scenario as an opportunity to castigate Israel now implies (however ironically) that Iran - IRAN! - is a force for peace and stability in the region.
For goodness sake, Kevin, stick to charts and economics and leave the Middle East to less biased writers.
There is, after all, this to consider (from CNN):
“A document recovered from a computer found inside a Hamas pickup truck outside Gaza, obtained by CNN from Israeli officials, shows a Hamas military commander requesting a scholarship for Hamas operatives to study engineering, physics and technology at universities in Iran …
“While it is widely known that Iran provides financial and military support to Hamas, Israeli officials and some former US intelligence officials say the document is evidence that in the run up to the October 7 attack on southern Israel, Iran was seeking to provide technical training that would help Hamas produce its own weaponry.”
Iran, in Kevin’s account, is apparently some sort of restrained victim in the face of Israeli aggression. Good thing those Iranians are there to keep a lid on all of that Middle Eastern violence!
And one of the only ways that anyone could come up with such an outrageous take on the situation is by continuing to ignore the existence and the agency of Hamas. Kevin has done that through writing numerous blog posts on the current Israel/Hamas war without even referencing Hamas.
If a space alien were to land on Earth and read one of Kevin’s recent columns, they’d think that Israel had decided to launch some kind of inexplicable assault on Gazans sometime around the beginning of last October. WOW, those Israelis must be meanies!
Yes, Kevin has indeed written blog posts that DO mention Hamas; but, at this point, he has written so many columns on the ongoing conflict that do NOT mention Hamas (including this one) that my criticism is very well-deserved.
So if the terrorists that Iran helps to fund don’t even exist? Well, in that case, Iran must be led by wise statesman who “sue for peace.”
Ladies and gentlemen, such is the comically unhinged determination of the modern Left to find Israel guilty of everything and to excuse all other regional actors from culpability.
Kevin might as well just start working directly for the Trump campaign, because I don’t think they could do a better job of convincing Jews to stay as far the hell away from the Left as possible.